White Victimization

Kevin DeAnna on Arktos: The European Civil War Starts Again

/11 Comments/in , , /by

The European Civil War Starts Again

Kevin DeAnna pays tribute to Charlie Kirk, Iryna Zarutska, and Liana Kassai, arguing that their killings inaugurate a new age of martyrdom and struggle for the future of European peoples.

Historically, Western Civilization has existed as a unity. From the Greek alliance against the Persians, to Rome, to the Crusades, the West has found its highest expression when it fights as one. Since the rise of the nation-state, such expressions have been few. In many ways, the entire twentieth century was one great European Civil War, with the global right and left warring over the destiny of Western Man. The victor was not the Communists nor the traditional Right but the extra-European, American creed of individual liberation and international capitalism. In the eyes of critics like Julius Evola, this was a foreign conquest as dangerous as that of Soviet Communism.

Yet, while it is rational for Europeans to oppose American interference on the Continent, it does not change the reality. Despite repeated boasts of European “strategic autonomy” from figures like Emmanuel Macron, the EU has failed to chart a course separate from Washington, and in many ways seems more committed to center-left transatlantic institutions than America itself. The more traditionalist and arguably authentic European Right remains submerged and politically marginalized, while Donald Trump, despite his failures, provides a rallying point for Western patriots worldwide. We can mourn that America has become the Metropole of the West, but what happens in the United States affects everything that happens in Europe.

“The past European conflicts over borders, language, and empires fade to insignificance as we see the war raging within each of our countries.”

The killings of Iryna Zarutska, Liana Kassai, and Charlie Kirk could provide an unexpected spur to united action. The murder of Zarutska is almost overdone in its scripted poignancy – a beautiful Ukrainian refugee, practically a poster child for the sympathetic victim that the neoliberal establishment has been championing. She received shelter in America, exactly the kind of case that the liberal media would use as a club against the Trump Administration’s anti-immigration and arguably anti-Ukrainian policies. She got a job and begins making her way in the big city, almost a walking advertisement for progressives who want a living rebuttal to nativism, patriarchy, and Putinism.

All this was annihilated overnight as she was butchered before the uncaring denizens of Chicago by a career felon who was already arrested more than a dozen times. Decarlos Brown Jr. was released by a magistrate on the basis of a “written promise” he would show up for court, despite numerous past offenses and wild rantings to police that materials in his body were controlling his action. Despite his supposed insanity, he somehow managed to expertly ambush the one white girl within his car from behind, avoiding potentially more dangerous targets. Audio after the event suggests that he muttered “got that white girl” to himself as Zarutska bled out on the dirty floor, fodder for cell phone footage by gawking spectators. Needless to say, the murderer has already been referred to mental health counseling, and we await the inevitable ruling that he cannot be held criminally responsible.

The manner of Zarutska’s end also made her immortal. In shock from the sudden stabbing, she curls in a fetal position and looks up fearfully, almost childlike in appearance. As life drains from her, she sobs while the other passengers on the train ignore her. She then slides off the seat, dead within seconds. There is no gore or fountain of blood, but a combination of vulnerability and beauty that can’t help but inspire rage and a frustrated desire to protect her in every white man that viewed it. Her final moment is iconic, and it compels and yet sickens one to look upon it.

In her, we also see the countless other victims of terrorism and crime, mostly committed by non-whites throughout Europe. It’s impossible not to think of Liana Kassai, another Ukrainian refugee killed at a train station in August, this time in Germany. She was reportedly killed by an Iraqi refugee who had been denied asylum. German authorities initially suspected suicide, though the victim’s family immediately objected. In this case too, we are told the alleged murderer is schizophrenic. Despite his asylum request being denied, the alleged killer remained in the country for years.

Angela Merkel’s boast of “Wir schaffen das” appears doubly tragic, as the Fatherland’s inability to assimilate millions of resentful Muslims now compromises its ability to shelter its European kinsmen fleeing from war. The bright promises of European unity and even the German rearmament supposedly needed to guard the Continent against Russian aggression are especially hollow when refugees are in danger from non-European migrants admitted by Berlin itself. History is rebuking Mutti Merkel, with reality showing Europeans that no, we cannot do this, we cannot admit unlimited numbers of migrants from the Third World and remain who we are.

The assassination of Charlie Kirk is the capstone to this trifecta of tragedy. Kirk was a singular figure on the American Right. Only 31, no one in recent political history has filled so many roles. The founder and lead organizer of the most powerful campus conservative organization, he was also a talk show host, a political organizer who helped win the last presidential election, a close ally and advisor of the White House, a campus speaker, and an online fixture. No one else was simultaneously pushing the margins of political debate while remaining relevant within the mainstream, advocating realistic policies from within the corridors of power while simultaneously widening the Overton Window.

For the extremely online Dissident Right, Charlie Kirk and TPUSA were something of a joke years ago, famously confronted during the first “Groyper War” by activists pressuring him on immigration, anti-white discrimination, Israel, and other issues. Recently, however, Kirk had shifted his rhetoric away from Conservatism Inc. bromides. He proclaimed that there was undeniably a war on whites. He told whites to be proud of who they were. He called for ending the “H1B visa scam.” His final post on X read: “If we want things to change, it’s 100% necessary to politicize the senseless murder of Iryna Zarutska because it was politics that allowed a savage monster with 14 priors to be free on the streets to kill her.” The hard right did not appreciate Kirk until he was martyred, and many of us found to our shock that his opinions were not so different from ours after all.

Despite a deeply dishonest effort by media to muddy the waters, it appears the killer is exactly what most people expected: a progressive radicalized by the violent cults of “antifascism” and transgenderism. Though he was raised in a conservative family, it appears Tyler Robinson converted to the clichés of the modern egalitarian religion and felt he had not just the right but the duty to kill Kirk because he was a “hater.” Perhaps more than the killing itself, it is the reaction to the murder that has radicalized the Right. Soldiers, nurses, teachers, government workers, emergency dispatchers, and others in positions that Americans depend on in their most vulnerable moments have revealed themselves as reveling in the public execution of one of mainstream conservatism’s most beloved figures, one whose entire approach was characterized by a dedication to open debate with even his most militant opponents.

Yet what is most remarkable about the assassination of Kirk is how it has echoed around the world. In England, his name, along with that of Iryna and Liana, was cited by activists at the Unite the Kingdom rally. In Vienna and Leipzig, impromptu monuments to Iryna and Kirk were created, and then promptly targeted and destroyed by antifa. In Poland, Dariusz Matecki held up a picture of Iryna on the floor of the Sejm while proclaiming “White Lives Matter.” The names of our martyrs are known throughout the West.

“This struggle is forging a new civilizational identity, if for no other reason than that we face the same enemy pursuing the same goal of the Great Replacement.”

The past European conflicts over borders, language, and empires fade to insignificance as we see the war raging within each of our countries. While whites cling to post-racial illusions, non-whites within our countries put race first in both political and personal disputes. Unlike in the last European Civil War, leftists do not fight in the name of class justice, but in solidarity with non-whites to defeat “hate” and “racism.” Whatever local issues confront us, the essentials of mass immigration, crime, anti-white discrimination, and the repression of right-wing figures are common to Europeans worldwide. This struggle is forging a new civilizational identity, if for no other reason than that we face the same enemy pursuing the same goal of the Great Replacement.

Few of those on the authentic Right can have any illusions that American-style “conservatism” offers a way out of the death spiral of the West. Yet that is secondary. What matters is the forging of a constituency and ultimately a people that is aware it is under deadly, existential threat. The assassination of Kirk and the butchery of Iryna and Liana have brought that home to millions. “Our fellow citizens” mean nothing compared to those of kindred blood who have felt the pain of these losses and rallied against them. The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church – and the Faith is Europe, and Europe is the Faith.

Kevin DeAnna, popularly known under the pen name James Kirkpatrick, is the author of Conservatism Inc., available from Arktos.

THE CHARLOTTESVILLE LEGAL STRUGGLE CONTINUES!

/1 Comment/in , , /by

As many of you are aware, I have been in bankruptcy court fighting the multi-million dollar debt incurred from the absurd Sines v. Kessler ruling. While I will continue to call bullshit on the conspiracy allegations to the day I die, for legal purposes the arguments in bankruptcy court are of a different nature. Currently, the plaintiffs have been claiming that the debt incurred is not dischargeable, despite a clause in the law itself specifically stating that those found liable on a conspiracy allegation can discharge their debt so long as they themselves did not cause the actual damages.

The bankruptcy exception under 11 U.S. Code 523(6) states:

A discharge under… this title does not discharge an individual debtor for any debt for willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity.

The critical language is “for… injury by the debtor”

The so-called “injuries” in the Sines v Kessler case were all alleged to have been caused by the actions of other individuals. Not myself. In fact, I was not even present when a single one of these injuries occurred!

Despite my attorney pointing this out in his argument, Judge Ronald Sargis ignored the law and sided with the plaintiffs bizarre argument which conflates two legal concepts from entirely different jurisdictions and areas of law.

He observed that, in Virginia civil suits, an individual or business entity can, in some cases, be legally liable for the actions of another person via respondent superior (aka vicarious liability). An example of this is if an employee of a company negligently or wantonly injures a customer, the customer can sue the company itself, and it is legally responsible.

Then he applied that logic to federal bankruptcy law (which is an entirely independent area of law) and concluded that, because VA civil liability acknowledges vicarious liability, then the federal exception statute for bankruptcy (which states that “the debtor” must physically harm someone or some property) should also be subject to vicarious liability.

This is an entirely malicious interpretation of the law based on a genocidal hatred of of White people. This ruling is ultimately not about me. It is about sending a message that any White man who publicly rejects the ethnic cleansing of our people will be dragged through the system for years on end.

Despite this, I have not given up hope. Legally, the ruling is so absurd that there is a good chance a higher court will overturn it or risk setting an entirely new precedent that would overthrow long-standing bankruptcy law. While I have already filed a notice of appeal, the process will require raising another $3,000 for the fees involved that I cannot afford. If you would like to contribute to my my legal fight against this judicial corruption, click on the link below to the Free Expression Foundation (FEF) and make a donation. Please ensure to write in the notes that the donation is to go to my appeal, as I am not the only individual being represented by the FEF.

DONATE

As always, anything donated to the Free Expression Foundation that is not needed for my case will go to the defense of others. Thank you for your support. I could not continue without all of you.

The need for a White Minorities Movement

/30 Comments/in , , , /by

The 2011 census revealed that across London, Leicester, Luton and Slough, approximately 4.5 million White British people already live as a minority. The release of the census results was significant as it legitimised what British Nationalism has been saying for years about the extent of mass immigration. No longer can opponents of demographic change be smeared as playing on peoples fears or as ‘racist’ by advocates of structural racism theories as if we had ‘White Privilege’, why would we allow ourselves to become a minority?

Now provides the perfect opportunity to launch a movement representing these new white minorities as being a localised minority but a majority of the population nationally enables us to warn of the dangers of demographic change whilst we still have time to motivate the remaining majority to do something about it.

Brexit changes everything- not just because UKIP is now out of the picture- but most crucially because politicians can no longer use discussing Eastern European immigration as a way to talk about immigration without mentioning demographic change. By combining our traditional cultural and security focused arguments with social, economic and political arguments against demographic change we can back the main parties into a corner as, whilst the main parties can try to argue that immigration is good for voters through bringing in tax receipts to pay for pensions, they can’t say the same about their own voters becoming a minority.

People only vote for the main parties as they think they are the only ones capable of governing, providing economic security and safeguarding public services. If we can prove that the rapid demographic change the main parties support undermines this, then we can build a mass movement. It’s impossible to argue in favour of becoming a minority without the main parties exposing their hatred of their own population.

So what does becoming a minority mean really mean for peoples everyday lives? Read more

Blacks As Emotional Abusers of Whites: The Exploration of a Possibility

/113 Comments/in , , /by

There is an aggressive, unreasonable, even neurotic, quality in the outlook and behavior of blacks toward whites currently that wasn’t present — at least not nearly to this extent — in prior decades.  The term that captures this quality or thrust for me: it is abusive of white people.  I think it may be helpful to look at black-white relations in our time from an abuse angle.

Recently, I wrote an article for this magazine that recounted episodes on the Dartmouth and Yale campuses.

A group of blacks, shouting Black Lives Matter chants and wielding protest signs burst into the Dartmouth University library where several dozen white students were studying.  “Stand the fuck up you filthy racist white pieces of shit!” they screamed.  They pushed and shoved the young white women and men.  One of the women, pinned to the wall with the blacks yelling “filthy white bitch” in her face, began to cry.   “Fuck your white tears,” one of her attackers sneered.   [The white students acquiesced to this attack on them, and as far as I know, no one at the university came to their defense.]

At Yale University a black female student snarled at a white male faculty member who also was an adviser in a residence college: “Who the fuck hired you?  You should not sleep at night!  You are disgusting!”  His response was to say that the student had “broken his heart.”  He apologized to her — “I have disappointed you and I’m truly sorry”—and then he resigned. 1

I don’t recall this wild-eyed, in-your-face, attack-mode behavior directed at individual white people in prior times.   This conduct is abusive.  And I have the distinct impression that if this kind of thing had happened to white students or faculty back then they wouldn’t have rolled up in a ball and taken it in the way whites did in these instances. Read more

The Riddle of Rotherham: “Mad Ash,” White Trash and the Hostile Elite

/65 Comments/in , , , , /by

The Yorkshire town of Rotherham, that hotspot of vibrancy, is back in the news. A gang of Pakistani Muslims (and two White women) have just been jailed for what the judge described as an “appalling catalogue” of sex-crimes against under-aged White girls. The ringleader, Arshid “Mad Ash” Hussain, received 35 years; his brothers Basharat and Bannaras received 25 and 19 years respectively. According to their victims, the gang seemed to “rule Rotherham,” committing brazen crimes “with impunity” for two decades. And there are lots more like them. A lawyer has said: “This trial is just the first of many and it is the tip of a very big iceberg.”

“Tip of a very big iceberg”: Mad Ash & Co.

“Tip of a very big iceberg”: Mad Ash & Co.

The Rotherham Triangle

And there you see one of the deep mysteries about the vibrant rape-gangs of modern Britain. In smarmy liberal terminology, the Rotherham criminals are of “Pakistani heritage.” Pakistan was once part of the British Raj, an empire created when India was conquered by relatively small numbers of Whites from vast numbers of non-Whites. Whatever your opinion of British imperialism, this was an impressive military and strategic achievement. The higher intelligence, technology and organization of Whites gave them a decisive advantage over less intelligent and less organized non-Whites. Read more

Reply to Ron Unz

/in /by

Ron Unz has been busy lately dealing with his critics. This is good news because it means that the word is getting out about his meritocracy paper. His most recent excursion was a beat down of of a 3500-word comment by Prof. Andrew Gelman (“Meritocracy: Response to Prof. Gelman on Jewish Elite Overrepresentation“). Unz defends his analysis that on Jewish overrepresentation quite well. However, toward the end, he attempts to lump my critique in with Gelman’s:

Still, [Gelman and Jane Mertz] are hardly alone in such carelessness.  By a remarkable coincidence, their critique was published almost simultaneously with that of a critical column by Prof. Kevin MacDonald, whose focus of greatest interest seems very similar to that of Prof. Mertz.  In Prof. MacDonald’s case, he chided me for no longer discussing the Jewish aspects of my analysis.  Apparently he, too, had failed to notice the same column of mine missed by Prof. Mertz.

In fact, I had noticed Unz’s previous column (“Unz on meritocracy: Yale debate and surname analysis“). Indeed, I linked to it toward the end of my article because it referred to several of his public appearances where he seems to focus entirely on discrimination against Asians. It therefore buttressed my point that Unz’s public comments at Yale and elsewhere, including his NRO article, have ignored the plight of non-Jewish Whites and have even failed to mention Jewish overrepresentation.

I am glad that Unz is defending his analysis of the data on Jews in these online exchanges because I have no quarrel with his analysis. It’s just that the real message of his data is that non-Jewish Whites are being discriminated against because of the huge overrepresentation of Jews. Again, the point of my column is that Asians are being discriminated against only with respect to Jews; when Jews and non-Jewish Whites are combined into one category, as is the practice by universities, there is no discernible discrimination against Asians. Moreover, when compared to Jews, Asians are being discriminated against far less than are non-Jewish Whites. But you would never know this from accounts of Unz’s public appearances, his NRO article, or in accounts of Unz’s work by writers like David Brooks in the New York Times mentioned in my column. Read more

Why has Ron Unz stopped talking about discrimination against non-Jewish Whites?

/1 Comment/in , , /by

Ron Unz’s meritocracy article is an important analysis of discrimination against non-Jewish Whites in admission to elite universities. But you wouldn’t know it by following his recent writing and public presentations. For example, a recent article posted on National Review Online (“Racial Quotas, Harvard, and the legacy of Bakke“) focused entirely on his findings on Asian Americans. No mention of non-Jewish Whites.

This obvious omission did not go unnoticed. In “The Minimum Wage, Immigration, and Affirmative Action“, Unz mentions “a prominent conservative hardliner, someone very critical of the Republican establishment, who wondered why my sole focus had been on Asians, rather than on the white victims of affirmative action in college admissions.”

I suspect that the conservative hardliner is concerned about the effects of Ivy League practices on non-Jewish White Americans, and, in any case, that is certainly my concern. But Unz doesn’t touch on this issue, preferring instead to chastise Republicans for focusing on quotas rather than other more subtle and less rigid forms of racial preference. I agree that the Republicans have avoided addressing racial presferences. But in his reply Unz makes it sound as though there is no problem at all with White enrollment:

On average, white percentages have declined substantially over the last twenty years, but so has the white fraction of the college-age population, and the two trends have generally moved in parallel.  The range of white percentages across the Ivy League in 1990 was roughly as wide as the range today, with no sign of collusion or “quotas” in either case.

But in his original article Unz showed that Asians aren’t being discriminated at all in terms of the admission to Harvard compared to Whites ( including Jews and Whites in one category). The ratio of Asian Harvard students compared to the Asian share of National Merit semifinalists is 63%, whereas for Whites (including Jews) the comparable ratio is 61%. That is, both groups are represented at Harvard at just over 60% of what they would be in a completely meritocratic system; the shortfall from a meritocratic result is due to affirmative action for Blacks and Latinos, as well as international students and students who don’t declare their race.

So Asians are not being discriminated against compared to Whites at all, if Jews are included in the White category. Read more