• MISSION STATEMENT
  • TERMS
  • PRIVACY
The Occidental Observer
  • HOME
  • BLOG
  • SUBSCRIBE TOQ
  • CONTACT USPlease send all letters to the editor, manuscripts, promotional materials, and subscription questions to Editors@TheOccidentalObserver.net.
  • DONATE
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

White Racial Consciousness and Advocacy

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

January 28, 2025/5 Comments/in Featured Articles, White Racial Consciousness and Advocacy/by Sigurd Kristensen

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)

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Sigurd Kristensen https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Sigurd Kristensen2025-01-28 07:11:572025-01-28 16:41:09Destination 1982: Wilmot Robertson’s “Ventilations” Then and Now — Part 2 of 2

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

January 27, 2025/2 Comments/in Featured Articles, White Pathology/Guilt, White Racial Consciousness and Advocacy, White Racial Consciousness and Advocacy/by Sigurd Kristensen

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)

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Sigurd Kristensen https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Sigurd Kristensen2025-01-27 07:54:342025-01-28 07:13:04Destination 1982: Wilmot Robertson’s “Ventilations” Then and Now — Part 1 of 2

Preserving the White Majority in the United States: My 10-Point Plan

January 14, 2025/14 Comments/in Featured Articles, White Racial Consciousness and Advocacy, White Racial Consciousness and Advocacy/by Spencer J. Quinn
From Counter-Currents, with permission.

Preserving the White Majority in the United States: My 10-Point Plan

Since Donald Trump was re-elected in November, many things that were rarely said in the mainstream are now being floated in public and taken seriously. Great examples include mass deportations, the US buying Greenland, Facebook ending its fact-checking algorithms, the phasing out of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs, flipping New Jersey red, and restricting immigration from India. Three months ago, who in the mainstream was discussing, let along debating, such topics? Whatever faults Trump has—and he has many—being wholly part of the Washington uniparty elite is not one of them. And that is a good thing. This reminds me of the Khrushchev Thaw period following the death of Josef Stalin in 1953. For a time, ordinary people and Soviet elite alike were let out on a longer leash, and could engage in discourse that had previously been frowned upon or forbidden. Yes, it was more of a Thermidorian reaction than anything real, but it still opened the door for at least some changes and improvements to the Soviet Union.

Of course, it didn’t last. Mostly likely Trump’s thaw won’t either (they never do, do they?). This is why white advocates should take advantage of this period of greater openness while we can. In other words, it’s time to push the envelope, even if that means getting the enveloped shoved back into our faces by a president who might identify more as orange than white.

My suggestion, beyond what David Zsutty has given us in his excellent three-part series “What White Nationalists Want From the Trump Administration,” is to propose a bill in Congress which would, on paper at least, protect the US white majority in perpetuity through selective immigration bans, mass deportations, and pro-natalist policies. Outlandish, I know. A white US minority is the very thing the Left craves and the mainstream Right is too afraid to talk about—a political third rail indeed. However, there are upsides to attempting to sell such legislation to US congressmen during the second Trump term—aside from it actually succeeding, of course.

For one, whites these days are waking up to anti-whiteism, and so a proposed bill to protect the dwindling white majority at least won’t be unpopular among whites in red areas of the country. Such a proposition in 2025 would certainly not come out of left field, and would make sense to many. Trump has recently spoken against anti-white racism, and so have conservative mainstream pundits such as Charlie Kirk, Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Laura Loomer, Michelle Malkin, Matt Walsh, and Mark Dice. The Hodge Twins as well as former MMA world champion Jake Shields recently featured longtime white advocate David Duke on their podcasts. Jared Taylor had his Twitter/X account restored and has garnered tens of thousands of followers. Patrick Bet David recently hosted Patriot Front leader Thomas Rousseau. And here’s a report from February 2024 about a Michigan lawmaker Steve Carra who led a sit in outside the Michigan House Speaker’s office to protest his state’s anti-white spending policies.

So if there ever was a good time to go public with a pro-white initiative like this one, it’s now.

Secondly, even in defeat, such a proposal will provide a surfeit of rhetorical victories for the Dissident Right and pro-white camps. Any congressman who ignores or opposes such a bill can be fairly branded as anti-white. Not only this, they can be accused of not just wanting a white minority, but actually contriving to attain one. If you are not in favor of a white majority then you are in favor of a white minority. There is no middle ground. Yes, most Democrats would reject such a bill out of hand, gladly admitting that they look forward to the day that whites dip below 50 percent in America. Joe Biden did just that back in February 2015. With today’s whites being less likely to tolerate anti-whiteism than ever before, record of such a refusal would certainly help damage a Democrat ticket during a general election.

But the main use of such a bill would be to hector, bog down, or at best replace weak-minded Republican lawmakers who would also reject the bill. How much would it cost, really, to primary a Republican congressman who refuses to consider a pro-white bill because the mainstream narrative tells him it’s racist? How hard would it be for even mainstream Republicans with a little pluck to ding an incumbent over his purported hostility towards whites? Remember, we are in the Trump Thaw at the moment. So what seemed beyond the pale of public discourse three months ago, may no longer be. With enough energetic, well-funded, aspiring politicians beating the white majority drum, establishment Republicans would have to at least give lip service before rejecting the bill. And the more people talking about it, the better—even if much of that talk is negative. And for all we know it could even work well enough to reach a vote on the House floor.

You can buy Greg Johnson’s White Identity Politics here.

Finally, there is the metapolitical change that such a bill promises to make. They say the process is the punishment, but in this case the process would also the reward. The goal here should not necessarily be to get the bill passed (although that would be great). The goal should be to introduce the bill into the long and arduous lawmaking process in order to make it its own news item. The goal should be to get people talking about it in the way the Soviet public began discussing the gulags after the publication of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich during the Khrushchev Thaw. The goal should be to get ordinary, everyday whites to begin to want or even expect a white majority in this country. They should consider it their birthright, given how the Founding Fathers were all white and the vast majority of people who have fought and died in America’s wars have also been white. And why not? Is there anything in the US Constitution preventing this country’s founding race from legislating its perpetual majority? Can that even be called racist? In the Trump 2.0 era, what really is preventing a critical mass of whites from adopting such a perspective? Nothing, I’d say. As I’ve pointed out above, all the signs are actually quite encouraging.

If you are reading this because you have white identity—even a secret one—and you’re not a researcher from the Anti-Defamation League or Southern Poverty Law Center looking to squeeze the vitality out of the entire white race, then ask yourself, why not? Why can’t whites discuss these things? Why can’t we expect such things? Are our jobs and incomes and social standings worth so much to us that we cannot at least throw a few shekels at politicians and pundits willing to buck the anti-white system and stand up for ourselves? Do we really want to live in a world in which we are outnumbered by hostile non-whites in our own hometowns? Is this the kind of world we’d wish upon our children and grandchildren?

If not, then . . . what are we doing?

Assuming that we all understand that we need to do something, is there a better idea than crafting some sort of incipient law and presenting it to prospective lawmakers who are willing to promote it while running for office? Now, I am not an attorney, and have little influence irrespective of that. But maybe somebody reading this does have influence and can make a difference? If so, then I offer a rough 10-point plan as a starting point. And before I get outraged comments about how my plan is some cucked Magna Carta, please remember that this is not a White Nationalist wish list, but a proposal for a real-world document to effect real-world changes in the here and now that even non-whites in America today could abide. It will basically be a promise from whites to non-whites to share the United States with them in good faith as long as the current racial proportions remain the same. It will be an effort to halt the white demographic decline, not to turn back the clock or start a race war. Thus, there will be compromises in it which many white advocates (myself included) will find odious. Please don’t let these get in the way of seeing the overall value of the plan.

Such a plan can go two ways: it can work or it can fail. In the former case, great. We won’t be back to 1960, but it won’t be 2020 either. Let’s split the difference and call it 1990, not exactly a terrible year in the life of white people. In the latter case however—which is much more likely—the heightened racial awareness of whites will necessarily increase friction with American non-whites, and will lead to one of two things: red state secession, which is the first step towards a white ethnostate, or (God help us) Civil War 2.0. Again, in the former case, great. And in the latter, we would at least have a fighting chance. This means that of the three possible outcomes of a bill like this, two and a half are positive. Not bad, right?

Anyway, here are my 10 points, and if someone thinks they can do better and still be realistic, I’m all ears:

BILL TO ENSURE THE PERPETUAL WHITE MAJORITY IN THE UNITED STATES

  1. Require bi-yearly censuses.
  2. Define white by “one-half not black” rule (at least one white parent, and no fully-black parent). For the sake of this bill, “whites” would include people of white European descent, Jews originating in Europe, and Caucasians from Central Asia.
  3. Employ self-identification to determine race, and agreed-upon genetic markers to determine race in case of appeals.
  4. Establish African Americans and Indigenous Americans as “demographically exempt” populations. (This means that their populations can fluctuate naturally and are not counted when calculating the proportion of whites to the general population. This would be a good thing for both populations and should be promoted as such.)
  5. Require that the white majority remain no lower than 80% of the US population minus the exempt populations. (Using rough estimates taken from Wikipedia, the United States currently has 48 million blacks and 7 million Indigenous Americans, making 55 million demographically exempt citizens. Subtract this from the 340 million total population to get a denominator of 285 million. Divide the 205 million whites in America by that to get around 72 percent. If such a bill were to be signed into law, the main focus of government would be to push that number up to 80 percent as soon as possible.)
  6. Require that, among non-exempt non-whites, no more than 10 percent of the US population be of Mexican, Central American, or South American descent. All immigration from these places will stop if this proportion grows above this percentage.
  7. Require that, among non-exempt non-whites, no more than 10 percent of the US population be of Asian or Middle Eastern descent. All immigration from these places will stop if this proportion grows above this percentage.
  8. Require that pro-white immigration and pro-white natalist policies be put in place until whites reach 80 percent of the total non-exempt US population.
  9. Require that all illegal immigrants as well as legal immigrants with a history of violent or serious crimes be deported.
  10. Ban all immigration from places of origin of racially exempt populations (i.e., Indigenous peoples from the Americas or blacks from Sub-Saharan Africa).

Given how the Trump Thaw has already allowed whites more leeway to discuss their own racial interests (and Trump hasn’t even taken office yet), I think my 10-point plan might push the envelope far enough but too far in order to get white people to act their own racial interests as well.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Spencer J. Quinn https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Spencer J. Quinn2025-01-14 00:01:592025-01-13 12:54:29Preserving the White Majority in the United States: My 10-Point Plan

Some basic principles for the national struggle

May 4, 2024/13 Comments/in Featured Articles, White Racial Consciousness and Advocacy/by Povl H. Riis-Knudsen

With permission from: Danmarks Frihedsraad, a Danish Nationalist site.

Looking across the political landscape today, there is little reason not to be dismayed. Quite simply, Denmark has no national opposition to the prevailing political system. And by opposition, we don’t just mean a political opposition, but also a cultural and ideological opposition.

Many will now mention the Danish People’s Party as well as the Danish Association, the Danish Culture Association and possibly other small groups that may have some good will, but are all very far from meeting the criteria for being a national opposition.

In order to deal with any political or cultural issues that go beyond today’s arguments about tax rates, it is necessary to be clear about the nature of the task facing such an opposition. Every political leader must be able to expect absolute clarity on the following points. If they lack this clarity, they indulge in illusions, wishful thinking and easy shortcuts that only lead to nothingness. If he has clarity but still indulges in illusions that there is an easier way, he is dishonest and will achieve nothing. Only those who let every action be guided by these principles can accomplish anything positive – no matter in what way they choose to advance the Danish cause.

The following points are not a political program. Such a program is in itself meaningless. They are guidelines. They are hardly suitable as a basis for party politics, but should anyone harbor the vain hope that something can be achieved through party politics, it must be borne in mind that these points must necessarily be your invariable guideline – in the sense that you cannot take positions in your political work that contradict these points. You don’t have to post them on the church door!

1. The highest task of any Danish cultural or political movement is the preservation of the fatherland, its independence, its language and culture, its customs and traditions, its territorial integrity and the uniqueness and continued biological existence of its population. This is a task that cannot be discussed and there can be no compromises of any kind. Anyone who does not follow this clear principle is a traitor and deserves punishment as such. At no point can one cooperate with anyone who does not recognize this task. Any participation in or support of efforts that alienate the Danish people from their culture and history and biological origins actively participates in undermining the nation.

2. In this context, it is necessary to realize that the survival of the people is a biological question. You cannot change the people through the integration of foreigners and pretend that you are preserving Denmark. Anyone who treats immigration solely as a question of economics, religion or culture is missing the point. Those who do so act either out of stupidity, inexcusable ignorance or because they act against their better judgment in an attempt to avoid being labeled racist, Nazi or otherwise disliked. These are often alibi points, such as wanting more adoption of foreign children or wanting Muslim immigration to be replaced by Christian negroes.

Denmark must remain the land of the Danes, and being Danish is not something you can become by passing a law in the Danish Parliament. Any integration of foreigners will inevitably lead to biological integration, which in the long term will destroy the basis for talking about a Danish people. Anyone who does not want to recognize racial and biological differences within and outside the people must be relegated to playing in the political sandbox at Christiansborg. Such forces are of no real relevance to a national opposition.

3. It is necessary to realize that the democratic form of government, so highly valued today, has become the most powerful weapon against the survival of our people. It is no longer a form of government, but an ideology, based on nebulous and unscientific ideas of universal human rights, which denies all the principles that it would be necessary to defend to ensure the preservation of the people. As an ideology, democratism is as totalitarian as communism or Nazism — there is complete freedom to discuss where the deck chairs on the deck of the Titanic should be placed, but there is no freedom to change course. Believing that this system can save us is naïve. To believe that it can be changed through elections is hopelessly naive. If elections changed anything, they would not be allowed. The current monolith of politicians, civil servants, bishops, priests, teachers and press have nothing to fear. Against it, Goebbels was a true dilettante! Together with the EU, it controls what people are allowed to think — and any party that does not think this way will be crushed if it contains even the slightest germ of success. Even an election victory of over 50% of the vote (which for any party is utopian) would not make the current elite hand over the keys to power.

4. It is necessary to realize that all the ideologies that today dominate the natural sciences as well as culture, education, politics, law and social sciences were conceived and propagated by ethnically self-conscious Jews who, together with their minions, effectively control society through a central role in the economy, entertainment industry and media, with the stated purpose of weakening the power, self-esteem and population health of White peoples in return for strengthening their own position. Anyone who, in his efforts to be a respectable nationalist, emphasizes his support for Israel against the Palestinians is choosing the greater evil over the lesser. When Denmark today is flooded not only by Palestinians, but by all sorts of foreign peoples, the responsibility can largely be placed with Jews. Islam is undoubtedly an evil, but its threat to Denmark and Europe will disappear with the disappearance of the foreign masses. Effective work to realize this vision is consistently opposed by Jews and Jewish organizations.

5. It is necessary to leave every form of Christianity behind, for it has prepared the ground for the destruction of the European peoples by robbing them of their own original religion and filling them with guilt, original sin and spiritual Judaism to such an extent that Christians have a Jew as their god and “savior.” Christianity has always opposed science and progress and today is further subverted by subversive forces to support everything that destroys the existence of our people. The Danish National Church could have been a bulwark against the Islamization of Denmark, but practice shows the exact opposite. The People’s Church is leading the effort to dismantle the nation. Having said this, however, it must be added that Christianity has left such an indelible mark on our history and culture that it has gained a degree of civil rights that cannot be overlooked. In a cultural battle between Islam and Christianity, there is no doubt where the national opposition stands. However, if Christianity is to have any chance of being part of the future, the Church must necessarily arrive at a form of Christianity and a church structure that actively supports the preservation of the nation. Otherwise, it will remain part of the problem.

6. It is necessary to realize that all the evils that nationalist Danes today complain about and seek to combat are the result of Hitler losing the Second World War. Had Hitler won the Second World War — or even better: Had World War II not happened — these evils would not exist today. Copenhagen would not have had 20% foreign inhabitants, billions of kroner and euros would not have been spent on foreign aid and refugees, Danes would still have had children (there would have been no pensioner hump), Africa would still have been under European control, and the people of this amazing continent would not have had to fear constant civil wars, violence and famine. Had the Germans won the war, there would certainly have been many things to complain about, but the biological existence of our people would not have been threatened and everything else can be restored.

7. It is necessary to realize that the Holocaust of the Jews is the means used today to suppress any national revival in Europe. By participating in the now completely overblown death cult of this new religion of the 21st century, the power of the Jews and the powerlessness of the White race is cemented. The right is held accountable for Hitler’s actions, while the left never has to discuss the 200,000,000 people murdered in the name of communism and equality, the memory of which rarely finds its way into the media.

8. It is necessary to realize that America and America’s intervention in Europe’s internal affairs has been to Europe’s misfortune – and that America’s continued power will lead to the destruction of the White race. America has not saved us twice in the last century, as a foolish, history-less politician who likes to act as a representative of national Denmark has claimed – it has twice prevented an internal settlement of European affairs. Without America’s intervention in the First World War, the warring parties would have had to recognize that neither was capable of defeating the other and would have had to make a peace that would have preserved the status quo in Western Europe. Germany would not have been humiliated, there would have been no war reparations, no economic collapse, no Hitler (!), no World War II, no “holocaust”, 50 million Europeans would not have been killed, there would have been no bombed cities, no destruction of European cultural values, no communism in half of Europe, no Berlin Wall, no Middle East conflict, no immigration of the 3rd world masses into Europe, no Third World masses in Europe, no developing countries in Europe. world masses in Europe, no development aid, no terrorism, no September 11 …… in short, none of everything that makes our existence poorer and threatens our future.

9. The European Union is an effective tool for the deliberate destruction of the Europe of peoples. Every effort emanating from the EU is aimed, directly or indirectly, at removing national borders, wiping out cultural, linguistic and biological differences between the many peoples of Europe, opening up Europe to immigration from the Third World and giving big business unimpeded access to plunder the peoples of Europe while sending jobs abroad. The EU has absolutely no popular legitimacy and must be fought in every conceivable way. It is today’s occupying power and the greatest evil facing national forces.

***

Many will arbitrarily exclaim to these points that this is “pure Nazism”. Well, if Nazism embraced the principles underlying the above points, then maybe it wasn’t so bad after all. Maybe it was worth thinking about? “Nazism” is one of the key words used to scare people away from the values that would ensure a proper foundation for their lives and future. “That’s what Hitler said,” roar Krasnik, Notkin and all their ilk whenever a national movement appears, and immediately it scatters again in all directions in terror. The word “Nazism” automatically conjures up mountains of corpses, rolling tanks, marching columns, smoking chimneys, bombed cities and the like, all of which can easily be attributed to Nazism. However, all of this belongs to history, which does not prevent Nazism from being based on eternal, natural principles that are obviously true and which no society can afford to ignore.

“Nazism” – or National Socialism, as it should rightly be called – only makes sense today as a historical phenomenon, strongly tied to the country and time in which it emerged. National Socialism is inextricably linked to Hitler, German tradition and German social conditions, which today are quite foreign to us. Anyone who wants to revive the fallen ideology should do themselves the favor of reading Hitler’s Mein Kampf, which strongly warns against giving artificial respiration to the past. Instead, it emphasizes the need to create a new movement born of the needs of the time and place, which can grow organically in the given society. All in all, today’s admirers of Adolf Hitler should be the first to read his book, which, even in the clumsy translation available in Danish, has much to offer. The inevitable consequence of a sensible reading must necessarily lead to the immediate dismantling of today’s undergrowth of ridiculous and in many cases abominable small groups who claim to be Adolf Hitler’s heirs without ever having familiarized themselves with what this might entail. These have done nothing to save the existence of the people – quite the opposite.

Today, we don’t want to go back to the 30s – we want to be part of the future. The past will never and must never return – the external conditions are far too different for that. Today’s problems are far more serious than anything Hitler faced. His task was mainly economic – today it is existential, and the popular foundation on which Hitler built his movement no longer exists. Patriotism and nationalism are no longer self-evident, but something to be argued for. However, none of this means throwing the baby out with the bathwater. A truth is a truth, no matter who says it. There were serious inherent flaws in the Third Reich that must never be repeated, but the values that must underpin the renewal of society if it is to survive in a form that ordinary people want to be part of are ancient. They can be found in the ancient cultures of India, Ancient Greece, Cicero’s Rome and classical conservatism, and today they can be scientifically substantiated in a way that only 50 years ago could only be dreamed of. The virtues and qualities that have been the foundation of European civilization for millennia (and there are no other civilizations in our sense!) are completely independent of who started from them and what the outcome has been. It is the task of future leaders to avoid the mistakes of the past and build a better and more lasting edifice on the foundations. This requires a good, thorough and unbiased study of history.

Today, the task seems hopeless. The terror against dissidents has developed in such a way that they can no longer lead a normal life with work, family and social interaction. This is why so few have the strength to defend Denmark – and why so many seek pseudo-alternatives that seem easier than the consistent resistance struggle. This cannot be changed immediately, and those who seek a political way out within the framework of the ruling system naturally deserve at least tacit support, while remembering the above 9 points. But the fact that a political enterprise requires compromise is already in the cards. Most Danes want the Denmark they know back – and it’s not Helle Thorning Schmidt’s Denmark – but they just want it to happen by itself, so that one morning they wake up and everything is back to normal. They don’t think too much about causes and culprits – and above all, they just want everything to be solved the nice way. We would all much prefer that, but it is not a likely outcome to the problems. As already mentioned, the current decision-makers and their lackeys will not voluntarily relinquish their position of power and magically transform themselves into useful and nationally-minded citizens working for the good of the people. This fairytale ending is naive. There will be a struggle for power, and a far-reaching showdown with the current “elite” will be necessary – and it will not be pretty or harmonious. But the alternative to the Danish people rising up and demanding Denmark back is far worse. If the Danes just stand by, we will slide towards a full-scale war in the streets between Danes and foreigners – and it will be very bloody, as many of our intruders are born with a Kalashnikov in their hands and have excellent military training, while Danes are generally alien to combat and the use of weapons. In addition, respect for human life is far lower among our guests than among us. They have grown up in or been influenced by societies where a human life is not worth much. They will therefore be in a very strong position in such a war. The only alternative is to dismantle Denmark without a fight, adopt Islam, destroy the pigs, close the liquor factories and breweries, burn the paintings in our museums, melt the statues, tear down the churches, raze our ancient monuments to the ground, burn our books and sheet music, let our girls be forced to marry immigrant types from the third world, so that we can finally be biologically exterminated. Sharia will be introduced, women will be stoned and men beheaded for religious offenses, and any concept of law will disappear. The natural sciences will die out, creativity will disappear. Intellectual activity will be centered on interpretations of the Koran, such as issuing new fatwas, for example, banning snowmen, and this will only be done in Arabic. If anyone wants to know what society will be like, we would recommend a trip to the Islamic State – a one-way ticket should suffice. Of course, there are still gentler versions of Islamic states to which a return ticket may be worthwhile – but their days are numbered too, see the developments in Turkey. It is not recommended to postpone your trip for too long.

All ideas of human rights, multiculturalism, humanism, tolerance etc. are – ironically – products of Western culture and are unfamiliar concepts as soon as we get to other peoples. The ideas are partly fine when practiced within a homogeneous society where people have the same set of values, but when extended to other peoples with a completely different agenda, they are suicide!

What can we do to prevent this sad fate for our homeland? There are, of course, the political parties – but as mentioned, such work has no chance of achieving the goal if it stands alone, but it can be a good platform for spreading the national message and recruiting qualified people. We are very much in the same situation as in 1940. Back then, a party whose goal was to kick the Germans out of the country would have had no place on earth. So they eventually resisted in a more tangible way – but not very successfully. At the time, however, they had powerful foreign supporters and a different kind of manpower – and success was eventually brought in from outside. Under no circumstances would armed action against today’s occupying troops have any significance in the sense that it would cause the foreigners to flee from the wide-open Danish treasury. In many cases, they come from countries where they are exposed to an immediate risk of death and mutilation on a daily basis – mass shootings in mosques or targeted assassinations would not make much of an impression, nor would they significantly affect the percentage of foreigners. They would only serve for self-gratification – and probably for the hidden joy of more people than you might think, but this joy would have no overall impact either. Today, it is also difficult to imagine that an armed uprising against the police and military with the aim of overthrowing the system would lead to any result. Such an attempt would be doomed from the start. One could rather imagine that liquidation actions against the worst traitors would make an impression, but they would largely serve to make those in power drop the mask and implement the absolute police state. Nor would such actions save Denmark in the current situation.

There is absolutely no way around the Danish people. Change is only possible if a significant proportion of the people want it. If the people don’t wake up and want the change and everything that goes with it, it will die and disappear from the world map within the next 50 years. It will be infinitely sad, but in that case it is inevitable. It is therefore important, first and foremost, to influence the part of the population that is still deeply loyal to the homeland. You don’t do this by shielding yourself in parties that separate you from the Danish people, but by participating in the life of the people and cultivating their culture. One of the things you can blame the Danish Association, the Danish People’s Party and other well-meaning organizations for is that there has only been a very modest cultural involvement, and the “Association for the Promotion of Danish Culture, Democracy, Language, History, Architecture and the Danish Song” has never been very successful in its endeavors, perhaps because it was strongly influenced by the church from the beginning, perhaps because it has been too intellectual and too little popular. Culture is not something that is just written in books, it is something that must be lived in daily life. Today, we need singing and folk dancing – the latter not as a sport with Danish championships, but as a natural part of our traditional culture. We need to maintain our language in the face of the increasing use of English in our daily lives, and we need to read our literature. We need a cultural manifestation. There is a need to raise awareness of the people at all levels.

The first place to start is with ourselves. You can only save the people if you love them. To love them, you must know them. To know them, you must understand their history, their culture, literature, music, dance and other expressions of their life. Any desire for change that is not based on a heartfelt desire to save the Danish people from certain doom is doomed from the start. This is about the collective – not about the enlarged ego of the individual.

Actually, the right wing is in the same situation as the dog that barks at passing cars every day. What would it actually do if one day it caught a car? What would the right wing in the broadest sense do if Helle Thorning Schmidt one day walked past Morten Uhrskov Jensen or Daniel Carlsen with the keys to the Prime Minister’s Office and said: “I give up. Now it’s your turn. Have fun!” The fact is that the right wing today has too little to offer – not just in terms of manpower, but also in terms of ideas and education. There are simply far, far too few qualified people to even dream of replacing the traitors who sit everywhere in the glands of society. It’s not enough to have political ambition – it takes much more. This is where the right needs to step in. Educating a real elite that can take the place of the traitors and that is aware of the principles listed here. However, this elite cannot allow itself to be exposed and subjected to the usual press hype.

The communist ’68ers did not win their influence by standing for election, but by marching through the institutions. National Danes must not end up on welfare, but must follow the same path. If you have the skills, you should study, settle down in a good job and quietly influence the world as much as you can. If you are a lawyer, you should apply to the courts and take them on. If you are an educator, you must constantly promote reason in your teaching and fight any politicization of something that should not be political. If you are a craftsman, you must acquire a position in society from which you have as much influence as possible on your local area. In any case, you should educate yourself to be able to take over key functions in society if the opportunity arises. Applying for positions in the police, military and national defense is a given. These institutions will be key to any change – however it comes about. Participate in your children’s school life and try with all your might to counteract the stultification of the state. Avoid childcare centers – nothing good comes from them. You should participate in the life of associations and everywhere firmly defend your ideals without engaging in political activity. In general, you should not participate in the political game for the sake of power, because you won’t get it, but to create respect and familiarity in the local community – and you don’t necessarily have to found new parties to do that. Above all, you don’t have to compromise on basic principles. Support the grumbling and discontent that exists in the people. Never miss an opportunity to speak your honest opinion about politicians and the state of society. If you have the opportunity, you should choose the occupation that gives you the most influence and the greatest independence and untouchability. When choosing employees and suppliers, always think of your peers and, as far as possible, boycott companies that employ non-nationals or foreigners. The latter is the most difficult as they enjoy special protected status, but as a customer this is not primarily your problem. Preferably put your money where it benefits Danes.

Finally, it is important to keep an eye on the traitors and their henchmen so that they are not forgotten the day national Denmark (might) rise. Just as the resistance movement during the previous occupation kept meticulous arrest lists of their opponents, national Danes should remember the non-national forces so that they do not escape accountability for their actions. The big fish are already known to everyone. It goes without saying that politicians and media personalities have a lot to answer for – they will not be forgotten under any circumstances. However, all the small fish who diligently contribute to the execution of the genocide of the Danes in their daily lives, in letters and associations and under the guise of their public positions in education, the judiciary, the church, etc. certainly deserve to be remembered and held accountable for their actions when the time is ripe.

None of these measures will change anything on their own – but together they will create a possible basis for the rescue of Denmark. We must always remember the upheavals in Eastern Europe in 1989-91. Not many people predicted them. Most people thought they were just ripples on the surface, but it was the people who rose up against the tyranny the Western powers had handed them over to in 1945. We all thought that after this upheaval there would be new and better times, but we were wrong. There was no national elite capable of taking the reins so that the previous rulers and their henchmen could easily continue under new auspices, with the result that the state of the world from a national perspective has deteriorated considerably.

The people can rise up in many ways and for many reasons, and the EU’s fragile fantasy economy could collapse in a matter of months once the ball starts rolling. A political situation could arise that suddenly changes the rules of the game completely. All things that are difficult to predict, but which may offer the chance for a change. However, in such a situation, the national wing must be ready to take up the challenge and bring about this change. It is therefore to be hoped that the collapse will not be immediate.

Freedom is never won cheaply, and it is never won through stupidity.

Povl H. Riis-Knudsen

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Povl H. Riis-Knudsen https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Povl H. Riis-Knudsen2024-05-04 07:19:072024-05-04 08:48:28Some basic principles for the national struggle

Condition Red Revisited: White Male Erasure in Advertising

December 16, 2021/53 Comments/in Featured Articles, White Racial Consciousness and Advocacy/by Edmund Connelly, Ph. D.

Condition Red Revisited: White Male Erasure in Advertising.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Edmund Connelly, Ph. D. https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Edmund Connelly, Ph. D.2021-12-16 10:50:192021-12-16 10:50:19Condition Red Revisited: White Male Erasure in Advertising

No Country for White Children

December 10, 2021/62 Comments/in Featured Articles, Jewish Aggressiveness, White Racial Consciousness and Advocacy/by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D.

I’ve recently enjoyed an exchange of emails with a very intelligent and articulate former White Nationalist who is now dedicated to anti-natalism, the philosophy expounded by the Jewish South African philosopher David Benatar. Summed up, anti-natalism argues that life entails suffering, sometimes terrible amounts of it, and therefore that non-existence is always better than living and dying. Benatar’s 2006 Oxford-published book Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence is the influential key text of this growing movement. In the course of the book, Benatar advances the idea that humans should accept that procreation is inherently immoral because it involves creating sentient beings who will suffer and die. The text is thus a moral injunction against having children, and Benatar’s ideal scenario is one in which a barren mankind goes voluntarily extinct. In the course of the email exchange on these ideas, I raised a number of concerns with my correspondent about the logic, theory, and growth of anti-natalism, one of them being that, given the already problematic propensity among Whites to attach themselves to abstract moral concerns, and social fads based on guilt, there was likely to be a practical ethnic disparity in the adoption of anti-natalism at group level. In other words, I argued that anti-natalism, regardless of its philosophical merits or lack thereof (and quite apart from any consideration of Benatar’s intentions or ethnic origins), could contribute to the Culture of Sterility already prevalent in the West by providing yet more philosophical-cultural support for the demographic decline of Whites everywhere.

The minutiae of our broader debate of Benatar’s logic, and our shared rumination on existence and Being, isn’t worth covering here but, as our exchange narrowed in focus, two issues emerged which have relevance for this website. The first was whether life on earth was really a prize worth winning for Whites. The second was whether it was good to bring White children into an increasingly hostile world. My correspondent remains firmly in the camp that argues that life is most definitely not worth it, while I argued against Benatar and made the more optimistic case. This was a novel position for me given my longstanding appreciation of the deep pessimism of Schopenhauer and my general tendency to the “Black Pill” side of things. In this instance, however, I argued that, when it came to life, the game was indeed worth the candle. In fact, I believe that we should not only play the game of life, regardless of suffering, but play to win. I cannot say that I have arrived at this position rationally or logically. I can only say that the drive to life is firmly implanted in me, something that Benatar has argued is simply a trick of Nature. And yet, trick or not, I am a product of this earth, and not something alien to it and subjected to its whims. I am here. I exist. And I believe my best existence can be achieved with those most like me and especially, following in the thought of Frank Salter’s On Genetic Interests, those related to me. In a sense I am on a boat in rough seas—I need those who will reliably grab an oar alongside me, rather than throw me overboard.

My own attitudes to anti-natalism aside, my correspondent is correct in highlighting the increasingly difficult, and almost impossible, position of White children. Despair in this regard is always within touching distance. Just this morning it was brought to my attention that the ADL has extended its considerable tentacles across the Atlantic, and will now be involved in a three-year project in England to provide “lessons and activities to schools and pupils to talk about difference and diversity, celebrate inclusion, and understand discrimination and its effects.” The project is part of a deal with Chelsea Football Club, owned by Russian-Jewish oligarch Roman Abramovich, and will involve significant funding flowing from Chelsea to the ADL. In summary then, English fans are paying not only to see millionaires kick a ball for 90 minutes, but also for their children to be told they’re bigots by a gang of American Jews. That’s quite a deal. The interest of a body of New York Jews in English children is strange to say the least, especially when the ADL currently operates no such scheme in Israel where segregated education is still largely ongoing and, in the words of Israel’s own state comptroller, “racism and discrimination” are still prevalent in Israeli schools.

‘A Twig to be Straightened’: Jewish ‘Anti-Bias’ Research on White Children

I first wrote about the ADL’s strange and obsessive “interest” in White children in 2014, noting at that time their development of “Anti-Bias Lesson Plans and Resources for K-12 Educators.” The ADL program fit neatly into the broader history of Freudian attempts to portray anti-Semitism as a virulent mental pathology that careful education strategies could ‘inoculate’ against. That this process of “inoculation” has targeted White children and no others is an open secret. Although the idea that anti-Jewish attitudes are a form of disease with roots in childhood goes back to Freud, it has been prominent in Jewish activism for over a century and remains current today. Take, for example, the closing remarks from Abraham Foxman’s Jews and Money: The Story of a Stereotype, where parents and teachers are urged to “try to help the next generation grow up freer from the infection of intolerance. [emphasis added]” The goal, as Mr. Foxman himself once articulated, is to “make America as user-friendly to Jews as possible.” Theodore Isaac Rubin’s equally self-interested diatribe, Anti-Semitism: A Disease of the Mind, describes anti-Jewish feeling as a “contagious, malignant disease,” and concludes by stating, “extremely active application of insight and education is necessary to check the disease. Checkmate and eradication is [sic] extremely difficult and probably only possible if applied to the very young before roots of the disease take hold. [emphasis added]” To Rubin, and his like-minded co-ethnics at the ADL, the solution to the problem of anti-Jewish feeling is one of “prophylaxis” and “approaches to children.” The ADL-sponsored tome Anti-Semitism in America (1979), concluded that “It is apparent that the schools are the most appropriate and potentially effective agent to carry out the instructional strategy just outlined.”[1]

The 1979 ADL study was itself following in the footsteps of a series of social engineering experiments carried out on White children over several decades by scores of Jewish psychiatrists and sociologists. Research into the racial attitudes of White children in America began as early as 1929, in Bruno Lasker’s Race Attitudes in Children (New York: H. Holt & Company). Lasker was a Hamburg-born Jew who moved first to England before arriving in the United States in 1914 where he established himself as a pro-immigration social worker. Lasker’s work was furthered in the 1930s by Eugene and Ruth Horowitz[2], whose work was highly influential on probably the most high-profile “child racism” test of the twentieth century — the “doll tests” of Black psychiatrists Kenneth and Mamie Clark that helped end segregation via Brown v. Board of Education. The “doll tests” didn’t just have a Jewish academic heritage; the research of the Clarks was funded by the Julius Rosenwald Fund, and the pair were closely connected to the Northside Center for Child Development which had a “mostly Jewish Board of Directors.”[3]

Research into the putative racism of White children was furthered in the 1960s by Donald Mosher,[4] but it was in the 1970s that an intensification took place, partly as a result of its blending with discoveries of the importance of television in shaping attitudes, and other social behavior ‘modification’ techniques. In 1972, for example, Bradley Greenberg was allowed access to 300 White children from Michigan to see if consistently watching Blacks on television could improve their attitude to “diversity.”[5] The development of Sesame Street, “a program that exposes young children to a variety of attractive black and Hispanic models,”[6] at the start of the decade owed much to the interventions and analyses of Jewish sociologists like Greenberg, as well as Gerry Bogatz,[7] Gerald Gorn,[8] Marvin Goldberg,[9] and Gordon Cantor.[10]

In a glowing walk down memory lane in Tablet, it’s made explicit that “idealistic urban Jews were integral to Sesame Street’s origins. … Its genesis was a 1966 dinner at Joan Ganz Cooney’s apartment, attended by Carnegie Corporation VP Lloyd Morrisett and NYC Channel 13’s program manager Louis Freedman.” As with many social experiments at the time, there was a blend of Jewish activism, government backing, and the financial support of Big Capital. In the case of Sesame Street,

The Carnegie Corporation, the U.S. Department of Education, and the Ford Foundation donated most of the seed money for the launch of Children’s Television Workshop (today called Sesame Workshop). Harvard Ed School professor Gerald Lesser, one of the few people conducting research on kids and TV at the time, became the chair of CTW’s advisory board. He worked with the startup team and offered guidelines. … The show was racially and culturally diverse from the get-go.

These efforts to modify the behavior of White children via television were closely related to earlier Jewish efforts, in the 1950s and 1960s, to modify White racial attitudes. The most notable academics in the field of altering public opinion and White ingroup attitudes including Joseph Klapper, Bernard Berelson, Fritz Heider, Leo Bogart, Elihu Katz, Marie Jahoda, Joseph Gittler, Morris Rosenberg, Ernest Dichter, Walter Weiss, Nathan Glazer, Bernard J. Fine, Bruno Bettelheim, Wallace Mandell, Hertha Hertzog, Dororthy Blumenstock, Stanley Schachter, David Caplovitz, Walter Lippmann, Sol Ginsburg, Harry Alpert, Leon Festinger, Michael Gurevitch, Edward Shils, Eugene Gaier, Joseph Goldsen, Julius Schreiber, Daniel Levinson, Herbert Blumer, I. M. A. Myers, Irving Janis, Miriam Reimann, Edward Sapir, Solomon Asch, Gerald Wieder, Paul Lazarsfeld, and Morris Janowitz.

Someone once said that “when everyone thinks the same, conspiracy is unnecessary.” This is essentially the dynamic at work in this field of research, which was dominated by people from the same ethno-religious background, all of them bringing more or less the same anxieties, assumptions and enmities to their chosen field. The result was a very uniform approach among Jewish psychiatrists and sociologists to the “problem” of the White population, especially White children.

Following in the footsteps of many co-ethnics, in 1976 Irwin and Phylis Katz and their colleague Shirley Cohen moved away from the usefulness of television and into the testing of other “modification” techniques that specifically targeted White children. In one experiment, after gathering 80 White kindergarteners and fourth graders, attitudes to Blacks and the disabled were measured by, for example, confronting the youngsters with a Black man moving around a room in a wheelchair and observing their reactions.[11] Two years after this stunning leap forward for science, Phylis Katz returned to experimenting on White children with colleague Sue Rosenberg Zalk, in a project designed to achieve a “modification” of White children’s attitudes to race.[12] Katz justified the focus on children because, in White adults, “attitudes are relatively intransigent and much more difficult to change.” For Katz, to paraphrase the title of one of her essays, White children were a problematic and warped twig that emerged from a rotten tree and had to be “straightened.”[13]

Today, the same trend is very much in evidence. One of the more influential texts in the field is Louise Derman-Sparks’s 2011 What If All the Kids Are White? Anti-bias Multicultural Education with Young Children and Families. Derman-Sparks, who opened her speech to a multicultural conference in Berlin in 2010 with the statement that Germany’s shift to multiculturalism “has been especially moving and inspiring to me … as a Jewish woman,” adorns the cover of her book with the images of 14 White children gathered together above the distasteful title as if they’re criminal mugshots. The expressed intention of the book is to “pique the interest of Whites to examine themselves,” and it opens with reference to “many authors” who have published texts since the 1990s on how Whites perpetuate racism. The cited “many authors” includes Paul Kivel the Jewish author of Uprooting Racism: How White People Can Work for Racial Justice and founder of the (far from subtle) “Challenging Christian Hegemony Project.” Other examples of these “many authors” include Paula Rothenberg and her 2004 White Privilege: Essential Readings on the Other Side of Racism, Shirley Steinberg and her 2000 White Reign: Deploying Whiteness in America, and Tim Wise and his 2004 White Like Me. Although not mentioned by Derman-Sparks, one of the most influential academic texts in this field in recent years is developmental psychologist Lawrence Hirschfeld’s 1998 MIT-published Race in the Making: Cognition, Culture, and the Child’s Construction of Human Kinds.

Derman-Sparks’s text is one of those truly vulgar texts that maintains a cheery air even as it portrays the innocent as sinister. How else are we to react to the ethnic paranoia inherent in complaints that White children aged between 3 and 4 in one class were perceived as “avoiding dark colors in their artwork”[14] and thus demonstrated a deep-seated racism imbibed from their parents since infancy? The revelation that these White children preferred to draw paintings with bright, cheerful colors was apparently so devastating that a team of anti-bias “educators” was brought in. Derman-Sparks lauds the team for “brainstorming” techniques to adapt the children’s behavior, including providing them with excesses of black and brown paper, providing them with black and brown toys, and creating “relaxation” spaces that were dark. When the children, who weren’t much older than toddlers, complained that the dark spaces were scaring them, they were told that darkness “wasn’t scary” and were made to simply endure it. The ideology behind this mental saturation in darkness was that “White children’s learning to be “White” is part of the maintenance of systemic racism.”[15] The goal therefore, in all cases, is to prevent White children from adopting their natural racial identity. Derman-Sparks stresses her ambition to create not just generations of Whites who tolerate multiculturalism, but who become active warriors for “social justice.”

Getting the ADL Out of Schools

All of which is to say that Jewish activism in this area is intended to pervert the in-born natural affinity of White children for their own kind. Even Hirschfeld (1998) admits that

race is one of the earliest-emerging social dimensions to which children attend and this pattern of development appears to be stable across diverse cultures. Furthermore racial thinking clearly develops into a theory-like knowledge structure, representing a coherent body of explanatory knowledge sustaining inferences about category members that go far beyond the range of direct experience.[16]

The aforementioned ‘anti-bias training,’ which has been developed over the course of the past century, is designed to overcome the natural instincts of White children and to deprive them of the knowledge structures, explanatory knowledge, and inferences that are essential to the protection of their interests. When these aspects of their development are done away with, and when they are instead brainwashed into becoming “social justice warriors” on behalf of foreign groups, White children are essentially turned upon themselves and their own people.

A promising sign in recent times, however, has been the backlash against the ADL’s involvement in education, which is in turn part of a broader realization of the harmful nature of Critical Race Theory and its encroachment at all levels of the education system. In July, the Californians for Equal Rights Foundation initiated a “Get ADL Out of Schools” campaign after the ADL began state-wide measures that dictated that schools should “notify ADL when any incident of bias, bullying, discrimination or harassment occurs”—presumably so they could refer the offending youth to their “Center on Extremism” as soon as possible. The campaign is led in part by Stuart H. Hurlbert, Professor of Biology Emeritus, San Diego State University, who argues that “the Anti-Defamation League has inserted itself into American politics in a variety of ways over the decades primarily in the guise of a non-partisan, civil rights organization.” As part of his gathering of information revealing the true nature of the ADL, Hurlbert very helpfully directs readers to Kevin MacDonald’s work “Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881–1965: A Historical Review.”

In August, California’s Newport-Mesa Unified School District voted to continue its relationship with the ADL, but “with modifications.” The school district was the victim of an ADL shakedown in March 2019, after it was revealed that some drunken students from Newport Harbor High School arranged cups in the shape of a swastika at an off-campus party. After the prank was made viral by a malcontent, the ADL swooped on the instance of “abhorrent anti-Semitic activity” and shamed the nervous school board into accepting a rapidly escalating series of contracts for anti-bias training for staff and students.

The minutes of the school boards meetings are publicly available, and contain the actual contracts with the ADL which run to the value of some $96,650 over a two-year period for anti-bias and pro-immigration training sessions. The shakedown started to come apart in August, when board members began to question the transparency and cost of their agreements with the ADL, as well as the content of ADL training courses. In response to parents objecting to the school district’s relationship with the ADL on the grounds that it was “bringing critical race theory into the classroom,” the school district “reviewed the proposed contract and recommended eliminating second-level anti-bias courses for school employees.” Unfortunately, the most damaging aspect of ADL ‘training”—their lessons for children—remain in place (at a cost of $27,800), prompting Anti-Defamation League Regional Director Peter Levi to gloat, “We have long believed education is the best antidote to hate and bias.”

More and more objections are being raised, however. Back in June, in Alabama, the Mountain Brook School Board severed ties with the ADL after a parent-led protest against Critical Race Theory being pushed into schools via the ADL’s “No Place for Hate” program. In a familiar pattern, Mountain Brook’s involvement with the ADL began with a teenage prank involving swastikas. A Jewish parent, Elizabeth Goldstein, then claimed that Mountain Brook needed ADL training, providing as supporting evidence the undoubtedly truthful statement: “As a child, as a Jewish child growing up in Mountain Brook, [when I was in second grade] a girl told me she could not play with me because I killed Jesus.”

The shakedown began, but on July 8 Mountain Brook Schools issued a statement in response to parent pressure, announcing that “Mountain Brook Schools will not be using “No Place for Hate” and will no longer be using the services of the Anti-Defamation League.” The ADL, rather than gracefully bowing out of the affair, attacked Mountain Brook Schools in an open letter, accusing the city of “many issues of antisemitism and hatred over the past several years.” Sinister motives were implied to lie behind the Board’s

intentional and unexplained distancing from ADL. … In response to a serious 2020 antisemitic incident involving its students … the Mountain Brook Diversity Committee invited ADL to give a presentation on our educational resources in July 2020. This meeting resulted in the Diversity Committee choosing to use ADL’s No Place for Hate® education framework and A World of Difference Institute® programs for its goal of making MBS students globally responsible and conscious citizens by helping to foster a more welcoming and inclusive school community. … The treatment of ADL as a partner of the district and a resource to the community has been both disrespectful and lacking transparency and communication. We are leaving Mountain Brook Schools with no indication that the issues of antisemitism in the community are being addressed. Indeed, they feel worse. … Mountain Brook Schools’ failure to consider implementing anti-bias education in schools could serve to allow antisemitism and other forms of hatred to fester in the school community.

The ADL could have just cut to the chase and said “A world where bigoted White children aren’t put through our Brainwashing Seminar® and Anti-Identity Institute® (and all for the bargain price of less than $100,000!) is a world in which we’re deeply terrified.”

*****

We’ve come full circle. Is the ADL looking across the Atlantic because it’s being rebuffed in America? I doubt it. The group is international in origin and intent. It is simply expanding its modus operandi in accordance with its ideology—an ideology in respect to “child racism” in the West that has been a century in the making. This ideology dictates that the “twigs” must be snapped off from the White tree and reshaped. This ideology hasn’t required a conspiracy, only a tremendous similarity in thought and action over one hundred years. Defeating this pattern will require a similar uniformity of thought. White parents coming together to expel brainwashers is a great place to start.


[1] Quinley, Harold E. & Glock, Charles Y. Anti-Semitism in America (Michigan: The Free Press, 1979), 202.

[2] Horowitz, Eugene L., and Ruth E. Horowitz. “Development of Social Attitudes in Children.” Sociometry 1, no. 3/4 (1938): 301–38.

[3] Markowitz, Gerald E. and Rosner, David, Children, Race, and Power: Kenneth and Mamie Clark’s Northside Center (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1996).

[4] Mosher, Donald L., and Alvin Scodel. “Relationships between Ethnocentrism in Children and the Ethnocentrism and Authoritarian Rearing Practices of Their Mothers.” Child Development 31, no. 2 (1960): 369–76.

[5] Greenberg, B. S. (1972) ‘Children’s Reactions to TV Blacks’, Journalism Quarterly, 49(1), pp. 5–14.

[6] Katz, Phyllis A.; Zalk, Sue R. (1978). Modification of children’s racial attitudes.. , 14(5), 447–461.

[7] Bogatz, G. A., & Ball, S. The second year of Sesame Street: A continuing evaluation. Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing Service, 1971.

[8] Gorn, Gerald J., Marvin E. Goldberg, and Rabindra N. Kanungo. “The Role of Educational Television in Changing the Intergroup Attitudes of Children.” Child Development 47, no. 1 (1976): 277–80.

[9] Marvin E. Goldberg & Gerald J. Gorn (1979) Television’s impact on preferences for non‐white playmates: Canadian “Sesame Street” inserts, Journal of Broadcasting, 23:1, 27-32.

[10] Gordon N. Cantor. “White Boys’ Ratings of Pictures of Whites and Blacks as Related to Amount of Familiarization.” Perceptual and Motor Skills 39, no. 2 (December 1974); Cantor, Gordon N. “Effects of Familiarization on Children’s Ratings of Pictures of Whites and Blacks.” Child Development 43, no. 4 (1972): 1219–29.

[11] Katz, P. A., Katz, I., & Cohen, S. (1976). White children’s attitudes toward Blacks and the physically handicapped: A developmental study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(1), 20–24.

[12] Katz, Phyllis A.; Zalk, Sue R. (1978). Modification of children’s racial attitudes.. , 14(5), 447–461.

[13] Katz, P. A. ‘Attitude change in children: Can the twig be straightened?’ In P. A. Katz (Ed.), Towards the elimination of racism. New York: Pergamon Press,1976.

[14] Derman-Sparks, 25.

[15] Ibid,. 31.

[16] Hirschfeld, L.A. Race in the Making: Cognition, Culture, and the Child’s Construction of Human Kinds (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998), 83.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Andrew Joyce, Ph.D. https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Andrew Joyce, Ph.D.2021-12-10 07:57:342021-12-10 07:57:34No Country for White Children

Sines v. Kessler Plaintiffs Coordinated with Refuse Fascism, an Anti-White Terrorist Organization

November 11, 2021/19 Comments/in Featured Articles, Unite the Right, White Racial Consciousness and Advocacy/by John T. Kelly

“Antifa WILL claim they are bystanders so they can file lawsuits.”
@Aeyannic_Order, Unite the Right Discord Server, August 11, 2017

Two plaintiffs in the upcoming Sines v Kessler lawsuit have ties to, and coordinated activities with, the anti-White terrorist organization Refuse Fascism in the months prior to and during the rally. The organization, a “mass line” front group for the Revolutionary Communist Party, rioted across numerous states in the months before Unite the Right in order to “shut down” the events of their political opponents, including the inauguration of President Donald J. Trump. The two plaintiffs connected to the terrorist organization, Natalie Romero and Seth Wispelwey, have both alleged that Unite the Right speakers and organizers conspired to violate their rights at the 2017 Charlottesville rally. A new report by Occidental Observer reveals the extent of these ties, and how a founding leader of the organization was brought in to violate the rights of the defendants.

Refuse Fascism’s 2017 Terrorist Rampage

Following the election of Donald J. Trump in 2016, Refuse Fascism was founded by members of the Revolutionary Communist Party and other anti-White extremists such as Bill Ayers, a member of the infamous anti-White, Judeo-Bolshevik terrorist cell that not only bombed the U.S. Capital in 1971, but discussed the “merits” of murdering all newborn White babies. Numerous protests the group have attended, organized or participated in have descended into violent riots as participants attacked those they were “protesting.”

All the more terrifying is the organization’s connections with several extraordinarily wealthy and powerful anti-White Jewish billionaires. In June of 2020, a Project Veritas undercover operation revealed that the head of the organization’s Atlanta chapter, Tee Stern, claimed to have received funding from George Soros for a side project and was in talks with Jewish billionaire Tom Steyer’s assistant. Steyer was the top Jewish donor to the Democratic party during the 2020 election cycle, contributing 54 millions dollars to Democrats and 35 Million to Republicans.

On January 14, 2017, the homosexual, Jewish libertarian Milo Yiannopoulos was scheduled to speak to students at UC Davis. Refuse Fascism was among the terrorist groups who showed up and shut the event down. As with the Unite the Right rally, mob participants brandished genocidal anti-White “antifa” terrorist symbols, as well as the bold black and white Refuse Fascism signs that have various demands such as “NO! STOP TRUMP/PENCE FASCIST REGIME BEFORE IT STARTS” with the organization’s website at the bottom.

In a now deleted video, a Breitbart photographer is shoved and spit on by Refuse Fascism protesters. Ringleader calls for his comrades to steal the photographer’s camera.

During the fracas, numerous attendees were assaulted. Milo’s guest speaker had dog feces thrown at him. Nathan Damigo, a current defendant in the Sines v Kessler lawsuit who conducted an interview with CNN that evening was assaulted while livestreaming the riotous mob. Breitbart cameraman Mike Perdie was assaulted after a member of Refuse Fascism demanded he stop filming. He then called for his comrades to remove Perdie from the area. After pushing and shoving Perdie around, a man shouted directly in front of him with a bullhorn screaming “Fuck off” and then spit in his face. It was then that the man who appeared to be the leader of the Refuse Fascism group yelled for his comrades to steal Perdie’s equipment, “Get that camera! Someone grab that expensive camera!”

Mob participants then began inciting violence, chanting “No justice, no peace!” and “If we don’t get it, shut it down.” Animated by the rhetoric, the agitated mob tore down the barricades and blocked the door of the venue. Administrators and campus police called the event off with little attempt to apprehend the perpetrators of the violence and chaos.

#DisruptJ20

A week later Refuse Fascism would carry out a conspiracy to disrupt the inauguration of President Donald Trump. Days before the event, undercover footage of Refuse Fascism organizer Sunsara Taylor was released by Project Veritas revealing their plan to disrupt the inauguration with various anti-White terrorist groups. The conspirators included numerous organizations who later that summer would descend upon the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, such as Antifa Seven Hills, Ashville Anti-Racism, Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), Metropolitan Anarchist Coordinating Council (MACC), Redneck Revolt, and The Revolutionary Communist Party (RevCom), to name just a few.

The night prior to the inauguration, members of Refuse Fascism clashed with police outside Trump International Hotel. They then met up with other anti-White “antifa” terrorists outside the Deploraball, an event put on by Donald Trump’s most vocal supporters. Mob participants threw objects such as eggs and batteries at those entering the venue and attacked multiple attendees. Among those attacked was James Allsup, a young college student from Washington state who would go on to attend Unite the Right. While debating a member of the mob, he was surrounded by the anti-White “antifa” terrorists who stole his hat. When he attempted to retrieve it, the terrorists beat him. They then proceeded to stalk him and attacked him again, hitting him in the back of the head leaving him bleeding so profusely that he had to be taken to the hospital.

A young James Allsup was taken to the hospital following an attack by anti-White “Antifa” terrorists outside the DeploraBall, January 19, 2017.

On the day of the inauguration, Refuse Fascism stormed a highway, shutting down all traffic. Code Pink also blocked streets in an attempt to stop the inauguration from taking place. During the human blockade Tighe Barry, a member of Code Pink who’s in a relationship with the organization’s cofounder, Medea Benjamin, was wearing a large Refuse Fascism sticker on his chest and claimed that “we blocked this street because…we feel like we have the right to tell them not to go into our city.” The stunt created chaos, but unlike Unite the Right, police stepped in and made arrests. Code Pink has a history protesting with Refuse Fascism, and its leaders Tighe Barry and cofounder Medea Benjamin were among those who attended the Unite the Right Rally.

In other parts of the city, Refuse Fascism members participated in a goon march with black bloc terrorists where they proceeded to riot through the streets, smashing windows and setting a limousine on fire. Several hundred were arrested, although only around 20 of the 234 people arrested were ever convicted, and those were primarily due to plea deals. Unlike the majority of the January 6 capital protesters who were refused bail, the majority of those arrested in 2017 received bail and had their charges dropped by prosecutors.

It was during the chaos that defendant Richard Spencer was famously punched in the head by an anti-White black bloc terrorist, igniting a media firestorm about the “ethics of punching Nazis.” One writer for Politico resigned in disgrace after implying that Spencer should be beaten with a baseball bat. A Huffington Post writer instructed his readers to assault White advocates, referring to them with the pejorative, anti-White racial slur of “nazi.” The racial incitement of the public to violence by the mainstream corporate media would contribute to the chaos in Charlottesville that summer, as well as help to cover up attacks on Unite the Right participants.

Crashing Berkeley

With the success of their heckler’s veto at UC Davis and close attempt at a successful coup at the inauguration, Refuse Fascism members launched another aggressive attack several week later against Yiannopoulos’ UC-Berkeley speaking engagement. Following a similar pattern, Refuse Fascism showed up early along with other anti-White terrorist organizations. These groups included the TORCH Antifa Network’s local chapter Northern California Anti-Racist Action (NoCARA) whom law enforcement claimed had attacked a pro-White rally in Sacramento in 2016 hosted by Sines v. Kessler defendants Matt Parrot and Matthew Heimbach’s Traditionalist Worker Party (TWP). Other organizations included By Any Means Necessary (BAMN), whose founding members worked with and were members of the openly pedophile organization North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMLBA), as well as Refuse Fascism’s parent group, the Revolutionary Communist Party (RevCom). A Buzzfeed livestream filmed the entire event, and showed Refuse Fascism members instigating the riot, pulling down the barricades and leading the mob up to the building where the event was set to occur.

After pulling down police barricades, Refuse Fascism member with shield and sign (second from the right) leads the mob into the prohibited area, kicking off the riot.

As the mob attacked the building using the metal barricades as battering rams against the glass windows, they fired explosives at law enforcement. Several women who came to see Yiannopolus speak were then attacked. One of the young female students was giving an interview with local media when she was pepper sprayed. Another woman was attacked with a club disguised as a flagpole. After fending off her attacker, another masked terrorist sprayed her in the face with pepper spray. She was then beaten mercilessly by multiple terrorists with wooden clubs.

A mobile light tower illuminating the plaza was knocked over and caught fire. Numerous trash cans were knocked over and lit on fire, and even a bank  had a  flare thrown in it as the mob proceeded to celebrate the success of their heckler’s veto by parading down the street adjacent to the school and vandalizing local businesses. The San Francisco Chronicle estimated $100,000 in damage to the school and the surrounding area.

Yvette Felarca, a leading member of BAMN openly bragged on Fox News to Tucker Carlson about how her terrorist group had helped shut down the event. Refuse Fascism claimed on their website that “what happened at UC Berkeley is part of the kind of broad, powerful and meaningful protest which needs to continue on an unprecedented scale to OUST this regime from power” and that their actions were “righteous” with “much more like this…[is] needed.”

Plaintiff Natalie Romero, Movimiento Cosecha, and Refuse Fascism

Sines v Kessler plaintiff Natalie Romero, who admitted her parents were in the country illegally, travelled from Houston to Charlottesville on August 12, 2017 to call for the ethnic cleansing of European cultural symbols from the city’s parks. She is among those who filed a lawsuit that same year alleging speakers and organizers of the event “conspired” with James Fields to hit her with his vehicle. Despite a law enforcement investigator involved with the Fields case admitting under oath that there was no evidence of communication between Fields and other Unite the Right defendants of the Sines v Kessler lawsuit, Romero and her fellow plaintiffs have continued to make the unsubstantiated allegation. Why, despite lack of evidence, Romero has continued to make such allegations which have destroyed the lives of the plaintiffs is unknown. However, new evidence reveals that Romero had a history of blocking traffic and was a member of an organization with deep ties to the anti-White terrorist organization Refuse Fascism.

Movimiento Cosecha & Refuse Fascism

At the time of the Unite the Right event in 2017, Romero was a member of the anti-White, racial replacement organization Movimiento Cosecha. The group calls for open borders and the amnesty of all illegal aliens residing in the United States; it had conducted numerous acts of civil disobedience across the country in the months prior to, and in the years following, Unite the Right. In Michigan, three of their members were arrested in April of 2017 for blocking a highway. Two months later, in an event Romero would help lead, 15 members (of whom four were illegally in the country) were arrested in Austin, Texas for sitting in the street and blocking traffic in front of the State’s Capitol. In 2019, 22 members were arrested in Detroit for blocking the Windsor Tunnel.

Movimiento Cosecha’s president Dylan Lazerow, is unsurprisingly Jewish. A recent in-depth report by the National Justice Party revealed that Israel’s strategy outside its borders is the exact opposite of what it advocates for its own people, and that the majority of organizations assisting migrants in ethnically replacing Europeans in all White countries are run by Jews. Even in cases where Christian churches are involved, they are receiving Jewish funding to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars. While Lazerow has opposed Israeli settlement policy of Palestine, he promotes the settlement of tens of millions of unwanted non-Whites into European nations.

Movimiento Cosecha President Dylan Lazerow with Refuse Fascism Co-Founder Cornel West.

In March of 2017, Lazerow posted a photo on his Facebook page of himself posing with Cornel West, a cofounder and lead spokesman of Refuse Fascism who has fielded various interviews for the terrorist organization. West was recently denied tenure and compelled to resign from his position at Harvard by the institute’s Jewish leadership for criticism of Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestine. Like Lazaro, however, West has no problem promoting the ethnic replacement of European peoples, but he does have a problem with ethnically cleansing Palestinians.

While it is common for popular people to have their photo taken with random individuals they don’t know, this was not the case with Lazerow and West. Lazerow once posted a Movimiento Cosecha advertisement with Cornel West quoting him as saying “In this moment in history, the people dedicated to loving their neighbors must resist. Stand with me as I join Movimiento Cosecha and our immigrant brothers and sisters on May 1st for the #DayWithoutImmigrants — and beyond — as we work to win permanent protection, dignity, and respect.” Furthermore, Movimiento Cosecha also has a history of demonstrating with Refuse Fascism. These facts reveal close ties between the two organizations.

Refuse Fascism members participate in Movimiento Cosecha’s Austin, Texas action.  

Less than a month prior to the now infamous Unite the Right rally Natalie Romero and other members of her organization, along with members of Refuse Fascism, blocked traffic in Austin, Texas to demand citizenship for millions illegally living within the country. Video of the incident revealed Romero to be playing a major role, practicing and then leading the group in chants with a megaphone as they approached the state capitol. Romero initiated chants such as “The power, is in our hands. This is our state!” and “Undocumented and unafraid.” She even went so far as to parrot a slogan taken straight out of the Communist Manifesto “One struggle, one fight. Workers of the world unite!”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Movimiento Cosecha (@cosecha_harvest)

As the group approached the intersection of Congress Avenue and 15th Street, a number of agitators marched into the center of the road. Romero can be seen in the background, wearing an orange reflective safety vest blocking traffic on Congress. Fifteen Movimiento Cosecha members were arrested during the action. As those arrested were moved into transport vehicles, Romero led those still remaining in further chants celebrating their actions calling for policy that would further the ongoing racial replacement Americans.

Following the Unite the Right rally, Movimiento Cosecha published a photo of Romero wearing a t-shirt with their logo emblazoned on it and holding a megaphone, claiming her as a member. Another photo published on the organization’s Facebook page on July 25, prior to their July action, shows Romero lying on a pile of Movimiento Cosecha t-shirts with another activist with the caption “We are in Austin! Text “RESISTE” to 41411 to stay updated as we launch the first DACAmented sit-in of the Trump era TOMORROW at 11am. Stay tuned!” This evidence reveals that Romero was no average member, but a very active participant with the organization.

“We are in Austin! Text “RESISTE” to 41411 to stay updated as we launch the first DACAmented sit-in of the Trump era TOMORROW at 11am. Stay tuned!” Natalie Romero (bottom left) poses on a pile of t-shirts for Movimiento Cosecha days prior to blocking traffic in Austin, Texas and a month prior to Unite the Right.

As Unite the Right attendees headed to their vehicles on August 12, 2017 the anti-White mob who managed to shut down the rally followed them to the parking lot on South Street where they blocked attendees in and then attacked and chased their vehicles as they attempted to leave. Moments before Romero and several of her co-plaintiffs were struck by Fields’ vehicle, the mob she was marching with were celebrating how they successfully shut the rally down, chanting “who shut shit down, we shut shit down!” Those Romero was illegally blocking the street with during the state of emergency consisted of various anti-White terrorist cells, such as the Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement, several chapters of the TORCH Antifa Network, along with members of Refuse Fascism.

Seth Wispelwey Invites Refuse Fascism’s lead spokesman Cornel West to Help Him Shut Down Unite the Right

In preparation for Unite the Right, plaintiff Seth Wispelwey’s organizations, Congregate Charlottesville and the United Church of Christ, hosted direct action training in preparation for violating the rights of those he is now frivolously suing. During a press conference on July 31, 2017, Wispelwey claimed that Refuse Fascism’s spokesman Cornel West and others “had already responded to the call and are committing to join Congregate’s efforts in Charlottesville to confront the rise of White Nationalist’s political power and refuse to let Charlottesville be used as a platform towards those ends.”  It is no surprise then that several days prior to Unite the Right, West’s anti-White terrorist organization Refuse Fascism called on their members to go to Charlottesville to “protest” the event, a word which the organization had previously used to describe mass rioting and violence they instigated at UC Berkeley.

On the night before Unite the Right, West gave a sermon at St. Paul’s Memorial Church in Charlottesville where he proclaimed to thunderous applause “We have to take a stand! That’s why some of us came to fight and get arrested if necessary!”  During the church service Wispelwey took the microphone and announced that “This [service] is the result of Congregate [C’Ville] being in existence for one month. Think about what we could do in Charlottesville over one year,” and “We are working as the fiscal sponsors for this work.” Prior to the rally the following morning, West gave another sermon at First Baptist Church where he further called on the congregation to get arrested with them to stop the rally, telling the congregants “When we march this morning. We hold hands and lock in this morning. When we’re seen this morning. When we get arrested this morning. When we go to jail this morning, let’s try to remember those, the best of those who came before who sacrificed so much for us. Who paid a greater cost than we gonna pay today.” West then marched to the park with Wispelwey and blocked the entrance.

Cornel West joined Seth Wispelway and other clergy block the entrance to the park and discuss tactics with anti-White terrorists.

Wispelwey blocked UTR participants from entering the park just yards away from where Refuse Fascism members attacked numerous event attendees. Newly released drone footage shows some of the attacks which are all clearly unprovoked. Other video and photographic evidence shows Refuse Fascism members knocking individuals to the ground, kicking and stomping on their heads. The Charlottesville police department never prosecuted the assailants, despite the large black and white signs they were holding during the assaults clearly displaying what organization they were with.

Following the rally, in an attempt to separate himself from the violence of Refuse Fascism and other anti-White terrorist organizations while simultaneously showing his approval of their actions, Wispelwey claimed in an interview with Slate magazine that “They [“antifa”] have their tools to achieve their purposes, and they are not the ones I will personally use, but let me stress that our purposes were the same: block this violent tide and do not let it take a pedestal.” Britany “Smash” Cain-Coneley, who co-founded Congregate Charlottesville with Wispelwey claimed in a now deleted interview with United Church of Christ that “We were all there with the same goal,” in reference to the violent anti-White “antifa” terrorists.

Far from exculpating Wispelwey, these statements, in concert with what is now known about his connection to the Refuse Fascism leadership, indicate his intentions at Unite the Right. During a Q&A session following Unite the Right, Wispelwey was asked about his cooperation with anti-White terrorists; he responded “I encourage a perspective shift. Because when you start to see that that violent ideology, systemically and directly, bodily and physically, harms everyone who doesn’t look like me. Then to stand and confront White Supremacy in its many forms is not an act, is not obstructing someone’s constitutional rights. It is an act of love. Maybe they have a right to the rally, we have a right to block them.”

Wispelwey went on to bemoan his co-religionists who rebuked his actions, admitting that he had “been accused of inciting violence by liberal White Christians so many times for showing up and trying to block their [UTR participants] entrance.” This statement reveals that it was very clear to many in his community that what he was doing would lead to violence. Numerous statements made by Wispelwey on social media since Unite the Right clearly demonstrate that this charlatan was in fact inciting violence and vandalism against his political opponents. Wispelwey encouraged his followers to damage the property of relatives who watch Fox News, assault people with milkshakes; he also follows various anti-White “Antifa” terrorist accounts on social media such as Bat City Antifa, New York City Antifa, and It’s Going Down.

Wispelwey went on to make numerous unsubstantiated, hyperbolic claims that “antifa” had saved his life. After reviewing hundreds of hours of video footage and volumes of photographic evidence of Unite the Right, my colleagues and I  were unable to discover any instance where Wispelwey’s life was anywhere close to being in danger. This cannot be said of Unite the Right attendees whose heads were kicked and stomped on by Refuse Fascism members after being knocked to the ground in unprovoked attacks. Furthermore, evidence conclusively demonstrates that the riots that occurred on the night of the torchlight ceremony at the University of Virginia on the rotunda the night of August 11 and the brawl on 2nd and E. Market street the following day would not have occurred had it not been for the instigation of well-known anti-White “antifa” terrorist groups.

Video evidence has revealed that the night of the torchlight ceremony, several participants were assaulted by known anti-White terrorists, particularly Thomas Keenan and Thomas Massey. While demonstrators were coming down onto the rotunda, Massey, who was arrested for rioting at Donald Trump’s inauguration and was quoted in The Washington Post as being disappointed he and his comrades weren’t able to commit more violence and hoped that he would at future events,  splashed an unknown liquid from a water bottle on torchlight participants. He then turned to journalist Dave Reilly and smacked his camera out of his hand. One “antifa” went so far as to spit on an attendee who did not retaliate. Another man who confronted the two had his arm hit by Keenan in an attempt to knock his torch out of his hand. It was only after these repeated assaults against torchlight participants and refusal of local law enforcement to intervene, that the rioting kicked off. The following year, Keenan and Massey would be arrested for the beating of two U.S. Marines in Philadelphia, in which they were charged with racial intimidation, among other things.

Thomas Massey (Left) and Thomas Keenan (Right) at the August 11, 2017 Charlottesville Torchlight ceremony (Top), 2018 mugshots for the beating of two U.S. Marines in Philadelphia (bottom).

The day of the rally, minutes after Richard Spencer was attacked with bear mace as he entered the park, Keenan, Massey, and various other anti-White terrorists rushed to barricade the street to block the National Front’s entrance to the park. A flag bearer at the head of the parade attempted to push his way through them and was immediately punched by various individuals so as to not let him through. As other National Front members came to his aid, the anti-White gang members pulled out weapons, including a hammer, to attack them with. The situation was the complete opposite of defendant Wispelwey’s claim.

The facts regarding just how these altercations were initiated reveal that there was no threat to the people of Charlottesville and minorities from Unite the Right participants. The violence that broke out was a direct result of known anti-White terrorist networks coming to Charlottesville to utilize violence and intimidation to stop White Americans from expressing themselves and participating in the democratic process in what has been the greatest modern civil rights violation in modern American history. These organizations and their anti-White terrorist members openly claimed they were heading to the rally to disrupt it. The Governor of Virginia, Terry McAuliffe, claimed they had intelligence that extremist groups planned to attack rally participants and law enforcement. Afterwards they bragged on their websites about how they attacked the rally while relying on the anti-White, Jewish-owned mass media to cover up the terrorist’s actions.

Adding insult to injury, the real victims of racial violence and intimidation are now on trial in a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) lawsuit launched by the very individuals who conspired with the anti-White terrorists in the months prior to and during the rally to violate their rights. We will soon see if the Charlottesville jury will buy the outrageous conspiracy theory concocted by Roberta Kaplan and her slimy plaintiffs, though the psychological effects of widespread anti-White terrorism over the last few years means that even if the jury doesn’t buy it, they are likely to be too terrified to clear the defendants of all allegations for fear of their lives and careers.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 John T. Kelly https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png John T. Kelly2021-11-11 07:57:222021-11-15 09:14:49Sines v. Kessler Plaintiffs Coordinated with Refuse Fascism, an Anti-White Terrorist Organization
Page 2 of 27‹1234›»
RSS Feed Logo RSS Feed Logo Subscribeto RSS Feed

Kevin MacDonald on Mark Collett’s show reviewing Culture of Critique

James Edwards at the Counter-Currents Conference, Atlanta, 2022

Watch TOO Video Picks

video archives

DONATE

DONATE TO TOO

Follow us on Facebook

Keep Up To Date By Email

Subscribe to get our latest posts in your inbox twice a week.

Name

Email


Topics

Authors

Monthly Archives

RECENT TRANSLATIONS

All | Czech | Finnish | French | German | Greek | Italian | Polish | Portuguese | Russian | Spanish | Swedish

Blogroll

  • American Free Press
  • American Freedom Party
  • American Mercury
  • American Renaissance
  • Arktos Publishing
  • Candour Magazine
  • Center for Immigration Studies
  • Chronicles Magazine
  • Council of European Canadians
  • Counter-Currents
  • Curiales—Dutch nationalist-conservative website
  • Denmark's Freedom Council
  • Diversity Chronicle
  • Folktrove: Digital Library of the Third Way
  • Human Biodiversity Bibliography
  • Institute for Historical Review
  • Mondoweiss
  • Pat Buchanan
  • Paul Craig Roberts
  • Project Nova Europea
  • Red Ice
  • Richard Lynn
  • Rivers of Blood
  • Sobran's
  • The Occidental Quarterly Online
  • The Political Cesspool
  • The Raven's Call: A Reactionary Perspective
  • The Right Stuff
  • The Unz Review
  • VDare
  • XYZ: Australian Nationalist Site
NEW: Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition

Also available at Barnes & Noble

Culture of Critique

Also available at Barnes & Noble

Separation and Its Discontents
A People That Shall Dwell Alone
© 2025 The Occidental Observer - powered by Enfold WordPress Theme
  • Link to X
  • Link to Dribbble
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top

By continuing to browse the site, you are legally agreeing to our use of cookies and general site statistics plugins.

CloseLearn more

Cookie and Privacy Settings



How we use cookies

We may request cookies to be set on your device. We use cookies to let us know when you visit our websites, how you interact with us, to enrich your user experience, and to customize your relationship with our website.

Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.

Essential Website Cookies

These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.

Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, refusing them will have impact how our site functions. You always can block or delete cookies by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website. But this will always prompt you to accept/refuse cookies when revisiting our site.

We fully respect if you want to refuse cookies but to avoid asking you again and again kindly allow us to store a cookie for that. You are free to opt out any time or opt in for other cookies to get a better experience. If you refuse cookies we will remove all set cookies in our domain.

We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.

Other external services

We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.

Google Webfont Settings:

Google Map Settings:

Google reCaptcha Settings:

Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:

Privacy Policy

You can read about our cookies and privacy settings in detail on our Privacy Policy Page.

Privacy Policy
Accept settingsHide notification only