White Victimization

Part 2 of Connelly on White Victimization

/75 Comments/in , , , /by

Part 2 of Edmund Connelly’s article on White victimization is posted. I was unaware of the following quote from Solzhenitsyn that Connelly found on Israel Shamir’s website:

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn summed up the process during the Bolshevik Revolution, when the

executed army officers were Russians, the noblemen, priests, monks, deputies were  Russians. . . . In 1920s, the pre-revolutionary engineers and scientists were exiled or killed. They were Russians, while their place was taken by Jews. The best Russian Psychiatric institute in Moscow, its Russian members were arrested or exiled, while their place was taken by the Jews. Important Jewish doctors blocked the advancement of Russian medical scientists. The best intellectual and artistic elites of Russian people were killed, while the Jews grew and flourished in these (deadly for Russians) years.

It’s passages like this that make an English translation of Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together essential. Americans must be made aware of the enormous risks that lie ahead when White political power diminishes and Jews continue to be a hostile elite.

Solzhenitsyn shows that the Bolshevik revolution meant the rise of Jews in psychiatry. The following passage from Ch. 4 of Culture of Critique shows that the result of Jewish domination of psychiatry in the USSR was that psychoanalysis became official dogma. It also shows the strong overlap among Jews, psychoanalysis, and political radicalism. As noted throughout CofC, psychoanalysis proved to be a very useful tool in constructing theories in which White identity and interests were analyzed as a sign of psychiatric disorder. To some extent, this revolution has already occurred bloodlessly in the West since WWII, given the influence of the Frankfurt School and other Jewish intellectual movements in the contemporary world. Psychoanalysis has died a well-deserved death and for that we should all be grateful. But the theoretical basis for rejecting White identity and interests has simply migrated to other pathologies of the academic left.

This belief in the curative powers of sexual freedom coincided with a leftist political agenda common to the vast majority of Jewish intellectuals of the period and reviewed throughout this book. This leftist political agenda proved to be a recurrent theme throughout the history of psychoanalysis. Support of radical and Marxist ideals was common among Freud’s early followers, and leftist attitudes were common in later years among psychoanalysts (Hale 1995, 31; Kurzweil 1989, 36, 46–47, 284; Torrey 1992, 33, 93ff, 122–123), as well as in Freudian inspired offshoots such as Erich Fromm, Wilhelm Reich (see below) and Alfred Adler. (Kurzweil [1989, 287] terms Adler the leader of “far left” psychoanalysis, noting that Adler wanted to immediately politicize teachers as radicals rather than wait for the perfection of psychoanalysis to do so.) The apex of the association between Marxism and psychoanalysis came in the 1920s in the Soviet Union, where all the top psychoanalysts were Bolsheviks, Trotsky supporters, and among the most powerful political figures in the country (see Chamberlain 1995). (Trotsky himself was an ardent enthusiast of psychoanalysis.) This group organized a government-sponsored State Psychoanalytical Institute and developed a program of “pedology” aimed at producing the “new Soviet man” on the basis of psychoanalytic principles applied to the education of children. The program, which encouraged sexual precocity in children, was put into practice in state-run schools.

Bookmark and Share

Kevin MacDonald: Edmund Connelly on White Victimization

/50 Comments/in , /by

Kevin MacDonald: Edmund Connelly’s current TOO article (God Helps Those Who Help Themselves) is fittingly subtitled “The Beginnings of White Victimization in Multicultural America.” As he emphasizes, we can already see Whites being targeted by criminals because they are White, with little or no concern on the part of either the media or the government. But these trends are likely to increase in the future as Whites edge closer to becoming a minority with less political power. Anyone with common sense and an appreciation for the brutal history of ethnic conflict around the world must realize that voluntarily becoming an ethnic minority carries huge risks, especially when many of the groups who will collectively become a majority have historically conditioned grudges against the White population. Some of these historical grudges are real enough, while others are mainly the imaginings of ethnic activists intent on rewriting history to suit their current ethnic agendas. (My favorite is the lachrymose view of Jewish history in which for 2000 years Jews have been helpless, innocent victims of irrational hatred by Europeans.)

But in the end, it matters little.  Connelly makes an analogy to the Bolshevik revolution, quoting the Black Book of Communism, “The Bolshevik leaders encouraged anything that might promote this aspiration to ‘social revenge’ among the masses seeing it as a moral legitimization of the terror, or what Lenin called ‘the just civil war.’” Right now, the media ignores brutal Black on White crimes while fomenting moral panics when some college students at UC-San Diego failed to express officially sanctioned attitudes on Black History Month. (The LA Times has had 13 articles on this crisis, with no end in sight.) This demonization of Whites is the first step in large scale murderous revenge.

And yet the vast majority of White Americans would doubtless choose their own extinction rather than suffer the opprobrium of being called a racist for expressing their legitimate ethnic interests. The anti-White revolution has been internalized among Whites. It reminds me of a book by Jewish activist Alan Dershowitz. The plot of Just Revenge is that a Jew finds a German officer responsible for the death of his family and convinces the German to commit suicide in repentance for his crimes.  Decades of propaganda emanating from the most elite academic and media institutions has resulted in a White population that is overcome with guilt — guilt to the point of suicide. The first step is to change that. 

More Marriage, Less Rape

/19 Comments/in /by

Reginald Thompson: Research shows that remaining unmarried greatly increases the chances that a woman will be raped, while living with a husband greatly decreases her chances of being raped.

According to the FBI Crime Victimization Survey, the average unmarried female over the age of 12 had a 0.37% chance of being raped or sexually assaulted in 2006.

In contrast, the average married female over the age of 12 had only a 0.04% chance of being raped or sexually assaulted that year.

That’s a staggering risk factor for single women of being 9.3 times more likely to be raped!

Now you might think this is due to single women tending to be younger, and younger women being more likely to be raped. But that idea is refuted by the fact that divorced women, on average older than single women, are even more likely to be raped than single women are.

Divorced or seperated women had a 0.43% chance of being raped or sexually assaulted in 2006, which means they had a 10.8 times greater chance of being raped than the married women did, and a 16% greater chance than the Single women.

Intriguingly, single women are also 3.7 times more likely to be subjected to violent crime than married women are, while being 5.5 times more likely to be subjected to completed violence.

Also, they are 4.9 times more likely to be robbed, 3.1 times more likely to be subjected to aggravated assault, and 3.5 times more likely to be subjected to simple assault.

So single women are at an elevated risk for all kinds of violent crime, but none so much as rape and sexual assault.  This is doubtless due to the sexual nature of the relationship between a husband and wife, and the fact that by marrying a man, a woman provides herself with a physically stronger companion who has a profound evolutionary interest in protecting her sexuality.

But does it follow from these findings that if women spent more of their lives married, the overall rape rate would decline?

Or would rapists just compensate by raping the remaining single women at a higher rate?

To find out I got the rape rate for 18 years from 1960 to 2007, and checked it against the median age at first marriage for women in those years.  What I found was a very strong +.602 correlation between the rape rate and median age at first marriage for women, with a statistically significant P Value of .008.

This means that 36% of the explosive increase in rape from 1960 to 2007 is explained simply by the catastrophic trend of more and more American women delaying marriage until later in life.

In sharp contrast, variation in median age at first marriage explains only a paltry 3.3% of the variation in the overall crime rate. This shows that there’s something very special about the relationship between age at first marriage and rape, and that the correlation between them isn’t just a question of median age at first marriage corresponding with some other factor that has an influence on crime.

Given this data, it is clear that anyone who actually has the best interests of women at heart will encourage them to get married as early in life as is reasonably possible.

Reginald Thompson is the Pen Name of an Advisor to an International Software Company. He lives on the American East Coast and is proprietor/manager of a recently created Blog called Statsaholic.

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark and Share