General

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

Ron Unz on the JFK Assassination: Strong Suspicion LBJ and Mossad Responsible, as recounted in Michael Collins Piper’s “Final Judgment”

/5 Comments/in /by

Do Liberals Really Care about Children Being Separated from Their Parents?

/in /by

The American news media have apparently just realized that when foreigners illegally enter the United States in the company of their minor children and get arrested, those children are temporarily separated from them. It would be surprising if it were otherwise: keeping the children with their parents would require throwing them in jail as well. It would hardly be fair to punish minors for the acts of their parents, so they are accommodated separately. We are now being told this amounts to “ripping families apart” and “child abuse.”

I would like to draw attention to a passage quoted in a review essay of mine from The Occidental Quarterly, Summer 2007, regarding children forcibly separated from their fathers through divorce. Such children, we read,

expressed the wish for increased contact with their fathers with a startling and moving intensity….The most striking response among six-to-eight-year-old children was their pervasive sadness. The impact of separation appeared so strong that the children’s usual defenses and coping strategies did not hold sufficiently under stress. Crying and sobbing were not uncommon…. More than half of these children missed their father acutely. Many felt abandoned and rejected by him and expressed their longing in ways reminiscent of grief for a dead parent…In confronting the despair and sadness of these children and their intense, almost physical, longing for the father, it was evident that inner psychological needs of great power and intensity were being expressed.

This has been allowed to go on every day in America—year in, year out—and no major media outlet has yet seen fit to treat it as newsworthy. Today, however, the nation is awash in maudlin sentimentality over the unavoidable inconveniences suffered by the children of foreign lawbreakers because of their parents’ crimes.

If American children victimized by family courts have less claim upon our attention and sympathy, it would appear to be because their suffering cannot be used to further the project of deconstructing the historical United States. What the liberal establishment really wants is open borders.

Ann Coulter: “Meanwhile, 10 miles from the White House…”

/15 Comments/in , /by

I thought I would start writing blog posts with excerpts from articles I find interesting, sometimes with brief comments.

Now that Trump has solved Northeast Asia’s problems, maybe he can get to a problem in our country — in fact, within 10 miles of the White House. For some reason, The Washington Post recently ran an article on something important — the MS-13 gang presence at a public school on the outskirts of our nation’s capital, William Wirt Middle School in Prince George’s County, Maryland. The media’s usual approach to the diversity being inflicted on us is: Don’t report this! It’s better if no one knows. Maybe the left has decided it’s too late to do anything about the transformation of our country into a Third World hellhole, and Trump couldn’t stop it even if he wanted to. The Post reported that, like many schools up and down the East Coast, MS-13 has turned Wirt into a battleground. There have been near-daily gang fights, rampant drug dealing, one reported rape, gang signs on the walls, one shooting — more in nearby schools — and teachers afraid to be alone with their students. At least two students are required to have security officers assigned to them, walking them from class to class and watching them during lunch hour, on account of MS-13 threatening to kill them. How many different categories of immigrants require special law enforcement officers devoted to them? Thanks to mass Muslim immigration, the FBI has terrorist watch lists in ALL 50 STATES. That’s why whenever there’s a terrorist attack, the FBI says, Oh yeah, we were watching that guy. And now we have police bodyguards for kids at schools wherever “unaccompanied minors” have been dumped by our government. …

The reason for this transformation of our country, our culture and our politics is to flood the market with low-wage workers and Democratic voters.

That’s right, but we shouldn’t leave out the ethnic lobbies who (often in opposition to the wishes of their own constituents) keep up the pressure for unending immigration. Obviously, my writing has emphasized the role of Jews and the organized Jewish community. I just came across some material on the sentiments of John Podhoretz, from his Wikipedia page. Obviously, his Jewish identity is critical to his attitude on immigration to the U.S. (not Israel).

In disagreement with several writers at National Review and conservatives in general, Podhoretz has aggressively favored a more open immigration policy for the United States. He wrote: “I said merely what I feel deeply—which is that, as a Jew, I have great difficulty supporting a blanket policy of immigration restriction because of what happened to the Jewish people after 1924 and the unwillingness of the United States to take Jews in.”[9] Podhoretz has been generally supportive of President Bush’s proposals for a guest worker program and a path to citizenship for certain illegal immigrants in the U.S.
This hostility among Jews for what happened nearly 100 years ago is quite common. The argument then goes that the holocaust would have been prevented or ameliorated except for the 1924 law. And of course, there are other motives as well, especially a perception that Jews are safer in in more diverse societies because of a lessened possibility for homogeneous White movement to rise up against them (here, p. 246ff).

Derbyshire vs. MacDonald Revisited

/32 Comments/in , /by

I don’t believe I’m exaggerating when I say that Kevin MacDonald’s Culture of Critique is one of the most important books of our age. Despite this fact, it has garnered remarkably little attention in traditional spheres, particularly academic circles. Of course, the reasons for this are obvious — the book is critical of Jewish behavior, it helps Gentiles understand how Jews are working against Gentile interests, and it shows that Jews control much of the content of academic and media discussion.

At the same time, MacDonald and his works have garnered immense attention from those who are often harmed by Jewish behavior or are excluded from areas of cultural construction, including many in the loosely-defined “Alt-Right.” Further, Prof. MacDonald has been indefatigable in his efforts to spread his views, appearing on countless podcasts and other Internet shows, speaking at conferences, etc. In my estimation, MacDonald is the hands-down intellectual leader of resistance to Jewish attacks on the White race, and in our circles he is honored as such.

Recently, a young man in the academic arena chose to address MacDonald’s work, which has given MacDonald a chance to once again defend his various theses on Jews. The academic is Nathan Cofnas, a graduate student working toward his doctorate in the philosophy of biology at the University of Oxford. (He is not a professor yet, though as a potential graduate of Oxford with a Ph.D.  —  and as a Jew who has published an attack on MacDonald —  his chances of gaining a good tenured teaching position are almost guaranteed.)

Fortunately for us, Spencer Quinn, a prolific writer for Counter-Currents, has ably summarized the debate between MacDonald and Cofnas. See Parts 1,  2, 3 and 4.

This leaves me free to bring back a similar older debate among MacDonald, John Derbyshire, and Joey Kurtzman. Though these debates deserve a revisit based on their own merits, the fact that Cofnas has now revived similar discussions makes previous discussions all the more relevant.

I first wrote about Derbyshire’s opinions of KMAC’s work way back in 2008, then again in 2012. For the purposes of this current piece, I will crib liberally from those original two essays, though the links within have often not survived well.

Derbyshire’s first major piece on MacDonald appeared in the March 10, 2003 issue of The American Conservative under the title “The Marx of the Anti-Semites.” (Editors chose the title, not Derbyshire.)There Derb’s take on the book was mixed, beginning with “The Culture of Critique includes many good things. . . . Kevin MacDonald is working in an important field.” He even validates an important point of MacDonald’s work: “These Jewish-inspired pseudoscientific phenomena that The Culture of Critique is concerned with — Boasian anthropology, psychoanalysis, the Frankfurt School, and so on — were they a net negative for America? Yes, I agree with MacDonald, they were.”

Derbyshire, however, then concludes that “This is, after all, in the dictionary definition of the term, an anti-Semitic book.” What? That’s odd. I suspect I’m not the only reader sensing an unexplained contradiction here. (See MacDonald’s reply.) Read more