Featured Articles

Trahison des clercs: civil servants waging class war on White Britons

/3 Comments/in , /by

In the aftermath of the jailing of Axell Rudakabana, the son of Rwandan asylum-seekers who massacred young girls outside a dance class in Southport, the authorities are doing their usual tactic of obfuscating and generalising. Society is being encouraged to attribute the horrific incident to ‘knife crime’ and harmful content online. Meanwhile, the vague but selective concept of ‘hate’ is used, more in reference to those reacting to the killings than to the killer himself.

How does a political establishment, which never tires of reminding us of the murder of Black teenager Stephen Lawrence three decades ago, manage to make White Britons the focus of criminal intervention, when this was clearly a case of anti-White racism? To the professional-managerial class, with its progressive (or rather subversive) values, racism is only perpetrated by White people. So a Black murderer found to have expressed motives of White genocide (and following an Islamist terror manual) was not racist – how could he be?

The only image presented in mainstream media of the suspect was a school photograph, depicting a smartly-dressed 12-year-old angelic choirboy. Not just a normal kid, Rudakabana had performed on a BBC television series. He was identified as the son of a Rwandan couple, given sanctuary in this country on fleeing the civil war (nothing was mentioned about his father’s role in this conflict).

Axell Rudakabana, Then and Now

In August last year, around the time of the Southport carnage, Yvette Cooper, appointed as home secretary in the newly-elected Labour government, ordered a review towards development of a new counter-extremism strategy.  The report was leaked to the Policy Exchange think-tank, who divulged its disturbing contents.

According to the official narrative, the Southport incident unleashed a wave of racist rioting across the land. The protests were certainly about more than the latest cause of outrage: the long-running scandal of Pakistani rape gangs preying on White working-class girls, previous random killings by migrants, as at Nottingham, instances of terrorism such as the Manchester Arena bombing, and the grossly insulting and expensive housing of illegal immigrants in four-star hotels. But the establishment view was summarised by a magistrate who jailed someone with the remark: ‘I have no idea what you were protesting about’.

The report referred to ‘alleged’ ‘grooming gangs’. The inverted commas around this term were not for the same reason that I use them. From my perspective, this is a shady euphemism to mask the truth of mass racially-motivated gang rape. From the institutional perspective, it’s because the existence of the gangs is exploited by the ‘far right’, so it must be doubted, if not invalidated. This is extremely offensive to the thousands of victims, who don’t feel ‘allegedly’ traumatised. And it defies fact: hundreds of Pakistani-origin men were convicted and jailed for abusing these girls. In some instances the rapists had referred to their prey as ’White trash’.

The concept of ‘two-tier policing’ is dismissed by the report as ‘right-wing extremist narrative’. White working-class people are not permitted to complain about the destruction of their culture and livelihood by institutionally-favoured immigrants. Indeed, the report focused on boosting existing protection for minorities under the Equality Act. Furthermore, it opposed the outgoing Conservative government’s policy to abolish police recording of ‘non-crime hate incidents’. Labour ministers want to curb expression of allegedly Islamophobic and anti-Semitic ideas, whether lawful or not. Denigrating White people is fine, to the extent of barring them from jobs or services, or blaming them for being stabbed, raped or murdered.

A new offence of ‘harmful communication’ likely to cause psychological harm is recommended by the report. The scope of extremism is to be broadened to include misogyny and conspiracy theories.  The establishment is determined to shift the focus from the racially-motivated Black and Muslim violence to make the White working class the biggest threat to a multicultural society.

A few days ago Unity News Network revealed that a hotel in Loughborough owned by a senior civil servant has been repurposed for housing illegal immigrants. Irfan Hemani, a deputy director for cyber security, is profiting from the huge taxpayers’ burden of this relentless influx.  But it would be a mistake to see this primarily as a problem of Muslims abusing positions of power to support an Islamic takeover of Britain.

The real problem is that the civil service is run by the White progressive class, whose treachery to their country and fellow citizens is boundless. They despise the White people below them on the socio-economic hierarchy. They would probably regard Axel Rudakabana as a victim of his upbringing in a racist country. The worst crime, in their eyes, was not the stabbing of eleven innocent primary-school girls, but the ordinary White folk who dared to complain. This is truly le traison des clercs.

Destination 1982: Wilmot Robertson’s “Ventilations” Then and Now — Part 2 of 2

/5 Comments/in , /by

Go to Part 1.

4598 words

Reshaping and Reordering a Decadent United States

Clearly, “Kosher conservatism” is what we today call neoconservatism (and neocons). “Militant liberalism” certainly foreshadowed the feminism, DEI, LGBTQ+, illegal immigration, BLM, critical race theory, global warming and ESG (environmental, social, governance) movements that have divided (and conquered?) this country’s people. Robertson was on to something! While all these movements probably could be called “Kosher” or “Kosher certified,” we probably won’t hear that description from the Trump GOP party as it postures now with a reactionary pushback to the Left. You can, though, find the collaborations from author Scott Howard, who Robertson surely would have supported in the hypotheses of his two books, The Transgender-Industrial Complex and The Open Society Play-Book.

Before the convenience or the computer information age, Robertson’s Ventilations made a valiant effort at connecting the dots of the previous decade and expanding his TDM critique of Jewish power and influence. Before leaving this first chapter, here are some of his interesting takes:

  • The alliance of liberalism, equalitarianism and social Christianity has done more to weaken America in the last thirty years than all the machinations of all the Communist spy rings since 1917.

  • “If [old-line anti-Communists] want to see something Jewish and really conspiratorial all they have to do is turn on their TV sets.”

  • The low standard of living in Russia has also prevented any fanatic emphasis on the ‘good life’ and the soul-dampening materialism that automatically goes with such a philosophy. … In Short, the Russians are the modern Barbarians at the Gate, and we are somewhat in the position of the Romans. Rome [was] not destroyed by Germanic incursions until the internal rot had made resistance all but impossible.

  • We must attempt to root out the infection [i.e., the “disease that now grips America”] before it spreads throughout the American social organism.

  • The Soviet leadership … does not wish a showdown with world Jewry. Whenever Jewish propaganda gets too ruthless and overwhelming, Russia makes a few concessions. Whenever Jewish racial fury provokes some new outrage against Lebanon or some other Middle Eastern country, Russia supports the Arabs, but not to the point of brinksmanship. (my emphasis; consider Russia’s latest yielding on Syria as avoiding brinksmanship)

  • Meanwhile, to prepare the Soviet masses for a stronger line against the Israelis, the state-owned publishing houses release a series of books whose anti-Zionism can hardly be distinguished from czarist anti-Semitism.

Ventilations hit hard on the geopolitical events of the sixties, seventies, and early eighties. It gave a strong, condescending update to his conservative followers on the role of Jewry in Soviet Russia, and reported on the beginnings of American domestic agitation and cultural degeneracy. The final wisdom of this first chapter harks eerily close to today’s shaky predicaments and the warmongering towards World War III:

[If] Americans can be talked into pouring billions of dollars a year into armaments for Israel and cutting themselves off from Arab oil by fostering Jewish racism in the Near East, if Americans continue to act as the moral lepers of modern history by furnishing the weapons for the destruction of Egyptian cities (in the 1967 war), Lebanese villages and Iraqi reactors, then half of Russia’s military problem will be solved. Then Dostoyevsky’s farfetched dream of a Russian colossus astride the four corners of the earth will become less farfetched with every passing day.

On Religion and Social Sciences

Wilmot Robertson dishes out his attacks on Christianity, religion, and the social sciences in the second chapter of Ventilations. It is chock full of his personal insights and frank opinions — what he probably deemed as simple wisdom:

  • The few religionists who have an honest interest in our spiritual welfare offer us a god who is a mirror of our best instincts. The religionists who have more concern for ideas than people or more concern for their people than our people offer us gods who are likely to be mirror images of our worst instincts. (emphasis in the original)

  • It might be better for everyone — everyone, that is, except the religious professionals — if our faith came from the heart. But that isn’t the way religion works. … When it comes to the moral law, we prefer to lend our ear to otherworldly teachers.

  • [The] Moral Majority’s support of Zionist aggression in the Middle East, including massive attacks on civilians in Beirut, belies its name by putting  [the U.S.] on the side of immorality.

  • There is such a multitude of Christian denominations in America, such a strong tradition of church-state separation, that it would be difficult, if not impossible to obtain Christian unity for any cause. For this reason any realistic political movement should leave religious matters strictly to the private conscience.

Robertson clearly finds our Majority religion to be problematic in the way it’s been exploited to work against us in recent years. His boldest comments are found here after a short introduction that backs his hierarchical thoughts on Christianity; he notes that there are both higher and lower religions, “just as there are higher and lower civilizations and higher and lower men”:

Historians tell us that Jews were the greatest religionists. But the historians are wrong. Jews were not great religionists. They were great religious fanatics. Who else could have dreamed up such tribal deities as the genocidal Jehovah, the apocalyptic Marx and the totemistic Freud. Jews may or may not have founded the Christian sect — according the Pharisees, Jesus was a Gentile from Galilee —  but Indo-Europeans most certainly developed the higher religion known as Christianity. The composers of the greatest Christian music, the builders of the greatest Christian churches, the painters of the greatest Christian art, the expounders of the greatest Christian philosophy were not Jews. There were Indo-Europeans.

Christ may have preached to all men, but only men of the West gave him their minds as well as their hearts and remained true to him for more than fifteen hundred years. Jews anathematized him, Moslems unchurched him, Hindus ignored him, Chinese outlawed him, mestizos indigenized him, blacks syncopated him and the Soviet Union in 1917 abandoned and ridiculed him.

There is a wealth of suggestions here from Robertson on the Religion Question:

The perceptive Majority Christian who wants to preserve his religion should have only one response to the question, ‘What do we do about Christianity?’ … He must recognize that the West has provided the only biological framework in which Christianity has both prospered and endured. He must understand that, when a people’s culture is teetering on the edge of a precipice, race must be put before religion in order to save race and religion. (emphasis in the original)

He also lashes out on the social sciences working together with religious sects (“operated by minority and liberal shamans”) for “the purpose of imposing their own particular political, economic and social creeds on the Majority:

Drugs, pornography, the soaring crime rate and corruption at all levels are clear proof of the near-total failure of social scientists to spread anything more than moral nihilism, not only among their brainwashed student congregations, but among the population at large.

Robertson hopes that “the best Majority minds could recapture the social sciences and apply them to the improvement of human behavior … [thus providing] a chance of building a viable morality on empirical as well as metaphysical foundations.” But when the best of Majority minds cannot be easily discovered like Uncomfortable Conversations With A Jew can, Robertson’s third chapter gives us glimpse as to why: “The Censorship of Silence.”

Censorship In Action

Before former Louisiana State Legislature Representative Dr. David Duke had his book My Awakening banned from Amazon, before California State University-Long Beach Professor Emeritus of Psychology Dr. Kevin MacDonald, author of the famous trilogy on Jewish Group Evolutionary Strategy was banned from Twitter/X (see bottom of TOO website for individual books) and most of his books banned on Amazon, before the shadow-banning of 911Pilots.org founder and bona fide whistleblower Captain Dan Hanley (on X as handle @DanHanley4) or the de-platforming of countless right wing activists from their very own YouTube channels, Wilmot Robertson experienced tremendous difficulties promoting and selling the newly published TDM because of censorship. He begins this chapter with enlightening perspective:

In the past several decades the pro and con ratio of books written about minorities has been approximately 1,000 to 1. Two prominent additions to the bulging pro-minority library, the heavily promoted The Decline of the Wasp by Peter Schrag and The Rise of the Unmeltable Ethnics by Michael Novak, have amounted to little more than book-length racial slurs against the Majority.

Well, while it seems in 2024 that the entire American society (mainstream media, academia and corporate world) has mainstreamed anti-White racial slurs (or at least its implicit equivalent), today’s “Conservatism Inc.” resistance is still meek and ineffective due to the average person’s lack of exposure to well-written content like Wilmot Robertson’s. He talks a great deal about the trouble he had getting reviews, and “[s]ince reviews are the life blood of the book trade, there is little or no possibility at all of an un-reviewed book coming to the attention of the general reading public without a long, laborious, year-in, year-out promotional campaign that would consume more money and time than any small publisher could possibly afford.”

Robertson explains the various pitfalls that created the literary blockade against his masterpiece. His diligent efforts to engage library officials and book critics, to place TDM on consignment at book stores, to use paid advertising in newspapers, magazines and college publications, and his attempts to get the book listed in the Literary Market Place were extremely challenging and disappointing. His pain is felt in the myriad details conveyed in this chapter, and he concludes that this marketing failure

does not prove the abrogation of freedom of thought in this country. After all, the book did get published. But in the final analysis, what good is the freedom to write, if there is very limited freedom to publicize what one has written? If America’s largest population group is to be defended effectively against a torrent of minority racist propaganda, the rights defined in the First Amendment must apply to the dissemination of ideas as well as their expression.

His moving plea here is today suppressed by the ease in which the Jewish interpretation of this right is spread and enforced: “Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom of reach,”[1] says Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL.

No doubt, Robertson would not have been surprised to find this coming from the Jewish Anti-Defamation League. And although he did not specifically cite Jewish influence behind the campaign to silence his book, he did include one typewritten comment from the wife of a Jewish department store owner who returned her copy of TDM to Robertson. And he does state that her comment “does help to prove that at least some Jews take pride in the fact this censorship is so effective.” She wrote:

My pride in being an American Jew was never greater nor more profound than now, since I see where bookstores and decent Americans refuse to put your trashy literature (???) on their shelves. When you crack up, which you must eventually, maybe a Jewish psychiatrist will take pity on you and help you deal with your insanity. Too bad you’re so insanely jealous of those who have proven you less than adequate.

As is often the case, Jews take pride in their accomplishments but are utterly blind to the idea that their interests conflict with those of the Majority. Robertson adds his erudite comment on to her stinging comment:

There are many sources of pride in the human spirit, but this is surely one of the strangest, particularly in a country supposed to be a democracy and in a member of a race which is so overwhelmingly ‘liberal’.

And he finishes this chapter on censorship thus:

Members of the Cosa Nostra get away with homicide by the traditional practice of omerta. They never talk, and they see to it that witnesses never talk. The same code of silence is used very effectively by members of the publishing Mafia to murder ideas.

Forty years after Robertson published Ventilations, the Museum of Jewish Heritage—A Living Memorial to the Holocaust, hosted an event featuring Jewish historian Robert Rockaway titled “Kosher Nostra: The Life and Times of Jewish Gangsters in the United States.” One can wonder what the fallout would be if Robertson would have substituted the  term “Kosher Nostra” for “Cosa Nostra” as found in his book. One can only imagine the additional flak he would have received! We can say that we will never know, but that would be a lie. The presentation linked above is likely Jewish history intended for a Jewish audience, and goyim (i.e., non-Jews) are off-limits from making critiques on how odd it might be that a Jewish heritage site would celebrate ethnic gangsterism. But the included video presentation actually supports Robertson’s ethnic concerns when within the first seven minutes the speakers are stressing the point that large scale organized crime in America began with Jews and Italians. Of course, most Americans today only associate the Italians with the Mafia, since Jews have been the predominant producers of Hollywood’s movies and kept these details hushed.[2]  In the end, it was more than just “ideas” that were murdered in the lust for money, territory and power. During the same period that organized crime exploited the American prohibition on alcohol, Palestine and Russia were both being overtaken by the same ethnic cabal. See my articles “Destination 1922” and “Destination 1933” on these conflicts.

Other Topics Covered

A lot of ground had been covered in these first three chapters. The next ten were titled as follows: “The Loony Bin or the Great Watergate Purge,” “The High Grading of Henry Kissinger,” “Harsh Advice for Young Majority Activists,” “Productive Activity for Majority Undergraduates,” “A Search for Mental Coordinates,” “Why, for the Time Being, Nothing Much Can Be Done,” “Homage to Kemal Ataturk,” “A Second Life for Women,” and “The Utopian States of America.”

The gist of Ventilations is jointly a history lesson on the complex ways our enemies operate coupled with the guidance and advice of a guru who wishes the Majority to learn from its failings and have a fighting chance in its struggle. It is too late to ignore the mistakes of our past. And if there were ever a time to read this book, the time is now while right-leaning politics takes power in Washington, D.C. It’s  a time not to rest on one’s laurels. Robertson critiques the Majority:

We think individually when we should think collectively. We react when we should act. We whine when we should be positive and assertive. In short, we do everything but the right thing.” Incredibly, we are still immobilized by the story line the media feed us in ever larger doses. Because it says so in print, we actually believe that we are the oppressors, not the oppressed.” (my emphasis in both)

The fact is, the Majority no longer is the establishment, but the disestablishment. It no longer is an ascendant race, but a rootless agglomerate of the mentally and morally disarmed. Worst of all, it actively participates in its own downgrading.

Thinking Morally for Solutions

Robertson brings many solid points to his “search for mental coordinates,” and with his pragmatic nature he prescribes that “the Majority must begin to devise programs to put a stop to its dispossession.” Yes, a lot of today’s internet warriors might be thinking, “Easier said than done!” The opposition has over 10,000 non-profits and billions of dollars, while the racially conscious Majority has one hand’s full of charity groups, maybe a few hundred thousand dollars, and difficulty putting together a conference or hosting a dinner without getting attacked! Then again, maybe the time to attract new adherents and start up new programs really is today, after the 2024 election, where enough good people have had it with woke politics and its negative impact on traditional family life. Can today’s Majority heed Robertson’s admonitions and change for its future survival? Can they finally tolerate the scholarly writing of authors published in The Occidental Quarterly or the alternative narratives found on The Unz Review?

We must acquire the proper frame of mind…to direct the slow and difficult process of recovery.  We squirm at accusations of bigotry while refusing to identify our accusers as the authentic bigots. We retreat before allegations of racism by opponents who are the real racists.  We are deathly afraid to talk about racial solidarity, although it is the racial solidarity of others that has performed the miracle of our dispossession.

Robertson understood that the solution to our demise requires a revolutionary behavioral change towards unabashed courage. “If we are to win this war [against Western Civilization], we must conquer not only our enemies, but ourselves.”  And maybe that change demands a re-thinking of our past ideals:

We were once idealistic enough to believe that, at least on paper, all men were equal. Now we know better. Now we know that those who honestly believe in equality are likely to become the servants of those who pretend to believe in it.

That certainly sounds like the summary of George Orwell’s Animal Farm, doesn’t it? If only more of our people would read and draw lessons from masterful writings like that! Instead, we know that since the dawn of the movies, advancing to TV, then personal computer bringing us Facebook, Twitter/X, and TikTok, our people have demanded more from less of our time-space, and on smaller screens. While the internet and PCs were not even available to the public when Ventilations was published, Wilmot Robertson delivered a profound message that makes even writing this simple book review seem so very worthwhile. It’s the spirit at the heart of  this article, the patience that precedes glory:

The written word does not bring with it the immediate satisfaction of the spoken word. Nevertheless, it is the authentic seed of action. Your successors, the second — and third-echelon movers and shakers of future generations, will harvest the crop you have sown in your loneliness and tragic isolation. But instead of being depressed by such a thought, you should be aware that very few humans have ever had the priceless opportunity to be in at the start of a fateful attempt to save a great people from suicide. Your reward, although delayed, will be the greatest of all rewards, a niche in history. (emphasis in original)

I believe Francis Parker Yockey would have approved those words! And an inspiration like that could help multiple generations of our still-current Majority start playing the long game, just as our adversaries have, if Robertson’s wisdom and message spread.

Indeed, the dispossession of the European White race from America, its European Homeland and Western colonies — The Great Replacement — has been played out for many generations, and well over a century. Robertson ends his book urging us to use “morality as a weapon,” much like Dr. Kevin MacDonald always stresses how our opposition routinely conquers us by claiming the “moral high ground.”

What Would Wilmot Do Today?

While I write this book review, two of the most striking examples challenging our European-derived principles today are right before our very eyes, and Robertson’s spirit is surely wondering what’s taking the Majority so long to stake out the moral high ground. Most of the general American public that watches network news, CNN or Fox News, is inundated with one particular commercial so much that they probably could sing the accompanying jingle without a hitch. I’m talking about “1-877- Kars-4-Kids, donate your car today!” This charity is so successful that it’s likely that very few have not heard of it — but how many know whose kids receive the donations?  It’s not surprising that this non-profit spells “cars” with the letter “K,” since the organization is through and through Kosher in its focus, with donations funding (exclusively?) Jewish children’s organizations. And it’s no longer just cars that the charity takes on, but also boats, airplanes and real estate!

Along with that jingle, the American public has their heartstrings pulled multiple times per day to help these poor young innocent souls. The amount of advertising from this organization alone hints that they are a successful money-maker, and it would be no surprise to find that the ever-altruistic European-Americans are the predominant group rushing to open their wallets to help the “kids.”[3] Actually, it might move them more if they knew it was strictly Jewish children the charity was helping since Jewish victimhood has been drilled so well into the minds of Americans. One can only behold how well the drumbeating jingle works, and “pathological altruism” kicks in (as Dr. MacDonald might claim).[4]

But at the same time, 2024 and beyond saw the Jewish community’s majority both tacitly and overtly sanctioning the Israeli slaughter of innocent non-combatant Palestinian kids (because they’ll grow up to be Hamas combatants?), and any American protesting these disgusting war crimes is singled out as an “anti-Semite” and has their career or livelihood destroyed one way or the other by Jewish elites and their supporting organizations. Then, the same Jewish community sneakily takes your money to support their children from a charity goliath that uses kids to draw your sympathy. The cognitive dissonance could rattle the heads of anyone clued in to today’s real world, and it’s time somebody call them out on it. A reading of Ventilations might inspire the strong, intelligent and courageous of the Majority today to meme this hypocrisy into a truth movement supporting our children’s future. For some day, Majority children may be a despised minority just as Palestinian children today are being found under concrete rubble by the thousands.

Here’s another folly of “justice” foisted upon our minds that wasn’t quite at a mature state when Ventilations was published: The Israeli lobby approves the ongoing Palestinian genocide based on the October 7th Israeli hostage crisis and the 1200 allegedly killed in action. But for decades now the American people have been forced to accept hundreds of thousands, if not millions over time, of murdered citizens caused by the illegal drug trade brought in across our southern border as well as violent illegal immigrants and cartel networks growing in our Homeland.[5] Based on today’s Jewish logic we are forced to hear every day from the mainstream media (“all Palestinians are Amalek,” “destroy all of Gaza including non-combatant citizens”), Robertson might assert that Americans should have annexed Mexico or Central America over a decade ago when fentanyl deaths began to creep up. American government support for Israeli military actions certainly places our people’s lives and security into second place compared to foreign interests, and it’s now up to our people to speak intelligently on this delusional madness — wherever their voice can be heard.

Speaking up with what we have remaining in our First Amendment is one of our greatest challenges facing us when billionaire Elon Musk’s “X” social media platform obeys the wishes of a non-profit, the ADL. And that’s why if Elon wants to make a difference for the world, he too should invest a few hours in Ventilations and heed the important lessons taught in this collection of essays.

This direct mail fundraising letter received by the author at time of writing; Same organization inundates TV with lengthy infomercials targeting Christians; Is there any equivalent showing poor Christian widows or starving Palestinian children seeking money from the wealthiest ethnicity in the world?

 

Inside Ventilations the reader will find “An important message for Christians,” non-Christians, and in fact all Gentile Americans wishing to reverse the accelerating dispossession of White European-Americans from their Homeland.  Until we find the boldness to aggressively raise funds and build an organized-Majority explicitly for their interests, or until money and finances no longer are a factor in the big picture, Ventilations and TDM should be required reading for understanding the grave dilemma we face and brainstorming multiple paths towards our sanctuary. For the Millennials and Gen Z, just call it Diversity Training!

Final Thoughts Inspired by Wilmot

I’ll conclude my review of Ventilations by returning to the start of this article where I was surprised at the opening words of an older Jewish woman asking me straight off about holocaust movies: There hasn’t been a day since October 7, 2023, where “the [Israeli] hostages” haven’t been mentioned in the news. But in the paradigm I would like to see more widely known, I see the sailors and marines who survived the 1967 attack on the USS Liberty as the greatest hostages in our recent American history — hostages to our government’s lies and betrayals for 58 years now, whose PTSD must be unthinkable. Those military men were likely not all Majority members, but the suppression of their story by The System we live under today clearly shows that American civic nationalism is dead — a foreign nation matters more than American patriots serving our own country. We constantly admonished to “never forget” the Israeli hostages, but we are forced to forget the dead sailors who were left in a flooded gaping hole of a Navy ship attacked by Israeli military, or the dead servicemen shot up on the deck or murdered with napalm. So the next time I meet someone worth influencing at first greeting, I will follow the strong collective advocacy approach and say, “Have you visited USSLiberty.org?” instead of “Hi, my name is Sigurd!”

Until the USS Liberty survivors, such as author Phil Tourney, are given a standing ovation in congress greater than Netanyahu received, I encourage our readers to blindside others with a retort on “hostages” such as “Which hostages?” to grow a back bone for even stronger challenges against our demise — challenges that could help create a new word for Chutzpah, but exclusively reserved for European-Americans. Make USSLiberty.org a household name and charity that will bring reflection and perspective on what kind of collective will best suit our Majority interests now that sacrificed military men have been disgraced in favor of a hostile nation advertised as “our greatest ally.” With that moral compass redefined and polished, we can begin our own ventilations to guide us in our struggle.[6] Perhaps then “Hostages” will always be published with a capital “H” like the “Holocaust” is today in journalism, but it will signify even greater meaning for the European Man. It will serve as a memory that Westernkind was held Hostage in their own nation-states for well over a century while it fought massively destructive and fratricidal wars — later termed the Zionist Wars by our newly awakened people — until European humanity at last spoke.

Wilmot Robertson put it this way in Ventilations:

But one day, perhaps in five years, perhaps in fifty, the Majority’s decline will be pushed a little too far and a little too fast. Something will finally snap in the neuron network of some talented Majority politician. For the first time a Majority member with brains, character and ambition will divert his life-supporting drives to his race rather than to his career. From then on, the Majority curve will point up. The termite will then have to think seriously about moving to another mound and the fungus to another tree.

Clearly, that “Majority politician” will have to have protection from blackmail or assassination, the enemy’s favorite tactics when bribery via campaign contributions or ostracizing fails.

January 21, 2025 post script: President Donald Trump, who took office yesterday, probably is not that man. But maybe he will fertilize the soil that will create him!

[1] https://x.com/JGreenblattADL/status/1511331730594095107

[2] See An Empire of their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood, Neal Gabler, (1988) https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/118657.An_Empire_of_Their_Own

[3] Their mission statement as filed on their 2021 IRS form 990 stated:
“KARS 4 KIDS FUNDS EDUCATIONAL, DEVELOPMENTAL, AND RECREATIONAL PROGRAMS FOR JEWISH YOUTH AND THEIR FAMILIES. OUR GOAL IS TO FOSTER A GENERATION OF WELL-BALANCED, PRODUCTIVE ADULTS. OUR MEANS TO ACCOMPLISH THIS GOAL IS TO PROVIDE CHILDREN AND THEIR FAMILIES WITH A STRONG NETWORK OF PERSONAL GUIDANCE AND EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES, INDIVIDUALIZED TO THEIR NEEDS. OUR WIDE ARRAY OF SERVICES IS DESIGNED TO MAXIMIZE EACH FACET OF A CHILD’S DEVELOPMENT — ACADEMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL.KARS 4 KIDS’S OVERALL AREAS OF ACTIVITY CONSIST OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMMING, SCHOOL PLACEMENT, TUITION ASSISTANCE, MENTORSHIP PROGRAMS, CULTURAL ACTIVITIES, WEEKEND RETREATS, RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION, SUMMER CAMPS, RECREATION AND GUIDANCE COUNSELING.”

The “Gross Receipts” on this form indicate $234,009,826.

[4] See “The Personality System of Empathy,” Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition. Dr. Kevin MacDonald, p. 318, and “The Role of Empathy in Moral Communities: Altruism — And Pathological Altruism,” p. 381–391

[5] Please see and consider supporting the 501(c)3 non-profit “The Homeland Institute” for polling and surveys that better serve the Majority’s opinions and interests. It’s one of only a handful of such IRS-sanctioned organizations. See https://nida.nih.gov/research-topics/trends-statistics/overdose-death-rates#Fig3 for government stats on overdose deaths in America.

[6] Ventilate: to examine, discuss, or investigate freely and openly: expose (definition 2.a. Merriam-Webster dictionary)

Destination 1982: Wilmot Robertson’s “Ventilations” Then and Now — Part 1 of 2

/2 Comments/in , , , /by

3152 words

The Context

Absolutely true event — not a joke: My former neighbor, whose parents emigrated from the nation of Georgia to Israel to the United States, introduced me for the first time to his parents on a family visit. I cordially spoke, “Hello, my name is Sigurd, and I live next door.”  The mother immediately fired back with the strangest reply in her strong foreign accent, “Have you heard about the new holocaust movie?” “Why no, I haven’t. And what was your name again?” I answered. While geography and family economic status had me surrounded by Jews since early childhood onward, and having developed an understanding of what I might expect in their social behavioral traits, this mother’s opening line finally confirmed my midlife curiosities that these people were wired differently, despite the often-similar skin color. This was my turning point where I scrutinized our social, cultural and political situation with a much keener eye. Human diversity was a fact, and as my worldview evolved along with the internet, I came across a book — a quasi-underground classic — that attempted to spell it all out on behalf of the European-American’s perspective: The Dispossessed Majority, by Wilmot Robertson, published in 1972[1] (henceforth TDM).

President Trump is found on cover of the latest paperback edition of The Dispossessed Majority

Robertson’s magnum opus is an eloquent attempt to bring racial consciousness to the American Majority before it’s too late! As its dust jacket introduction states, “this mind-rousing book hammers home the theme that America has changed, and changed for the worse…the Americans of Northern European descent — the American Majority — have been reduced to second-class status.” It continues, “the sickness of America…is presently racked by a double infection: (1) the moral debility of liberalism [and] (2) the rampant virus of minority racism.” The concluding paragraph here finally describes the American Majority as “the loser in a racial war.”

Wilmot Robertson’s life experiences and extensive education brought him the great clarity to coin the term “The Dispossessed Majority.” But while even the mainstream Fox News channel will carry today’s similar term “The Great Displacement,” they dare not credit the author whose book forewarned Americans and is still available on Amazon (hardcover, $224 and paperback for $35). For Fox News, delving into what they’d consider extreme right-wing literature is far more violent and hateful than tacitly approving the America-funded-and-condoned bombing of defenseless women, children, and non-combatant male civilians in the Middle East (continued by Trump).

As abhorrent and devastating as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict had already been by the writing of TDM, this subject comprises but a small chapter within a larger section on “The Foreign Policy Clash.” In fact, after addressing racial dynamics, racial composition, and the predicaments of the Majority, the core substance of its original 538 pages carefully describes the Minority groups within our nation that have interests that conflict with those of the Majority. The factor of assimilability is stressed in Robertson’s writing long before the Diversity-Equity-Inclusion movement celebrated the differences of all groups and sub-groups of peoples apart from the nuclear family which is indigenous to Whites and rare in the rest of the world; nor was the heterogeneity of Whites acknowledge in an effort to paint all Whites as cut from the same (evil) cloth. Chapters V–VIII emphasize Majority-Minority “Clashes” — culturally, politically, economically, and legally, and the book concludes with Prospects and Perspectives. It is here where Robertson’s nine pages titled “Toward a Pax Americana” foreshadows concepts for his final book, “The Ethnostate,” a 1993 utopian journey that he professed would be most beneficial for the civilizations of all races — not just those of European descent — since multi-cultural societies always degenerate into discord.

Social Science Bookshelves Today

TDM has sold hundreds of thousands of copies in over fifty years despite the challenges promoting a book that defends and advances the uniqueness of Northern Europeans and their American descendents. Indeed, the quality of Robertson’s writing and the rationality of his intellect present (in this author’s opinion) the most profound and sagacious appeal ever accomplished on behalf of the White race. TDM would easily have sold millions if abundantly stocked on the Social Science shelves of a Barnes & Noble book store today. This is where you should find this well-thought-out discourse in defense of Western peoples and culture. Robertson’s the book is both exemplary and thorough, but instead of carrying TDM or other like-minded books, instead, this last bastion for brick-and-mortar book sales carries titles like: Rich White Men, by Garrett Neiman, White Fear, by Roland S. Martin, White Fragility, by Robin Diangelo, Nice Racism (How Progressive White People Perpetuate Racial Harm), also by Robin Diangelo, Nice White Ladies (The Truth about White Supremacy, Our Role in it, and How We Can Help Dismantle It) by Jessie Daniels, and of course Critical Race Theory, Fourth Edition, by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic. Today’s mainstream social science topics certainly do not shy away from the topic of “race.” It’s just that “racial justice” today means tipping the shelves over with multi-pronged anti-White attacks from every direction![2]

Typical books found in the “Social Science” section at popular book stores

One book that was also displayed prominently in the Barnes & Noble social science section was Uncomfortable Conversations With A Jew, by Emmanuel Acho and Noa Tishby, both “New York Times Bestselling Authors.” The back cover of Uncomfortable Conversations brings up a multitude of topics on Jews that I’m confident Wilmot Robertson would loved to have opined on — topics which today’s critical-thinking youth of all races are probably questioning amidst the escalations of Israeli (read: Jewish) deadly aggression (read: war crimes) and student protests against it (read: last vestige of American freedom of speech). We find:

  • Is a “Jewish race” a thing?
  • Is it true that people don’t believe the Holocaust really happened?
  • Are Jewish people white? Do they have access to the privilege that comes with that?
  • If Zionism is Jewish people’s right to have a country, what’s the counter?
  • Is it possible to be an anti-Zionist and not be antisemitic?[3]
  • In whose life am I the oppressor?
  • Why are there so many Jewish people in Hollywood?
  • Could the Holocaust happen again?
  • Is ending antisemitism even possible?

And most relevant to what we see and hear today in everyday news and media:

  •  Calling things antisemitic is the quickest way to shut down a discussion. But if there are no discussions, how can we ever reach a place of understanding?

Everybody on the book shelves is a “New York Times Bestselling Author.” Wilmot Robertson devoted a chapter in Ventilations to why he didn’t garner this accolade.

If equity or egalitarianism[4] referred to any notion of fairness for all races, this book and the previous social science bestsellers already mentioned would alone justify mainstreaming of TDM. It should sit side by side on the shelf next to Uncomfortable Conversations at Barnes & Noble, since Robertson’s book represents the uncomfortable racial realism issues confronting Majority Americans — whether they know it or not. Instead, TDM receives “The Censorship of Silence.” And a decade after its first edition print, this would become the title of the third chapter in a new Wilmot Robertson book that provided his essays and commentary on TDM:  Ventilations.

Anti-White books dominate brick & mortar book store shelves for “Social Science.”

Wilmot’s Observation: More Pronounced Domination = More Separateness

Robertson wrote 45 pages on “The Jews” as a separate chapter within “The Minority Challenge” section of TDM, and it was the longest chapter regarding minorities while representing less than ten percent of the book.[5] After reading the book twice, I found his treatment of Jews and their history to be just a small side story in the overall message and lessons he was trying to convey, and I wondered if the Uncomfortable Conversations authors would even approve TDM on the same shelf as theirs? But for today’s young adults with curiosity on how our government and nation ticks, having no clue as to how a William Ackman[6] can summon up a congressional hearing to confront campus free speech, or how people like him, such as Idan Ofer, Len Blavatnik, or Leslie Wexner, can earn or accumulate vast sums of money and a great deal of power, this TDM chapter instructs us:

To sum up the phenomenon of Jewish affluence, what is happening in the United States today is what has been happening throughout much of Western history. The Jews, finding themselves unrestricted and uncurbed in a land rich in resources and labor, are rapidly monopolizing its wealth. It is almost certainly the same historic process that took place in Visigothic, Arabic and Catholic Spain, in medieval England, France and Germany — and most recently in twentieth-century Germany. Yet no one cares — or dares — to notice it.

He emphasizes that so many people seem to be

concerned about labor monopolies or business cartels, about the influence of the Roman Catholic Church or the military-industrial complex, about the WASP domination of the big corporations or the international Communist conspiracy,

but these same critics are

strangely silent and utterly unconcerned about the activities of an ever more powerful, ever more dominant, supranational ethnocentrism with almost unlimited  financial resources at its command.

Here are Robertson’s comments on anti-Semitism — comments that prefigured Uncomfortable Conversations and provide a quite different perspective:

Instead of submitting anti-Semitism to the free play of ideas, instead of making it a topic for debate in which all can join, Jews and their liberal supporters have managed to organize an inquisition in which all acts, writings and even thoughts critical of Jewry are treated as a threat to the moral order of mankind. The Tartuffe[7] of the contemporary era turns out to be the Jewish intellectual who believes passionately in the rights of free speech and peaceful assembly for all, but rejoices when permits are refused for anti-Semitic meetings and rocks crack against the skulls of anti-Semitic speakers.

More than fifty years later we find our U.S. House of Representatives passing an outrageous anti-Semitism bill aimed at preventing criticism of Jews and Israel;[8] and we find that “punching Nazis” has become normalized and society-approved form of violence. Robertson saw it all coming, but then he also understood history. He emphasizes that “Jews seem bent on destroying the very political, economic and social climate that has made their success possible.”

But how does Robertson really feel about Jewish history?

As if in the grip of a lemming-like frenzy, they have been in the forefront of every divisive force of the modern era, from class agitation to minority racism, from the worst capitalistic exploitation to the most brutal collectivism, from blind religious orthodoxy to atheism and psychoanalysis, from total dogmatism to total permissiveness.

The TDM chapter on “The Jews” ends with Robertson admonishing the reader “to transcend, for the first time, the ancient racial infighting by submitting the Jewish problem to reason and full disclosure, not to the harsh and inconclusive solutions of the past.” His appeal is fundamentally moral. But this last paragraph incorporated a pre-condition for this to occur: “When and if a resuscitated American Majority has the strength and the will to put a stop to the Jewish envelopment of America,” he wishes that we learn from, and not repeat history. And with (1) new laws on the near horizon combating anti-Semitism and possibly even “hate speech,” with (2) a newly elected President Donald Trump ostensibly supporting such crackdowns,[9] and with (3) politically-right-leaning citizens resting (all too) comfortably within the Republican Party that now has four more years in control, it remains doubtful that Wilmot Robertson’s reasoning and “full disclosures” will see daylight any time soon.

Most Americans read very little, and very few have heard the term “The Jewish Question” or “The JQ,” and even fewer “The Jewish Problem” despite these societal conflicts having existed for millennia.[10] Mainstream media and academia create the historical, political and cultural narrative that we consume. Most of the Majority haven’t a clue as to how many influential people in America identify as Jews, and so a book like TDM might open the eyes of a typical under-informed American and change his or her worldview, adding both wider and sharper focused lenses. 

A Decade after TDM: An Open Discussion on Race and Politics

In 1982 Wilmot Robertson published Ventilations, a short 113-page gem that is no longer available in print. It can, however, be downloaded from colchestercollection.com, the archival work created by a former writer/White advocate from The Occidental Observer, Russell James. I call it a gem because Robertson elucidates so many topics that occupied “the current events” of my teens and early adulthood, giving them a fresh perspective that complements and affirms the significance of TDM as we fall ever more downward in The Decline of the West.[11]

Wilmot Robertson was also the founder and publisher of the magazine Instauration, which presented articles that TDM readers likely found important and insightful. For instance, one issue featured the sensational 1913 Georgia trial of Leo Frank and the murder of 13-year-old Mary Phagan, “Pardoning the Unpardonable.” But it was in a 1982 issue where he finally commented on pro-Spenglerian metaphysical white knight “Francis Parker Yockey and the Politics of Destiny,” and especially regarding his book, Imperium, for it was the definitions of “race” that caused splits between the two camps of right-wing movements supporting America and Western Civilization. Per author Kerry Bolton’s biography on Yockey,[12]

The two types of race theory according to Yockey are ‘horizontal race’ and ‘vertical race’. The first is the race of the ‘spirit’, culture and soul, expounded by the German Idealists, Herder, Goethe, Fichte, et. al. The second is biological and materialistic, measured and tabulated, influenced by Darwin, and introduced to Germany by Haeckel.

Wilmot Robertson’s TDM definitely embraced the vertical race concept, as Bolton also describes as ‘zoological’ race theory. The quotes of the Instauration article provided in Bolton’s book are important if an advocate for “Westernkind and White Wellbeing”[13] wished to learn the history and inner conflicts of the movement resisting Majority dispossession:

In the six years since its existence, Instauration has not once touched upon the problem of Francis Parker Yockey. We say problem because it’s hard to know exactly what to make of this mysterious character, who has become a cult figure of certain hermetic elements of the American right. His much touted and much thumbed through Imperium (Noontide Press) is part twentieth-century Book of Revelations, part post-script to Oswald Spengler, part revised and updated edition of Mein Kampf. His suicide or murder in a San Francisco jail makes him a candidate for martyrdom in some future century, provided that in the meantime his writings and his tragic life story have not been scourged out of the West’s consciousness.

Towards the end of the article, Robertson sheds his positive viewpoint on Yockey:

[Yockey’s] great selling point is that amid all the despondency of the present age, he is one of the very few thinkers who offers us Balm in Gilead, some shreds of hope, some possibility of white resurgence. Expectedly, it is not the deep space of the cosmos that Yockey is interested in, but the equally deep and equally mysterious space of the inner man. This is all to the good because in these days anyone who writes seriously and earnestly about the soul, about the Western soul, strikes a bell that reverberates most pleasantly up and down our increasingly spineless spines.

So more power to Yockey. He is still alive and kicking in the hearts of a sizeable number of true believers. Despite his shortcomings, his life and his works are proof that no matter how far they get us down, we will never be out.[14]

Yockey was profoundly spiritual, Robertson was rational and more pragmatic. They also viewed Europeans differently, Yockey being the ultimate ‘inclusive’ proponent of all Europeans — including Western Russians — while Robertson favoring Nordics. And while they may have viewed race differently, they did share an updated view on the Soviet Union, particularly regarding the decline of Jewish power and influence in that communist state. Apparently, this topic tended to divide the right-wing movement from the 1940s onward, and Ventilations presents this topic as its first chapter, “The Kremlin and the Jews.” Given a similar divide in Majority opinions today on Russia and Putin, good or evil, Robertson’s 1982 commentary (contesting that the U.S.S.R. was under Jewish control by that time) provides amusing quips and forgotten events:

Jews themselves have reason to be suspicious about Russian racial policies when the foremost Jewish world organizations, which used to sing the praises of Russia openly or in secret, now issue frequent press releases accusing the Soviet government of anti-Semitism. When the United States Senate rejects most-favorite nation treatment for Russian trade, when Jewish publishers and reviewers in America heavily promote books by Khrushchev, Stalin’s daughter, Svetlana Alliluyeva, and the dissident Yugoslav Communist, Djilas, pointing out instance after instance of Stalin’s anti-Semitic speeches and cheer Yasser Arafat, when Russia gives or sells huge amounts of arms to Syria, Iraq, and Libya, Israel’s bitterest enemies, when Jews flee the Soviet Union by hundreds of thousands, it is difficult for anyone to say that Russia is a pro-Jewish country.

With all of the recent American uproar against Russia and our arming of Ukraine, Robertson’s view predicts the 2024 victory for Donald Trump and his campaign promises:

If we want to protect ourselves from the Russians — and we should never close our eyes to the possibility of a sudden Russian assault on Western Europe or on the oil fields of the Middle East — we should clean up our domestic chaos, which is an open invitation to Soviet aggression everywhere.” (my emphasis)

When millions of Americans go out after dark without running the risk of being mugged, raped or murdered by bands of roving young blacks who haven’t the faintest notion of what a Communist is or what communism stands for, it hardly seems logical for the Birch Society, William F. Buckley, Jr. and other assorted ‘patriots’ to harp on the Red Menace while carefully avoiding the far greater domestic menace.

Fast forward to today and we hear Republican pundits constantly harping on “Chinese Communists” while BLM/AntiFa rioters have recently burned our cities down ostensibly with federal agency immunity. Russia recently failed to support the Syrian government against Israeli and U.S. intervention, but in 1982, Robertson wished to straighten out the geo-political beliefs of right wingers:

When Jewish propaganda mills are cranking out anti-Russian articles day and night, it is some-what mind-boggling for our rock-ribbed anti-Semites to inform us that Jews and Russians are joining in a secret alliance. These fossilized patriots cannot seem to get it out of their heads that Jewish support for world revolution has now been withdrawn from the Russians and funneled into the New Left, the Maoists, the Zionists, militant liberalism and noisy Kosher conservatism.

Go to Part 2.

[1] The Dispossessed Majority, Howard Allen Enterprises, Cape Canaveral, FL, 1972. Wilmot Robertson was the pen name of John Humphrey Ireland (1915–2005), who studied at Yale, served in the Army during WWII, studied Physics at U.C. Berkeley, started a small scientific company, and had a successful career in journalism and advertising. Obviously, he was an intelligent man whose written words on racial matters could not be easily dismissed as simply “bigoted racism” (as leftists and mainstream conformists would describe), but rather an intellectual counter-argument that had to be censored by The System.

[2] It does appear, though, that Wilmot Robertson’s TDM might be purchased online in the new edition paperback from the https://www.barnesandnoble.com/.  On searching availability of this paperback, however, this author’s effort yielded nothing. It certainly wasn’t available on store shelves.

[3] Uncomfortable Conversations With A Jew uses the spelling “antisemitism” instead of the more commonly presented “anti-Semitism” on the book’s back cover.

[4] Robertson’s TDM frequently refers, instead, to ‘equalitarianism’.

[5] For comparison, Robertson wrote 25 pages on “The Negroes” in “The Minority Challenge” section.

[6] https://www.thenation.com/article/society/william-ackman-harvard-donor/

[7] Tartuffe, or The Impostor, or The Hypocrite, was a French theatrical play (by Molière) first performed in 1664 that included a character with the same name. The word Tartuffe now is used to mean a hypocrite who gives a false impression of caring for what is virtuous.

[8] https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6090

[9] See CNN’s story: “Trump Vows to ‘Remove the Jew Haters’…”, https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/08/politics/trump-remove-jew-haters-october-7-event/index.html

[10] But when Americans do read non-fiction, they do flock to the social science section of the book store in search for answers to the crazy world we are living in.

[11] The Decline of the West, Oswald Spengler, original publications: Volume 1 (1918), Volume 2 (1922), available by Arktos Media Ltd (2021)

[12] Yockey: A Fascist Odyssey, Kerry Bolton  (Arktos Media Ltd., 2018), https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/38741770-yockey

[13] Jason Kohne, Go Free: A Guide To Aligning With The Archetype of Westernkind, (2017)

[14] Yockey, A Fascist Odyssey, Kerry Bolton, p. 502 (Resurrection)

Black Biology Matters: The Southport Killer Was Created by Leftist Lies

/14 Comments/in , /by

Behind their smarm and sentimentality about the three dead little girls in Southport, leftists like Keir Starmer and journalists at the Guardian simply don’t care. They didn’t become leftists because they believe in Truth, Beauty and Goodness. No, they became leftists because leftism supplies the only things that truly matter to them: power, privilege, and fuel for their insatiable narcissism.

“Vile individual.” That is how Sir Keir Starmer, Britain’s leftist prime minister, has described Axel Rudakubana, the teenaged Rwandan Black who horrifically murdered three White schoolgirls in Southport last year. Starmer is wrong. Rudakubana isn’t vile. He’s pathetic. He didn’t choose to be born in Britain. He didn’t choose to possess the Black genetics that made him much more susceptible both to psychosis and to committing violent crime. Like the many Black killers who came before him and the many Black killers who will come after him, he is a product of Black biology, which evolved in Africa and should never have been exported from Africa.

Psychotic Black Killer #1: Axel Rudakubana and his victims

That’s why the only “vile individuals” in the story of the Southport killer are leftists like Keir Starmer. For decades they’ve made conscious choices to import and incubate Third-World pathologies on British soil against the clear opposition of the White majority. They’ve sacralized non-Whites, incited non-Whites to hatred and resentment against Whites, and demonized everyone who speaks the truth about non-White pathologies. Rudakubana’s horrific murders were the fruit of leftism and leftist lies. His psychosis is clearly visible in the now infamous photo of him taken after his arrest. With his crazed hair and twisted expression, Rudakubana looks utterly and appropriately alien. After all, he’s Black and Britain is White. Rudakubana is a glaring and ugly example of a great but forbidden truth: that Black Biology Matters. And it matters because it creates Black pathologies like murder, rape and educational failure.

Race is real

Leftism is founded on one of the biggest lies in history: that that all human groups are the same under the skin. Reality says the opposite: that we are very different under the skin because adaptation to wildly diverse environments has altered not just our skin-color and physiology but also our brains and psychologies. Ask yourself: Is it even remotely plausible that the Black natives of sun-blessed, fertile Rwanda and the non-Black natives of icy, oxygen-starved Tibet are the same under the skin? No, of course it isn’t. Rwandans and Tibetans look very different and behave very differently, because they’re very different under the skin — and under the skull. And that isn’t just because they’ve evolved in very different environments: it’s also because they’ve interbred with different species of hominid. Tibetans have genes from Neanderthals and Denisovans, two distinct species of human. Rwandans don’t have those genes, but they do have genes from distinct hominid species in Africa.

Even the Jewish pseudo-scientist Stephen Jay Gould couldn’t have lied away the effects of interbreeding with different species. Gould endlessly claimed that “human equality is a contingent fact of history,” mendaciously arguing there had been too little time for the human brain to evolve in distinct ways after the departure of Homo sapiens from Africa. He was wrong then and he’s even wronger now. Not only has there been ample time for humans in Rwanda and Tibet to evolve differently in their very different environments, those humans have interbred with different hominid species that have been separated for even longer. The Rwandan Black Axel Rudakubana was born in the White nation of Wales, but that did not make him Welsh or White. He was created by his Black genetics and committed brutal murder because of his Black genetics. Black Biology Matters. It’s responsible both for the low average IQ of Blacks and for the high average criminality of Blacks. But Rudakubana was only a vehicle for evil, not the creator and sustainer of that evil. The creators and sustainers are leftists like Starmer, whose ideology of lies and deceit is still denying racial reality and still ensuring that more indigenous Whites will be killed by more imported non-Whites in future.

Psychotic Black Killer #2: Valdo Calocane and his victims

Because leftism is an ideology of lies, leftists like Starmer have to crush anyone who tells the truth about the way Blacks blight Britain. Just imagine how leftists would react to anyone in the mainstream who pointed out the obvious parallels between what Axel Rudakubana did in the town of Southport in 2024 and what Valdo Calocane did in the city of Nottingham in 2023. Both Rudakubana and Calocane were Black, both were psychotic, and both murdered three people in horrific fashion. The psychotic Black Joshua Jacques went one better. He murdered four people in horrific fashion. He then had his precious Black identity erased by the leftist Guardian, which called him merely a “London man” in its headline:

Psychotic Black Killer #3: Joshua Jacques and his victims

London man who killed girlfriend and her relatives as ‘sacrifice’ jailed for life

A man who claimed he stabbed his girlfriend and three of her family members as a “sacrifice” has been jailed for life with a minimum term of 46 years for their murders. Joshua Jacques, 29, had consumed drugs and alcohol when he attacked Samantha Drummonds and her family with a knife in their home in south London in April 2022, the Old Bailey heard. Police found the bodies of Drummonds, 27, her mother, Tanysha Ofori-Akuffo, 45, grandmother Dolet Hill, 64, and Hill’s partner, Denton Burke, 58, after being alerted to a disturbance by a neighbour.

Officers found Burke’s body at the foot of the stairs and the three women “heaped together” in the kitchen. Mr Justice Bryan said Jacques had committed the “horrific catalogue of murders” after using skunk cannabis. … The court heard that Jacques took 3gm of skunk cannabis a day and refused to consider cutting down, saying he would carry on smoking marijuana “even if it killed” him.

At the scene, armed officers discovered Jacques naked and lying in the upstairs bathroom in a praying position, screaming “Allah, take me!”, “Kill me now”, “Get rid of me”, and “God please forgive me”. Later, at Lewisham hospital, he said: “I ain’t even in the wrong, I did them for sacrifice,” and warned: “I will do something stupid again.” (“London man who killed girlfriend and her relatives as ‘sacrifice’ jailed for life,” The Guardian, 1st March 2024)

What astonishing coincidences! Three individuals drawn from Britain’s tiny Black minority have slaughtered ten people in the same horrific fashion thanks to the same homicidal psychosis. But the coincidences don’t end there. It is now emerging that Axel Rudakubana was free to murder because the authorities failed to act on repeated warnings about his potential for harm, just as they failed to act on repeated warnings about Valdo Calocane and Joshua Jacques. Indeed, this seems to be a settled rule: each time a psychotic Black commits a horrific murder in Britain, it will emerge that the authorities failed to act on repeated warnings about the Black in question. That happened after a psychotic Black murdered the White schoolgirl Christina Edkins. And after a psychotic Black murdered the White father Lee Pomeroy. And after a psychotic Black murdered the White scientist Jeroen Ensink.

Cretinous rap is truly Black

But let’s be fair: Blacks do not have to be psychotic to commit horrific murders. The Blacks responsible for a blood-bath in the London district of Ilford were not psychotic, but they would have gone two better than Rudakubana and Calocane if they’d been able:

Non-psychotic Black killers who tried for five and slaughtered two

Two rappers were fatally stabbed and shot repeatedly in what jurors were told was a scene of “bloody carnage”. The Old Bailey heard Saydi Abu Sheikh, 23, and Zakariya Jeilani Mohamed, 31, were left dead or dying in a bedroom after the five-minute “revenge” raid in Ilford, east London, last October. A third man was shot through the head but lived. Two more managed to escape. … Minutes after the attack in Henley Road, a white Mitsubishi Outlander, allegedly used by the attackers and containing a small pile of clothes, was set alight in nearby Ronnie Lane. …

Police and paramedics found a “scene of bloody carnage” when they arrived at the address a few minutes later, [the prosecuting lawyer John Price] said. “In an upstairs room were two young men, both dead or dying. They had each been shot and stabbed many times,” he said. “A third young man, gravely wounded, had been left for dead. Though he sustained a gunshot wound which had passed through his head, he was to survive. It was later discovered that a fourth man had run from the back of the house when a group of attackers armed with guns had forced their way in. A fifth man was even more fortunate. Before the gunmen were able to force their way into the room, he had concealed himself between a bed and the wall. Almost miraculously, his presence there went undetected by the gunmen.” (“Ilford rappers found in scene of bloody carnage, jury told,” BBC News, 1st November 2023)

The Blacks Axel Rudakubana and Valdo Calocane killed three people; the Black Joshua Jacques killed four; the Blacks in Ilford would have killed five if they’d been able. But it’s important to note a big difference between the killings in Ilford and those committed by Rudakubana, Calocane and Jacques. The victims in Ilford were not innocent. As any honest observer will recognize, the BBC was being euphemistic when it described the murdered men as “two rappers.” In other and more honest words, they were two thuggish criminals who celebrated their thuggery and crime with an ugly and stupid Black genre of rhythmic noise and shouting called rap. That genre is a much more authentic expression of Black biology than, say, jazz or blues, which were created when Blacks were much more under White influence and control. Performing jazz and blues requires the ability to play non-Black instruments and master the rules of a non-Black musical system. Performing rap requires the ability to shout crude rhymes against deafening rhythms. It’s improvisational, inane, and celebrates violence.

In other words, it’s both a product of Black biology and an exacerbator of Black biology. Rap both expresses and incites the Black biological tendency to violence. That’s why I predict that the alliterative annihilator Joshua Jacques is also a fan or performer of rap. After all, he was a thuggish criminal who was described as posing a threat of “serious harm” to the public. Jacques was certainly a fan of something else that interacts disastrously with Black biology, namely, cannabis. Part of the reason that Blacks are more susceptible to psychosis is that Black brains are harmed more by drugs like cannabis and cocaine. Examine some remarks made by the judge who sentenced Jacques for his remarkable achievements in the field of extreme violence:

Mr Justice Bryan said Jacques had committed the “horrific catalogue of murders” after using skunk cannabis. Addressing Jacques in the dock, the judge said he had inflicted the murders “in the most brutal of circumstances on three generations of the same family” after increasing his daily intake of the drug. He said Jacques’ offending had been contributed to by cannabis abuse, and that he was “well aware” of the impact of it on his mental health. He added: “It is a salutary lesson to all those who peddle the myth that cannabis is not a dangerous drug. It is, and its deleterious effect on mental health and its potential to cause psychosis is well-established.” (“London man who killed girlfriend and her relatives as ‘sacrifice’ jailed for life,” The Guardian, 1st March 2024)

I agree with the judge about cannabis and that “salutary lesson.” But I am absolutely certain that the judge would not agree with me if he heard me adapt his words like this: “Jacques’ quadruple killing is a salutary lesson to all those who peddle the myth that Blacks are a blessing to Britain. They are not, and their vastly disproportionate tendency to commit murder, rape and other violent crimes is well-established.”

Clown Jewels

Indeed, not only would the judge disagree with me: he would happily send me to jail if I spoke those words in public or displayed this simple truth in public: BLACKS BLIGHT BRITAIN. Leftists like him would call that “hate speech,” because truth is hate to those who hate the truth. The BBC hates the truth, which is why I often encounter a great irony when I visit the BBC website for stories about pathological Black behavior. The BBC is a jewel in the crown of Clown World, which is why visitors to the site will often be greeted by the following image of a grinning Black woman:

The grinning Black woman who greets visitors to the BBC website

I saw that grinning Black woman again when I was looking for stories about the psychotic Black killer Joshua Jacques. The woman promotes a leftist lie: that Blacks Bless Britain. Jacques reveals the ugly reality: that Blacks Blight Britain. And what about another jewel in the crown of Clown World, namely, MI5, Britain’s domestic intelligence service? Before I visited the MI5 website recently, I made a little prediction to myself: “I bet the front page has prominent blacks on it.” I then visited the MI5 site and laughed out loud at what I found there:

Worshipping Blacks at mendacious MI5, a crown jewel of Clown World

More negrolatry at Clown Jewel MI5

MI5 is lying when it says “The people of MI5 work to keep the country safe.” In fact, they do the opposite, because they work on behalf of Clown World, the vast system of leftist lies that imports and incubates Third-World pathologies in White nations like Britain. But MI5 isn’t just lying, of course. It’s also spying. It’s central to  the surveillance state created by leftists in response to Third-World pathologies like Muslim terrorism. The cycle goes like this: First leftists import and incubate evil, then justify further evil by the evil they’ve imported and incubated.

Leftists pursue power, not truth

It’s a perfect cycle from the leftist point of view: evil feeds evil and enhances the power of leftists to create more evil. We can see the cycle at work once again in the proposals the Labour government is making in response to the Southport killings. The killings by a Black will be used to justify more surveillance of Whites and more censorship of Whites who speak the truth about non-White pathologies.

But the killings will not be used by leftists to criticize either non-White immigration or Islam, the imported ideology that directly inspired Rudakubana. He was the “shy son of evangelical Christians,” according to the leftist Guardian, but he found murderous Islam much more congenial than mild Christianity. Behind their smarm and sentimentality about the three dead little girls in Southport, leftists like Keir Starmer and journalists at the Guardian simply don’t care. They didn’t become leftists because they believe in Truth, Beauty and Goodness. No, they became leftists because leftism supplies the only things that truly matter to them: power, privilege, and fuel for their insatiable narcissism.

Send Blacks back

But I try to follow the truth, which is why I would never make the ludicrous claim that all problems in Britain are caused by non-Whites like Blacks, Muslims and Jews. That claim would be clearly untrue. For example, the White homosexual pedophile Thomas Hamilton shot sixteen children to death in 1996. And the story of an apparent White committing a horrific multiple murder has also been in headlines this month. Kyle Clifford killed three women in 2024, stabbing one to death and shooting the two others with a crossbow. He is also accused of raping one of the women. And his older brother Bradley Clifford is a killer too.

I’d be interested to know if Kyle Clifford has Gypsy or similar non-White ancestry, but let’s suppose he’s fully White British. That would not alter the statistical facts. Horrific murders by Whites are rare in White-majority Britain. Horrific murders by Blacks are routine in White-majority Britain. Also routine in White-majority Britain are the rape and sexual enslavement of Whites by non-White Muslims. Non-Whites like Blacks and Muslims inflict vastly disproportionate harm on Whites, which is why non-Whites do not belong here and must return to their homelands.

Why Are Whites So Vulnerable?

/25 Comments/in /by

A single lie is louder than a hundred truths
Georges Bernanos

Our ancestors, the Hunter-Gatherers of the North, evolved in the harsh environment of the Ice age. They formed small groups that tended for reasons of survival to isolate themselves socially instead of creating large cohesive communities, ethnocentrism being irrelevant in the battle against the elements, according to American professor of evolutionary psychology, Dr. Kevin MacDonald, the author of Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition. Evolutionary Origins, History, and Prospects for the Future.

Whites of European descent are therefore far less ethnocentric than the tricksters who have declared war on them. More inclined to individualism and moral universalism, they are vulnerable to strongly collectivist and ethnocentric groups that are by definition more cohesive and stronger.

Key genetically influenced traits of individualists include:

– More positive towards outsiders and more likely to behave in an altruistic manner;

– Less aware of differences between races and ethnic groups and have fewer negative attitudes towards outsiders, sometimes to the point of disagreeing with their own group’s policies towards outsiders;

– Show little commitment or loyalty to their group, and lack a sense of common destiny with its members;

– Less likely to assume that other groups are wrong;

– Create moderate attachments to other groups.[1]

What makes Whites even more vulnerable is the fact that they have guilt cultures rather than shame cultures (like the vast majority of the world) because in a cold and harsh environment if you don’t follow the rules of the group for survival, you can jeopardize everyone’s survival. If you don’t behave as expected, guilty feelings, to say it differently, will drive one to seek forgiveness and not to repeat any life-threatening behaviour that could endanger the group. “In the environments we evolved in, violating the moral sensibilities of the group was an evolutionary dead end,” as MacDonald puts it. Guilt, in other words, is a group evolutionary survival strategy.

However, in an artificial environment such as ours, this predisposition for guilt can be hijacked and used against Whites by predators who know how to manipulate people into doing things they would not normally do. Jews, for example, and minorities in general, who are much more ethnocentric than Whites, are very good at manipulating Whites into welcoming multiculturalism, race-mixing, and replacement immigration, for example, by making them feel guilty about the bad things their ancestors supposedly did to weaker and vulnerable people such as slavery, colonization, or the Holocaust. Most Whites who are made to feel guilty that way will tend to relinquish their normal survival instincts to seek forgiveness not only by opening wide their heart to invaders and their demands for equality and tolerance but also by punishing other Whites for not complying (altruistic punishment).[2] The following quote taken from the June 19, 2022, issue of White World Wrap sums up well the overall effects of this tendency to feel guilty and to seek forgiveness:

White people are basically battered housewives, whose better instincts have been used against them by predators who know how to construct consensus on a massive scale, basically a massive psychological warfare operation to turn weakened and dilute European countries until they can be integrated into a world slave state.[3]

This strong genetic predisposition for guilt which is no longer well adapted makes Whites prone to suicidal and punitive altruism as well as pathological compassion because they can be easily tricked into doing and believing things they would not normally have done or believed in the Evolutionary Environment of their Ancestors (EEA) where they lived for tens of thousands of years.

On top of the genetic factors, there has been a major softening up of the population because of domestication itself and various cultural measures, such as compulsory schooling, alphabetization, and the internalization of the law and religious principles; these measures were put in place along the way to curb our basic instincts in an environment to which they were no longer adapted when they left the EEA for reasons that are still not clear. These necessary steps of the civilization process are also part of a group evolutionary survival strategy. You don’t want people robbing, raping, eating, enslaving, or killing each other in the street. But this well-adapted strategy is not immune to being taken over and changed by hostile forces who have different interests at heart.

In fact, beginning with the French Revolution, native Western Christian elites, whose values were in sync with their populations, were gradually replaced by a Jewish elite that had different values. They were supposedly for universalism and the rejection of race consciousness while the natives were overwhelmingly for separatism and race consciousness. With the advent in the early 20th century of the fraudulent Jewish-led Boasian anthropology, which defined race as a social construct, race realism, Darwinism, and eugenics lost their popularity, except, paradoxically, with the Jews themselves, the very ones who imposed on Whites the values of universalism and race denial for political reasons. In other words, as we shall see further on, Jews are basically using universalism and race denial as a Jewish group evolutionary strategy to dominate the White race and eventually all races, while they themselves remain separate and racially conscious. As Kevin MacDonald says,

Jewish ethics is universalist, while at the same time maintaining that Israel must remain separate in order to present a moral beacon to the rest of humanity—a beacon of universalism and ethnic dissolution of non-Jews. One cannot underestimate the importance of the fact that the central pose of post Enlightenment Jewish intellectuals is a sense that Judaism represents a moral beacon to the rest of humanity. [4]

And this even after the Gaza genocide, and continuing on the West Bank.

As the Jewish elite was rising to the top of the social pyramid and in their mind approaching world conquest, criticizing Jewish influence gradually became more and more off-limits, to the point,

that even to openly use the word ‘Jew’ or to expose it nakedly to print is somehow improper. … There is an extreme sensitiveness about the public discussion of the Jewish question on the part of Gentiles. They would prefer to keep it in the hazy borderlands of their thought, shrouded in silence. … Anyone who essays to discuss the Jewish question in the United States or anywhere else must be fully prepared to be regarded as an antisemite in highbrow language, or in lowbrow language, a Jew-baiter.[5]

The situation though is not desperate yet because what is natural for all races is race consciousness and separatism, i.e., nationalism and territorial borders. These basic instincts implanted in our DNA for eternity can be subdued at gun point or massive propaganda but not for long. What is bred in the bone will come out in the flesh. So, if we fight back by debunking the lies or “tricks” that were implanted in the minds of Western populations to smother with guilt their racial identity and pride, it might be possible to trigger our collectivist instincts which lay dormant and to revitalize the facets of our character and temperament which allowed us to create the greatest and most unique civilization the world has ever known.[6]

Indeed, ethnic Europeans do not lack collectivist mechanism for group competition, notes Kevin MacDonald, but since these mechanisms are relatively less elaborated, they require a higher level of group conflict in order to trigger their expression.[7] Our racial competitors therefore go to great lengths to wage a low-key race war against us in order to avoid waking up a “sleeping giant.” They are a tiny minority holding a dog by the tail, and they’re scared stiff of losing their grip. So, they need to wage their racial war discreetly by hiding behind various masks, i.e., censorship, lies, or tricks, in broad daylight, you could say.

To unmask them, you need a special flashlight called “truth,” but in the end, it is useless to debunk the tricks with truth without naming at the same time the “trickster.” One must name this wolf in sheep’s clothing every time he shows his face behind one or the other of his tricks; attacking only the lie simply encourages him to invent another one, and ultimately to sharpen his will to power and control. This is perhaps the most demonic aspect of this low-key race war that is being waged on our race and eventually against all humanity: to make us contribute to our demise by not naming, systematically and publicly, our real enemies: the Jews and their non-Jewish allies.

Easier said than done in some cases as our enemies have learned over the centuries to disguise themselves by adopting the surnames, languages, and even the religion of their hosts. By impersonating, mimicking, cloning, copying the hosts’ culture and values, by being, in other words, indistinguishable and accepted, and therefore undetectable, they can with this clever trick bypass their hosts’ natural defense mechanisms against subversion. And the best way to hide in plain sight is to use as a pretext for stigmatizing Whites and destroying their civilization with some noble cause such as the liberal values of the left, i.e., democracy, anti-racism, humanism, universalism, tolerance, love, and egalitarianism, when in effect, you don’t yourself espouse these values. The following widely known citation falsely attributed to Roma Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 B.C.) stands as the best indictment of what has just been said:

A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.[8]

As written in the Talmud, their holiest book, Jews are loyal to no nation except their own. They occupy nations and literally vampirize them. “Because their break with their native environment — the Arabian deserts — occurred at an early stage in their ethnogenetic cycle, the Jews,” according to famed Russian historian and ethnologist Lev Goumilev (1912–1992),

developed the ability to penetrate virtually any type of natural landscape, and even codified their strategies in the Talmud. Wherever they settled, they acted as a chimera towards the indigenous populations, deliberately promoting ‘skepticism and indifference’ in order to erode the spiritual and moral resistance of their hosts and to extend their domination over them. In ethnological terms, a chimera is a parasitic ethnos, which exploits the indigenous populations of the country as well as its flora, fauna, and subsoil riches. Like a population of bacteria or infusoria [a type of single-celled organism] that spreads through the internal organs of the person or animal, a chimeric ethnic invasion vamps the vital energies and resources of its host organism.[9]

Goumilev also compared the relationship between a chimera and its indigenous ethnic group to a cancerous tumour: “The latter can only grow with the organism, never outside it, and it lives only at the expense of the host organism. As a cancer, a chimerical ethnic antisystem draws its means of existence from the indigenous ethnos.”[10]

In so doing, concludes French author Laurent Guyénot who summarized Goumilev’s work from Imaginary Kingdom: The Legend of the Kingdom of Prester John, a book written by Jewish American scholar Mark Bassin:

it disrupts the vital processes of the [native people]. The invading ethnicity is also irreparably degraded, but in a way that strengthens rather than weakens it. Uprooted ethnicities survive precisely by developing traits that, although unnatural, give them decisive advantages over their cohabitants. Uprootedness, as a structural trait, itself becomes a selective advantage, in the sense that the invading ethnicity has internalized strategies that allow it to thrive virtually anywhere.[11]

In short, whenever you encounter an influencer who systematically destroys anything which is ethnic-European, try to identify who that person really is. Much of the time, it will be a Jew, even if he looks White and claims to be speaking in the name of Whites. On social media, there are hundreds of these Jewish “White” trolls busy demonizing Whites and making it seem like righteous Whites are at war with their own race when in reality it is the Jews who are at war with our race:

Because of their ability to often pass as White, one of the most effective strategies Jews have of infiltrating and subverting White Christian nations is to take on a White identity and then speak for their “fellow White people.”

This shape-shifting phenomenon has been going on for years on X/Twitter, and one astute observer has painstakingly cataloged over 1,100 examples of Jews pretending to be White while at the same time denigrating Whites for being White, and then switching back to their Jewish identity to shield themselves from any criticism.[12]

Moreover, in order to put an end to any criticism of Jews, Israel, and Jewish power, Jews introduce laws against incitement to hatred, but have no qualms about writing books with impunity that smear whites as something they are not.[13] But if White people do the same, they are immediately arrested and prosecuted for hate speech. Why this double standard? Is it because Jews are the real masters of the West?

Yes, of course, it’s pretty obvious.

[1] Kevin MacDonald, Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition: Evolutionary Origins, History, and Prospects for the Future, Kindle Direct Publication Edition, 2019.

[2] Ibid., p. 304.

[3] White World Wrap (2022-06-19): merchantHelios @merchant-Helios@poa.st interesting thoughts from /lit/ on why so much western media is blatantly anti-White.

[4] Kevin MacDonald, cited, p. 284.

[5] Ibid., pp. 299-300.

[6] Ricardo Duchesne, The Uniqueness of Western Civilization, Brill, 2012.

[7] Kevin MacDonald, book cited, p. 94.

[8] Citation taken from Greg Felton, The Host and the Parasite. How Israel’s Fifth Column Consumed America. Expanded Post-Obama Edition, Money Tree Publishing, p. 536.

[9] Laurent Guyénot, “Lev Goumilev et ‘la chimère khazar,’” E&R, December 1, 2022. This article is a review of the book by Mark Bassin, The Gumilev Mystique: Biopolitics, Eurasianism, and the Construction of Community in Modern Russia, Cornell University Press, 2016.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Christians for Truth team, “Over 1,000 Shape-Shifting Jews Exposed For Pretending To Be White on X (formely Twitter),”August 19, 2019: https://christiansfortruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Shape-Shifting-Jews-on-Twitter-Exposed-.pdf

[13] Jewish Anti-White Books, https://www.thehardtruth.info/jewish-anti-white-books, The Hard Truth Files.

Why are Hollywood Lead Actors Getting Older?

/8 Comments/in /by

Titanic hit the cinemas in 1997. The tragic tale of doomed love between Jack and Rose, played by Leonardo di Caprio and Kate Winslett, is one of the most successful films ever made. As with many such films, it focused on the story of two young lovers of approximately the same age; perhaps the male was slightly older. This was reflected in the casting: Di Caprio was born in 1974 and Winslett was born in 1975. Precisely because they were so young, this was very much their big break, especially in the case of Kate Winslett. Very few people knew who she was before she starred in Titanic.

A fascinating new article has drawn upon a large body of research to show that this has been changing. Hollywood decreasingly casts young actors in key roles. Across the years, since the beginning of the twenty-first century, the male and female leads have gotten older. The article’s author is confused as to why this should be. In reality, of course, it makes perfect sense in terms of social changes that have been happening in Western countries, especially over the last 60 years or so. In particular, it makes sense in terms of increasing female influence.

The intriguing piece — “Why are actors getting older?” — was published on the Substack “StephenFollows.com — using data to explain the film industry”; it makes a number of eye-raising points. Across the twentieth century, the average age of top-billed film actors was about 38. However, from the year 2006 onwards a dramatic rise began, and it is now 44. This rise is the most pronounced in action movies and Westerns and the least pronounced in horror movies, but in both cases it is stark. It is found among both sexes. In 1940, the average age of a lead actor was 40 and the average age of a lead actress was about 28. By 2021, the male was 48 and female was 34.

This change reflects the fact that lead parts are increasingly given to established actors and increasingly not given to relative unknowns. It seems quite obvious to me what this reflects: a decreasing desire to take risks. If the lead is an actor who everybody has heard of ,then he will likely be older. Precisely because he has a reputation for being in successful films, more people will be drawn to watch his next film than if he is a relative unknown, meaning that the film is less likely be a box office flop. What changes, over the last 25 years or so, would militate in favour of this?

This most obvious seems be aversion to risk. As I explore in my book Woke Eugenics, there is abundant evidence that Generation Z are far more risk-averse than are previous generations. However, people have been becoming more risk-averse across a longer period of time. Generation Z lose their virginity later than Millennials, leave home later, learn to drive later, are less likely to drink alcohol (partly because of the risks involve) and even increasingly suffer from “Menu Anxiety,” disliking the “risk” of having to make a choice from a menu in what they see as the pressure of the moment. They need to be able to look up the menu online at home before they go to the restaurant or they become terribly anxious.

If you think about how they’ve been raised, this makes sense. Older people were deliberately prepared for the harshness of life such that they could develop coping mechanisms in order to deal with adversity. They were also allowed to take risks, as these build confidence or result in adversity which further prepares you for adult life. On average, Generation Z has been raised very differently. In many UK schools, unsupervised play is banned lest bullying occur, competitive sport is prohibited because losing at sport might hurt your feelings, children are allowed to identify as dogs or as the opposite sex rather than be smacked and told not be so stupid, there are no serious sanctions for bad behaviour and, in some schools, children are banned from bringing in birthday party invitations lest this upset the children who are not invited. In other words, everything is done to protect children from real life rather than prepare them for it. And it goes without saying that their parents drive them to and from school, often even at secondary school, and, almost unbelievably, accompany them to university open days.

The key reason for this shift, it seems to me, is fairly obvious: the rise of women in the workplace, especially in school-teaching. As of 2020, females were 73% of high school teachers in the UK and 85% of elementary school teachers. Females, being evolved to look after babies, are far more risk-averse than males; they are far more concerned with harm avoidance. Being evolved to alloparent each other’s children as part of harems centred around high status males, they must be able to totally trust their fellow alloparents not to take extra resources from the male. Accordingly, they are focused on equality and nobody feeling excluded, such that they can maintain their alloparenting clique.

What is the result? More and more younger people who are increasingly risk-averse. This shift has been happening for a long time and can be seen in every profession, including politics. Female influence was likely a key factor in Covid-19 lockdowns. In 1968, when men dominated UK politics, the government policy for any future novel pandemic was very clear: Achieve Herd Immunity; let the plague run through the population.

Of course, this risk-aversion is going to influence the movie industry as well. Perhaps the early-2000s witnessed the ascension into the movie-making industry of Generation Z, whose lives had been so much more coddled, and female-influenced, than those of Boomers. This would appear to make sense of what has happened. It also helps us to understand why onscreen nudity has decreased by 40% since the year 2000. Females are more influential and, in general, it’s only young and un-established actresses that are prepared to do nude scenes. Unlike older women, they are body-confident and, unlike established actresses, they are under greater pressure to be cooperative.

The nature of contemporary movies attests to this desire not to take risk. There is a growing concentration on trusted franchises: Remakes, reboots, sequels and even prequels abound. In part, this reflects a desire to avoid risk and, in part, it may simply reflect increasing materialism and concern with money above everything else. This, in itself, militates in favour of sticking with well-known actors. So, perhaps we can expect Hollywood stars to continue to get older and older.

Finishing the Job: Starmer the Pabloite

/11 Comments/in , /by

This is the tale of three men, a Russian, a Greek, and an Englishman, separated in time but united by doctrine. The first was Jewish, born Lev Bronstein, although he is better known to history as Leon Trotsky. After leading the Red Army to victory in the Russian Civil War, Trotsky became Lenin’s right-hand man, and after Lenin’s death was left as a rival to Stalin for leadership of the new Soviet. Stalin exiled Trotsky in 1928 and, after travelling rootlessly through Turkey, France, and Norway, the exile settled in Mexico. In August, 1940, an assassin dispatched by Stalin attacked Trotsky with an icepick. Whether or not the killing was quite as dramatic as that portrayed in the 1972 movie The Assassination of Trotsky, starring Richard Burton as the Russian and Alain Delon as NKVD agent Frank Jacson, is one for the historians. Trotsky survived the initial attack, but died in hospital days later, reportedly saying at the last that, “I think Stalin has finished the job he started”. Trotskyism, however, was still very much alive.

The second of the main proponents of Trotskyism was a Greek, Michalis Raptis, who was born in 1911 and later took the pseudonym Michel Pablo. Heavily involved in Greek Trotskyism, Pablo was also exiled, in 1936 when Greece fell under military rule, although he and his wife escaped and made their way across Europe to Paris. There, when France was occupied by the Nazis, he continued his work for the Trotskyist cause. After the war, he became General Secretary of the Fourth International, founded by Trotsky in Paris in 1938. After Pablo’s death in Greece in 1996, where his funeral was a state affair, he was perhaps best remembered for the political concept of “entryism”  (like neocons joining the GOP and moving it to the left on social issues.

The third man is the current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Sir Keir Starmer. Although he is leading the Labour Party, and thus the country, in an increasingly authoritarian fashion, it might seem excessive to place him in the lineage of Trotsky. As a term of abuse for those seen to be on the political hard left in Great Britain, “Trot” has always been just behind “Bolshevik”. But Starmer’s past is the subject of two mysteries. Firstly, what is his connection with “Pabloism”, and, secondly, why is virtually no one in the British media talking about it?

The 1980s saw Starmer in his twenties and entering on a career in the law, his choice of guildsmen consistent with his political leanings. He became Secretary of the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers rather than the alternative, the Society of Labour Lawyers, and there was one major difference of opinion between the two organizations. The latter did not approve of what was occurring and had occurred in the Soviet Union, while Starmer’s favored professional body very much did, this schism going as far back as the 1940s. As well as his fledgling legal career, Starmer also turned his hand to political journalism.

The International Marxist Tendency was a Parisian Pabloite group whose British chapter was named Socialist Alternatives. A magazine of the same name was published from 1986 to 1987 and was co-edited by Starmer. Pablo himself was among the contributors and, in its five issues, eight articles were penned by Britain’s future Prime Minister.

Starmer’s program for the redefinition of socialism had as its center of gravity trade unionism, but Socialist Alternatives also introduced a new political perspective, highlighting the potential for new and supposedly oppressed societal factions to bolster the socialist cause. The new socialism, the magazine and its co-editor held, “will necessarily have to be rooted in the anticapitalist alliance of all the emancipatory movements.” Looking to broaden the potential socialist base, Starmer foreshadowed his and Labour’s current abandonment of the White working class, insisting that “the working class exists beyond its historical base amongst white, male workers”. “Today the challenge to the status quo comes from protest movements which are not singularly based on class but represent a wide variety of social groups”, he wrote. These groups seem very familiar in modern Britain, comprising “environmentalists, tenants associations, ethnic minorities, feminists, gays, nuclear disarmers etc.”. This is an obvious deviation from Marxism. The workers were, at least nominally, championed by the Communists, whereas Starmer and his cabinet have made their hatred of the White working class in Britain absolutely clear, and these new “marginalized” groups are favored by today’s elitist, metropolitan Labour Party in a way its old base is not. When not running a Pabloite magazine, however, Starmer found time to experience socialism at ground level.

In 1986, in his mid-twenties, Keir Starmer attended a Communist work camp in what was then Czechoslovakia. This was at the height of the cold-war clampdown on free speech, and playwright Václav Havel was among those jailed for speaking out against Communism. This has echoes in contemporary Britain, where the issue of freedom of speech — and criticism of government policy in particular — is a hot-button topic. One union not favored by the British Government is The Free Speech Union, founded by journalist Toby Young, who report the following:

Pubs and other customer-facing businesses may ban discussions on contentious topics, such as Christians expressing deeply held beliefs about sex and marriage or feminists defending women’s sex-based rights, to avoid breaching Labour’s proposed workers’ rights reforms, the UK’s equality watchdog has warned.

The “rights” supposedly being defended are those of hospitality-industry workers not to be offended, which is held to be tantamount to “harassment”. No clear definition of “offense” exists in British law.

The Left-wing establishment in Britain has provided covering fire for Starmer and his Pabloite past. In a laudatory puff-piece on Starmer four months before the General Election that, while it didn’t exactly sweep Starmer and Labour to power, at least allowed him to pocket the keys to 10 Downing Street, Labour stalwart Andrew Marr discusses Starmer via a hagiography written by the dubious Tom Baldwin. There is no mention of Starmer’s dalliance with the hard Left, instead jumping straight from his taking up the law to his becoming DPP (Director of Public Prosecutions), and even then neglecting to mention the Muslims he defended and which are now causing a stir among Starmer’s critics. Baldwin also makes much of Starmer’s supposedly financially impoverished childhood, growing up as was claimed in a poor part of the county of Surrey.

This is fanciful, to say the least. Starmer grew up in Oxted, a town I knew well as I grew up at the same time a few miles away, and Oxted hosted our nearest cinema. We knew it as the town where the rich kids lived. As a matter of fact, I was at school with Starmer, a year above him at Reigate Grammar School in the same county, having gained my place by virtue of an examination-based scholarship. It is a great surprise to me that such a conservative school could have produced such a radically Left-wing Prime Minister. Starmer also mentioned ad nauseam during his election campaign that his father was a toolmaker, invoking images of back-breaking hard graft wielding a farrier’s hammer in some infernally hot workshop. In fact, Starmer senior — with whom the current PM had a cold and distant relationship — owned a tool-making company. This type of class-based cosmetics is familiar in British politics, but what of the more salient chapters of Starmer’s past outside these feeble attempts to bracket him with the working class he so reviles? Why are the British mainstream media almost entirely uninterested in the radical socialist past of its current, controversial Prime Minister?

In an article from 2020, when Starmer was the front-runner for the Labour leadership, The Daily Mail quoted an unnamed Labour MP as calling today’s Prime Minister a “posh Trot”, as well as referencing Socialist Alternatives, but the paper has kept quiet on the subject since. So much for the MSM.

Also in 2020, an article from the hard Left dismissive of Starmer’s past associations actually describes accurately the MSM’s oblivious stance towards the PM today:

Was Keir Starmer a Trotskyist? Or a follower of Michel Pablo and therefore a ‘Pabloite’? Is there a difference? Indeed, who was this ‘Michel Pablo’ and what on earth is ‘Pabloism’?

Does anyone care?

Indeed. The piece goes on to describe Pablo’s approval of the success of Mao and Tito, and the notion of “client states” inspired a concept which links Pablo to Starmer:

This led to [Pablo] putting forward an idea of ‘deep entryism’ (entryism ‘sui generis’ [‘of a special type’]) where Trotskyists would join mass Communist Parties and seek to influence their development without revealing their politics openly.

Rather than a “mass Communist Party”, Starmer chose Britain’s Labour Party.

And what of the British right-of-center politicians, such as they are? Professor Matt Goodwin is a near-permanent fixture on Right-of-center British media, and is becoming a force within Reform UK, whose political star is very much in the ascendant, and at whose party conference Professor Goodwin recently spoke. Professor Goodwin goes after Keir Starmer personally — a national pastime at present — from about 13:00 in the video, and since his academic background is in statistics, he is tethered to facts and figures in a way rare in the political class. If any man was going to expose Starmer’s Trotskyite past, surely this was Professor Goodwin. And he didn’t mention it. That the Prime Minister of the UK was formerly connected with hard-Left doctrine ought to be a serious weapon, particularly for a party eclipsing the Tories. One wonders what the media response might be were Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform and himself tipped as a future Prime Minister, found to have been an avid reader of Julius Evola.

The only British journalist even to have mentioned the fact that Starmer was or had been a Pabloite, and so by extension a Trotskyite, is the veteran writer Peter Hitchens, the surviving younger brother of the late Christopher Hitchens.

Hitchens becomes more curmudgeonly as he gets older and more jaded politically, but he is evermore forthright. The reason he gives for the media’s radio silence on Starmer’s radical political past is a simple one:

They don’t understand it. Most people who write about politics in this country are politically illiterate.

This is unlikely to lead to many lunch invitations from journalistic colleagues, but Hitchens does understand both his profession and politics. In particular, he understands Trotskyism because, in his youth, he was himself a Trotskyist, a fact he has never tried to conceal and which gives him his insight into Starmer.

Starmer is portrayed in the British press as “boring”, but he is psychologically fascinating. Asked his favorite book or poem in an interview, he seemed slightly surprised at the question, and said he had neither. What kind of person doesn’t have a favorite piece of literature? There is something autistic about the man, as though he doesn’t function at the human level, but instead as a sort of AI program. Peter Hitchens describes the PM as “an extremely dogmatic person”, which is accurate as far as it goes, but he is more doctrinaire than simply dogmatic, and this makes him absolutely suited to the hard Left.

Contemporary Britain is, of course, a very different place from the Soviet Union. One of the main points of difference between Trotsky and Stalin was that, while Bronstein favored a period of capitalism in order to bring down that very edifice, Stalin did not. Starmer seems to be with Stalin in despising capitalists. The rich are now leaving Britain at record levels due to his policies, with millionaires exiting the country in 2024 at a level 150% higher than that of 2023.

Starmer is not the first PM in recent history to have fallen under the spell of Trotsky. Tony Blair, whose New Labour began the project of which the Starmer administration is the continuity version, was himself drawn to Trotskyism after reading the first volume of Isaac Deutscher’s biographic trilogy of the Russian, as a 2017 Guardian article revealed:

‘Here’s this guy Trotsky who was so inspired by all of this that he went out to create a Russian revolution and changed the world. I think it’s a very odd thing – just literally it was like a light going on,’ Blair told Reflections with Peter Hennessy on Radio 4.

While Starmer has always been branded a “Corbynite”, or a follower of Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader prior to his tenure, seasoned watchers of British politics will recognize Blair as the PM’s true mentor. It may still be that a torch lit in Soviet Russia, kindled in Greece and Paris, and one that so illuminated Tony Blair, has been passed on to Sir Keir Starmer, and may not be extinguished before the job is finished.