General

Intellectual Dissidents Need to Place Their Assets in a Living Trust Rather Than in a Will

/11 Comments/in /by
A mutual friend has posted the following email to a confidential chat site where People Like Us can talk:

I have just been talking to a New Jersey wills and trusts lawyer. A decedent made a bequest to a nationalist group in Georgia and the distribution has been very slow in coming. It turns out that New Jersey requires that any bequest to a charitable organization be reviewed and, apparently, approved by the Attorney General of New Jersey.The present Attorney General of New Jersey is Gurbir Grewal, the first Sikh to hold that office.

What is the requirement for approval? The attorney did not know. But it takes very little imagination to conjure the SPLC argument that charities are approved by the State and must serve the public interests.

It would appear wise for any people residing in New Jersey desiring to make a bequest to a charity consult with an attorney and consider a trust. Please spread this information around. The SPLC intervened in a Canadian will dispute and successfully blocked a bequest.

This idea — that State Attorneys General can block testamentary charitable bequests— is something new but it shouldn’t surprise us.

As our country becomes ever more Stalinistic and genuine dissent is virtually being criminalized, we can expect to see more and more states adopt policies that will allow the System to intervene and block testamentary bequests to causes the System does not like.

Even if the Courts uphold the bequests in the face of vetoes by State Attorneys General, the legal expenses of fighting out the issue to conclusion in the law system in most cases will exceed the amount of the bequest or at the very least substantially erode it. 

The law in America does not allow you to recover your attorney’s fees against the State.

Here is the LESSON which I have preached many times to people who — as we heard in Church — seem to fit under the remarks “…ears have they but they hear not, eyes have they but they see not”:

ALL ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED IN GENUINE DISSENT IN MODERN AMERICA MUST ENCOURAGE POSSIBLE TESTAMENTARY DONORS TO USE A LIVING TRUST TO EFFECTUATE THE DISPOSITION OF THEIR ESTATES.

 WILLS SHOULD BE USED AS A “BACK-UP” DOCUMENT:

1. TO COVER ASSETS THAT ARE MISTAKENLY NOT PUT INTO THE TRUST;

2. TO NAME A SYMPATHETIC EXECUTOR WHO, IF NECESSARY, CAN PROBATE THE WILL SO AS TO ESTABLISH HIMSELF AS THE PERSON LEGALLY EMPOWERED TO CHALLENGE THE TRUST. This is so the disgruntled heirs (egged on by the SPLC and its ilk) cannot go to the Probate Court and qualify as the representatives of the estate and file their court challenge in that capacity instead of just as what they are — disinherited heirs.

Trusts do not have to be probated.  They are PRIVATE.  The assets are distributed privately and confidentially by the Trustee.  There is no public filing in a probate court where a minority or leftist  employee or a nosy “investigator” from the SPLC can discover that money is being left to a disfavored cause.

To recipients who are much more “normal” than I am (sometimes referred to as being more of the nature of “normies” or “goody-goodies”): If you think your cause is not disfavored, think again.  The System is painting with a wider and wider brush.  

Even things like religiously based opposition to homosexuality now falls under the rubric of laws such as the hate crimes statutes.  If a religiously motivated picketer gets into a pushing match at an LBGTQx event, a mere “simple assault” like pushing away the person shouting in your face becomes a hate crime felony in the hands of a politically motivated prosecutor.

NO ONE INVOLVED IN GENUINE DISSENT ON ANY ISSUE AFFECTING AN R.S.G. (“Regime Support Group” — feminists, Blacks, gays, cripples, Indians, Jews) IS IMMUNE FROM SYSTEM HARASSMENT AND LEGAL ACTIONS.

Vince Lombardi. Italian taskmaster.

/17 Comments/in , , /by

Football coaches provide one of the purest examples of true leadership in America, especially in the period since World War Two. This idea was slow to dawn on me, but eventually I realized that these men command all-male cohorts, train them to practice a violent craft in a quasi-brotherhood, and enjoy virtually dictatorial powers in doing so. Where else can a man claim this type of authority? In this era of hegemonic Cultural Marxism, even the armed forces don’t get to wallow in unfettered masculine violence. Modern officers have to manage and coordinate women, transsexuals, and homosexuals, with all the politically correct minefields that surround them. Football coaches do have to be more “sensitive” these days, but when most of them were active, it was a much different, less constricted world. These men, I found, had quite a few common traits—excellent ones—that apparently led to their success, and also, I would suggest, exhibit their racial essence in action.

I certainly do not consider football itself to be very important. Indeed, it is often a distraction from the important issue of racial survival, its attraction explained by the attraction that men have to “a violent craft in a quasi-brotherhood.” But these men nevertheless provide us with a certain physiognomy of race—a portrait of race in action, if you will. And a telling aspect of traditional American culture.

These men exercised leadership in a manner peculiar to White culture. They shared a handful of crucial attributes that are common to many leaders, but they added to them a Faustian knife’s edge in their quest for glory and fame and championships. One can think of football coaches as like leaders of Indo-European war groups, intent on conquest and—more importantly—enduring fame—the “fame of a dead man’s deeds.”. These attributes include the confidence to insist on total control in their field of operation, an extraordinary and demanding attention to detail, high intelligence, and a restless, individualistic creativity that craves the next breakthrough, the next leap forward. This last quality is the Faustian edge that, in different hands and different realms, has seen Western man best the field in every higher endeavor.   Read more

Fall 2018 issue of TOQ is available!

/1 Comment/in , /by

The Fall issue of TOQ is available to electronic subscribers. Just recently we were booted off Square, likely due to the activism of one Jessica Schulberg, who, one can be sure, has zero concern about advancing her ethnic interests (she describes TOQ as a “racist journal”). Given all the de-platforming and cutting off of financial services by the powers that be, it’s more important than ever to subscribe. We can’t let them win by shutting out our ideas. Only $30/year (4 issues) for digital version, $60/yr for hardcopy. Payments must be made by mail. Click here for all the details for subscribing.

TOQ Fall 2018

TrumpHate rises to new heights. Will it work?

/36 Comments/in , , /by

The Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki has resulted in the greatest outpouring of TrumpHate to date. Truly stunning. The #NeverTrumpers (basically neocons) now joined at the hip with the liberal/left have finally found the issue they think they can win on. Sure, the image of children being taken from their parents was effective with the people who already hated Trump. But this may not be a winning formula—certainly not Trump’s base—when 70% of voters rank immigration as “very important” for their vote. But the idea of “Trump the traitor” may well have legs.

Democrats and NeverTrump neocons are smelling blood in the water. They can pretend that they are patriotic nationalists (despite all the open borders “abolish ICE” comments from top Democrat politicians and neocon horror over Trump’s America First foreign policy (neocons have a very different idea of what country should come first, and predictably, they shed crocodile tears about Trump on separating illegal families (along with the ADL) without saying a word about Israel’s draconian immigration policies or gratuitous murder of Gazan children).

But more than all that, the “Trump the traitor” rhetoric appeals to quite a few mainstream Republicans who would not fall for the liberal line on immigration but who are definitely part of the hate-Russia crusade—some of them just exhibiting a reflex left over from the Cold War, while others are in thrall to the to the Israel Lobby’s hatred of Putin because of his pro-Iran, pro-Syria policies. (Sascha Baron-Cohen’s recent Showtime stunt is an indication of how reflexive support for Israel can make Republicans advocate ridiculous policies like arming 5-year-olds with guns.)

I should also mention Putin’s treatment of certain Jewish oligarchs who have attempted to influence Western policies toward Russia (e.g., Mikhail Khodorkovsky). A truly stunning moment in the Trump-Putin presser (all but ignored in the MSM) was Putin saying that Bill Browder and his associates had illegally earned $1.5 billion in Russia (“the way the money was earned was illegal”) without paying taxes either to Russia or the United States where the money was transferred. And that he and his associates had contributed $400 million [poorly translated; likely $400,000] to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. While the charges back and forth are impossible to for me to evaluate, Browder’s firm, Hermitage Capital Management, has been involved in other accusations of fraud. Browder was the main force promoting the Magnitsky Act, signed by President Obama in 2012, that barred Russian officials said to be involved in the death of Sergei Magnitsky, a Browder associate, from entering the U.S. or using the U.S. banking system.

Here the point is that American neocons have been in the forefront of hostility over Putin’s treatment of Jewish oligarchs, taking the view that Browder et al. are completely innocent victims of Russian evil. Along with Russian foreign policy, Putin’s actions toward the oligarchs is one factor in neocon and hence some factions of the GOP toward Russia. It’s no surprise that they are now eagerly joining the hate-Trump chorus throughout the American establishment.

Put all that together, and it’s a powerful array against Trump. We’ll see what the polls say, but there’s no doubt that many pro-Trump voters will be troubled by accusations of treason and appeasing Russia in a way they wouldn’t about hostility toward Trump’s policies on immigration. As usual, this media furor is couched as a moral imperative. And although the public (especially Whites) are getting less and less susceptible to moralistic rhetoric, I suspect that this is not so much the case with accusations of disgraceful, treasonous behavior by the president.

In any case, I hope Trump survives this hatestorm. His policies on immigration have been a breath of fresh air (I know, they could be even better but they are way better than any administration in memory—since Eisenhower’s Operation Wetback). And immigration is really the only issue.

Diplomacy in absentia: Trump searches for Russia G-spot and sundry other musings

/4 Comments/in , /by

The blame game surrounding Russia’s exclusion from the Group of Seven (G7) was just one of the many side stories piquing Western leaders in their recent display of irrelevance. It’s somewhat fitting that even the G7’s token communiqué was left in tatters—with all of its hackneyed neoliberal pledges for gender change and climate equality. Instead it was the insider anecdotes that dominated the news cycle. This summer, a remarkable array of summits is taking place, from NATO and BRICS to Finland and North Korea, but if the Quebec G7 entrée was anything to go by, we are in for a smorgasbord of sour grapes and humble pie.

Now that the 2014 reincorporation of Crimea into Russia is no longer seen by the international community as the great Anschluss of our times and given that the election meddling hysteria is not sustainable for much longer, something has to give. With Trump and Italian PM Conte expressing support for Russia’s return to the group, other members seem to have countered with a secondary strategy: they now disagree about the disagreement. Hardliners now argue that Russia is choosing to self-exclude from the Group of Seven, even neocon-supervised encyclopedia Wikipedia cites an article on Russia’s intent to leave, but contains nothing other than sardonic hypotheticals from Russian officials. Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov have stated on a number of occasions that Russia never left and is in fact still waiting to resume hosting of the boycotted Sochi summit. Read more

Thinking about Civil War II

/101 Comments/in , /by


Lately a lot of people—31% in a recent poll—have been thinking the previously unthinkable — a civil war. Specifically, they agreed that “it’s likely that the United States will experience a second civil war sometime in the next five years.” Moreover:

Women and those under 40 are more worried about a possible civil war than men and older voters are. Forty-four percent (44%) of blacks think a second civil war is likely in the next five years, a view shared by 28% of whites and 36% of other minority voters. Whites are also less concerned about political violence than the others are.

There’s no question that the level of polarization we see now is greater than perhaps any time since Civil War I. There is simply no common ground any more. Absent a complete capitulation to their policies (which is not going to happen), there is literally nothing that Trump can do that would be approved by the liberals and the left. The weeping that we saw after the election has turned into cold anger at Trump, his family (Peter Fonda wanting to “rip Barron Trump from his mother’ and put him in a ‘cage with pedophiles'”), and everyone in his administration (e.g., Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Scott Pruitt harassed). Read more

The TOQ Summer issue is up. Subscribers Needed!

/in , /by

The Summer issue of TOQ is available for subscribers, with the print version to be mailed out soon.

It’s a great issue with articles on a wide range of topics vital to understanding Western culture, Western history, and the struggles we face. I strongly encourage people to subscribe. As is well known, the establishment is attacking us on all fronts, and PayPal in particular has been a problem. TOQ has lost many subscribers because their automatic renewals were not processed after PayPal cut us off. The result is that we are struggling—especially frustrating because we had almost achieved the break-even point.

It’s very important for our side to be able to put out a high-quality journal. One of the strengths of Jewish activism has always been that Jews would support magazines and journals that were overtly (e.g., Commentary) or implicitly (e.g., Partisan Review back in the 1940s and 1950s). We should be able to do the analogous thing and support media that takes our side.

Subscription information is at www.toqonline.com. For US subscribers, it’s simple: $30.00/year for a digital subscription and $60.00/year for the print journal (includes digital access). We have been able to get a credit card processor. For anyone who wants to send a check or money order, please send an email to support@toqonline.com, and you will be provided with further instructions.

Summer issue

Guillaume Durocher on Greek struggle for freedom from the Persians

Dr. Tom Sunic on Heidegger and the current “Fake News” phenomenon

Karl Nemmersdorf on Ted Gold and the Jews of Weatherman, the 1960s group of radicals.

Prof. Ricardo Duchesne provides a scathing review of  Steven Pinker’s war on White identitarianism, Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress

Brenton Sanderson provides a review essay on Revolutionary Yiddishland: A History of Jewish Radicalism by Alain Brossat and Sylvia Klingberg

Nelson Rosit  reviews The Rhythm of the West: A Biohistory of the Modern Era, AD 1600 to the Present by Michael A. Woodley et al.

Guillaume Durocher reviews On the Origins of Greek Biopolitics: A Reinterpretation of the History of Biopower by Mika Ojakangas