White Racial Consciousness and Advocacy

Comment on White genocide/White dispossession

I am aware of the troubling issues surrounding the ongoing White dispossession in the USA and EU. I also understand Bob Whitaker’s concern about my/AFP suggestion to drop the expression “White genocide” and replace it with “White dispossession” instead.  I am also saddened at Mr. Whitaker’s disapproval with our current support of Donald Trump’s campaign.

I did indicate to HuffPo that the expression “White genocide” sounds too strong. This is because for many people ‘genocide’ connotes an organized campaign of murder rather than the gradual replacement and disempowerment which is actually occurring. It is unquestionably true that the current process will indeed result in White genocide in the long run as Whites become an ever decreasing percentage of the population. This genocidal process is being facilitated by the fact that Whites are persecuted if they publicize any sense of White identity and interests. It is also true that miscegenation rates have risen in recent decades, and these trends will likely increase in the future if current trends continue and as Whites become an embattled, hated minority. This is genocide by any reasonable definition.

The prospect of White genocide is staring us in the face and motivates our actions, and this vision also motivates our enemies for whom a dwindling, disempowered White population holds infinite appeal. But as a political party, we have to sell our ideas to the public, and this is a non-starter for most people. They look around and see White politicians with great power (e.g., all of the current presidential candidates and very large majorities in both Houses of Congress), and they see that there are many Whites among corporate and professional leaders. Whites are still very much part of the establishment. We don’t see White people being marched off to concentration camps. Read more

Review of “Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country”

51q6IDODWPL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country
by Greg Johnson

The picture on the cover and the title of Johnson’s latest collection of essays may seem at first glance to offer something of a bromide view of White nationalism: “A nice White country” it reads above a somewhat saccharine image representing healthy White demographics from yesteryear. This sets up a current of wistful yearning, which, given our predicament — heading for minority status in our traditional homelands within decades — is discomforting.

But the vision presented by the artful simplicity of the title and cover image is central to Johnson’s whole approach, which I characterize as stating his point as unambiguously as possible, then deploying his considerable powers of reason and evidence to drive it home.

This volume brings together 38 essays, all of which appeared on Johnson’s Counter-Currents site between 2011 and 2015, and cover a wide variety of topics. Most were written in response to the events and controversies of the day, so you might expect them to vary considerably in tone and message, but, once again, as with his previous collection “New Right versus Old Right,” the book has a remarkable consistency. The essays are organized thematically instead of chronologically. Read more

Richard Spencer Podcast with Kevin MacDonald: Principle Interest

I thought this was a particularly interesting podcast — and a preview of some of the themes that are sure to be raised at the upcoming NPI conference in Washington, DC on March 5. The podcast can be accessed at the Radix: Richard Spencer Podcast with Kevin MacDonald: Principle Interest.

Trump-Red-pilled
Read more

Last Call for the 2015 NPI Conference

npi

The October 31 National Policy Institute conference is fast approaching. All the indications thus far are for an excellent turnout, but it would be great to maximize our impact by having the largest attendance possible. It will be a great chance to meet and talk with people who are on the same page in thinking about White identities and interests. People who attend will be energized and more committed than ever to the cause and ideas that bring us together.

But public gatherings like this have implications far beyond stimulating conference attendees. The left has long been aware of the power of public meetings and demonstrations — larger events naturally bring out more press coverage. There is definitely an upsurge recently in interest in White identity movements. More of our people are being quoted in mainstream publications, and the fact that the NPI conference is taking place in the political media center of the US is a definite plus. We are aiming at creating an environment where ideas related to White identity and interests are a normal part of public conversation—as they inevitably will become given the current immigration onslaught against our people.

Information on registration can be accessed at the NPI events page.

P. J. O’Rourke on Ann Coulter: Not-So-Deep Thinking about Race, Anti-Semitism, etc.

pj_orourke-620x412-620x372 (1)

I suppose I should cut P. J. O’Rourke some slack. Like him, I was once on the hippie-dippy left during the 60s, and I know it’s hard to get over that. But there are limits. His “She said what?” in the Weekly Standard is an important reminder of how far there is to go to have intelligent discussion of Jewish issues in the mainstream media. O’Rourke, who, it must be stipulated, is a very entertaining writer, wants to call himself a conservative. The sad reality is that he is just the sort of cuckservative who is welcome at The Weekly Standard. As James Fulford points out at VDARE, he has Utopian ideas on race, maintaining that Haitians immigrants are just as acceptable as the Irish — or perhaps even more so if they had to struggle to get here, because, after all, being aggressive enough to get here illegally means that you would be crime-free, have a high IQ, and not be assertive about demanding free stuff paid for by previous waves of White immigrants. Or maybe not.

The main point of this is to discuss O’Rourke’s ideas on Jews and anti-Semitism, but a few preliminaries are in order. He thinks that because the Indians got here first, that Europeans have no right to defend their conquest:

She’s from Connecticut and is very upset about immigrants. I am willing to lend a sympathetic ear to people from Connecticut who are very upset about immigrants, if they have a tribal casino.

But why stop at Native Americans? What about the tsunami of migrants entering European homelands? Would nativism and nationalism by native Europeans be okay?  But the same attitudes and forces welcoming the displacement of Europeans in the US are resulting in the displacement of Europeans from lands they have dominated for thousands of years. And we hear the same charges of “racism” and “Nazism” thrown at opponents of immigration in both Europe and the U.S. Focusing on the tribal casinos ignores  the problems facing European societies everywhere. Read more

Talmud and Taboo: Part One of Two

‘We want Jews and Israelis to feel safe in Europe. … We must stand united against Islamism and jihadism.’
Christian Mayerhoff, PEGIDA Spokesperson, January 2015.

I greatly enjoyed watching David Duke’s recent taboo-busting confrontation with Alex Jones. Duke excelled, getting his facts across in a calm and almost irresistible manner. Even during the earliest stages of the debate Jones looked ill-informed and uneasy, resorting, as so many commentators have when confronted by Duke’s erudition, to giggling juvenile jibes at KKK “wizards, goblins and cyclops.”

As the show came to its conclusion I found myself reflecting on an earlier taboo-busting confrontation involving Duke, and the broader implications of decisions to silence discussion of negative Jewish influences on our society. We are all well aware that this topic is off-limits in mainstream discourse. What I am instead referring to is the taboo as it exists in the alternative sphere, specifically in the political and cultural expressions of White advocacy.

To point to just one well-known example, it’s now more than nine years since Henry Wolff penned “Jews and  American Renaissance,” discussing the role of Jews in the White advocacy movement. I acknowledge that AmRen plays an important role in the White advocacy movement and that it is quite possibly good strategy to encourage several strategies rather than put all our eggs in one basket in a situation where no strategy seems particularly effective at the moment. Nevertheless, Wolff’s brief apologetic is worth discussing because, if true, it would have implications for the  broader White advocacy movement.

Wolff argued for the untroubled participation of Jews in the White advocacy movement, and for a move away from an allegedly ill-founded, harmful and counterproductive focus on Jewish influence. The article appeared in the aftermath of the now-notorious 2006 AmRen conference during which, according to Wolff, “one participant” allegedly told a Jewish conferee that Jews were not welcome. I concede that I wasn’t present at the conference, but in the footage that I have seen no such statement is made. It’s now common knowledge that David Duke, rightly or wrongly depending on your perspective, took the opportunity during a question session with Guillaume Faye to make known several historical facts relating to the specific issue of Jewish disloyalty. The footage then shows Duke being interrupted and subjected to foul language by Jewish social scientist Michael Hart, apparently the sole malcontent, who then abruptly departed from the venue. Duke at no point addressed Hart directly, nor did he make reference to any Jews in attendance. What Duke had in fact done was to break a prevailing taboo on the discussion of Jewish influence within that organization. Read more

RadixJournal.com essay contest for young writers

RadixJournal.com is proud to announce its first annual essay contest for young writers!

There’s only one month left to submit entries.  Visit our contest page for more details.

The topic—Why I’m an Identitarian—is broad and can be addressed from a variety of perspectives. Essays could take into account culture, geopolitics, race and ethnicity, society, technology, and more. They could deal with the history or future political expression of European identity. Or they could discuss the writer’s personal journey to these ideals.

For ideas, writers are encouraged to read my “conversation starter” on Identitarianism.

PRIZES

The best essay will be awarded $500. The awardee will also be granted complimentary registration to NPI’s 2015 conference, Become Who We Are, and lodging in Washington, DC, for the weekend (October 30-November 1).

Three additional prizes of $100 will be awarded to essays of merit.

JUDGES

Gregory Hood
William Regnery
Richard Spencer

SUBMISSION

All essays must be recieved by September 15, 2015.

Submissions should be made online using the form below. Files should be uploaded in DOC, DOCX, RTF, TXT, MARKDOWN, or PAGES format.

You can upload your essay here.

Each essay must be accompanied by contact information (a name and email address) as well as the name that should appear as the byline should the essay be published. Writers are encouraged to use pseudonyms, though they are not required. We respect your privacy and will not share personal information.

RULES

Each contestant must be 30 years old or younger as September 15, 2015. Winners will be required to submit proof of age.

The contest is open to anyone around the world. Essays must be written in English and be between 1,500 and 3,000 words.

Submitting an essay grants RadixJournal.com the right to edit and publish it.

Good luck!