Excerpt from K. M. Breakey’s novel “Britain on the Brink”

Jack Campbell’s life is perfectly splendid. Lovely wife. Sweet children. Lucrative career in London’s hallowed financial sector. However, Jack can’t help but notice – England is suddenly no longer English. His best mate Ozzie’s been harping on the issue for years, and lately it’s impossible to ignore.

Was this outcome accidental? Or malicious betrayal? It’s starting to feel a lot like the latter, and Jack fears a dark and dystopian future for his kids. But what can he do? What can anyone do?

Abruptly, a little bit of magic appears in Jack’s life when he’s mysteriously transported back in time for a grand adventure in 1960s England. For a few glorious moments, Jack is home again. With his people. His kith and kin. Precious England as she once was. When the strange phenomenon happens again, amidst his utter astonishment, Jack sees an opportunity to change the course of British history.

Before long, he’s keeping company with historical figures like Enoch Powell, and operating in alternate worlds where things turn out drastically different. But can Jack change the actual world? And does he really want to when changing the past is fraught with peril and paradox?

In Britain on the Brink, a new hero emerges in the fight to save the West. And by Jove, he’s ready to do battle.

1. White Male “Privilege”

London, England

May 22, 2025

Jack Campbell took a seat in the posh penthouse boardroom. On the docket: Corporate Excellence Through Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. Good Lord. Jack despised the nonsense and would tell you as much in private.

But he didn’t say so publicly. No one did. Not in UniBank’s hallowed halls. Because DEI demanded respect and wielded power. Some UK institutions were pushing back, following the Trump/Musk juggernaut in America. Not UniBank. They remained all in. Diversity is at the heart of everything we do.

Jack played along, even put pronouns in his signature. He learned early in his career – corporate life involves indignities, even occasional soulselling. This was merely another hoop to jump through.

He was a Senior Executive at UniBank, one of the UK’s largest financial institutions, a behemoth with tentacles in over a hundred countries. He joined in 2003 and worked his way up the ladder. He had a sharp mind, a steady hand, and his baritone carried a natural authority. He was the archetype white male executive – tall, handsome, charming. Ruthlessly efficient.

His workday was a steady stream of strategy sessions, high-stakes calls, and complex (sometimes shady) M&A deals in far-flung locations with regulatory grey areas. This had been Jack’s world for twentyplus years. It was rough and tumble – full of ego, conflict, and testosterone.

He mostly stayed above the fray, navigating the politics with finesse and building alliances to consolidate power and influence. Despite layers of bureaucracy, Jack was known as a man who got things done, no fuss.

He knew how to play the game, but the game was changing. Correction: the game had changed. This insidious Wokeism Beast had slithered and squirmed into the bank’s corporate corridors – as if red tape and regulation wasn’t bad enough.

It seemed harmless at first, but like an infection, it morphed and mutated and grew to the point that it seemed it may eventually destroy its host. Jack had seen it destroy a few careers and put a glass ceiling on others. Inevitably, its victims were that once alpha species known as the white male. They deserved it, so said the doctrine.

Jack studied the instructor. Chantelle Williams was a black female. No surprise, they almost always were. The fake eyelashes, fake nails, and blonde weave combined to give her a clownish countenance. Ghoulish even. She was also morbidly obese, but for her it was not a bother. Her self-esteem was off the charts.

The bank was paying her great gobs of money to shit on everything in sight, especially white people. We’re lucky to have her, said the Director of HR, another black female. Chantelle had the jargon down pat – allyship, microaggressions, intersectionality. Words that didn’t exist a few years prior.

When the Orwellian torture session mercifully ended, Jack said a prayer of thanks and bolted for the door. Not only was it 5:00 p.m. it was Friday. And it was his birthday. Fun times awaited.

On the tube home, he observed the same sign he saw every day: Hey Straight White Man, Pass the Power. He shook his head. The insolence. The audacity. All taxpayerfunded, of course.

He shook it off. Nothing was going to dampen his spirits.

 

2. Another Lap Around the Sun

Lily and the kids greeted Jack at the door. “Happy Birthday, Daddy!” Finn and Lucy screamed in unison.

“Thanks, kiddos,” he swooped down for a hug and a kiss before turning attention to his wife. “Hello, beautiful. I survived another week.”

“You survived another year,” said Lily. “Happy forty-third, darling.”

Bloody heck Nora, I’m forty-three, am I?”

Lily nodded with a grin. “Fifty’s right around the corner.”

“I need a drink on the double.”

“Go on, Ozzie’s already here.”

Jack strolled with purpose into the living room.

“Welcome home, sir.” Ozzie bowed solemnly.

“Stand up straight you silly man.”

“Sorry, me Dad taught me to respect me elders.”

“I’m younger than you, mate.”

“Will you get the old folks’ discount at the pub now?”

Jack mixed a generous gin and tonic. “Where is everyone? I’m not stuck with you all night, am I?”

“Hey, it’s your party.”

Jack grinned at his best pal. “You were right about the struggle session.”

“Oh yeah, not letting up an inch?”

Jack shook his head. “Pedal to the metal.”

“Told ya.”

That kiss-ass Morgan lapped it up. What a broken man he is.

“Sorta like Steady Eddie?”

It’s an issue of class, not race,” Jack mimicked their liberal friend Edward. “Tell ya what, I may be VP, but I’m low man on the totem pole at these bloody events.”

“You’re not allowed to say totem pole.”

Jack feigned shock and horror. “This bloody wokeness thing, whatever it is, it’s taken over at the bank.”

“Be honest, mate. It’s taken over the bloody country. The commies are in charge now.”

“I should’ve explained that to the instructor,” said Jack.

Ozzie scoffed. “She wouldn’t appreciate the nuance. Too stupid, I guarantee it.”

Just then, young Finn dashed through the room – a blur of youthful energy. “Slow down, champ,” Jack scolded with a grin. My God, what will England be like when Finn comes of age? A scary thought, and not the first time it crossed Jack’s mind.

Edward Squire and his wife entered, pulling Jack from the rueful reverie. “Steady Eddie,” he and Ozzie called out in unison. The nickname, coined years ago, had stuck like glue. Eddie was calm, cool, collected. Nothing fazed him. Not even the rape and pillage of his native land. He was a raging lefty, and a target of ridicule for Ozzie.

Another couple followed, then another. The room swelled with hearty greetings and banter among familiar chums. Cocktails were proffered and before long conversation turned to football, as it often does at English gatherings.

“Don’t start. Our side always comes round.” Ozzie was a United supporter, and his Red Devils were off to a terrible start. “We’ve more trophies than your lot could dream of.”

“You’re living in the past, Ozzie.”

“Ha, I would if I could.”

“Don’t get him started,” said Eddie.

“We’ll be on top again soon, don’t you worry.”

“You’ve been saying that for years. Christ, how many managers you had since Fergie?”

“We’ve got history, mate. What’ve you got with bloody Arsenal? Sweet sod all.” Ozzie and Jack bellowed laughter.

“Keep laughing, lads,” said Eddie. “We’re playing beautiful football. Odegaard’s class. And Saka’s better than half your team combined.”

“Enjoy it while it lasts,” Jack chimed in. “You’re good ’til Christmas, then you lot fold like a cheap tent.”

“We’re runner-up the last two years.”

“Christ sakes, he’s proud o’ second place.”

Jack lapped up the banter. Friendly fire now but with Cup Matches it could come to blows. Literally. Jack was a Liverpool man, like his Daddy, and his Daddy’s Daddy.

“And for what it’s worth,” Ozzie added, “I lost interest years ago. Bunch of feckin’ foreigners wearing English kits and a bunch of cucks watching ’em, more concerned with their team winning than saving their dying country.

“You always say that when your team’s in the dumpster.”

Both statements were true – Ozzie was as politically right as they come, and one of very few ethnic British males unafraid to speak his mind. To get a sense of Ozzie, picture Conor McGregor, but bigger, bolder, and English. For Ozzie, the Prem was another tool to distract Brits from their dispossession.

Stop watching, lads. Stop supporting the bullshit.”

“Ah, come World Cup time, you’ll be there with the lot of us.”

Scoff. “I see we hired a German to manage our squad of Africans.”

“We’ll have black players and white players,” said Eddie. “As it should be.”

Bigger scoff.

“Don’t forget,” said Eddie, “it was Kane who missed the penalty against France.”

That stung. When England crashed out of the last World Cup, Oswald (Ozzie) Fletcher was devastated, despite what he might otherwise say. He was inconsolable. All the lads were.

“Wouldn’t it be something if we won,” said Jack wistfully. “What a day that would be.”

“It could happen,” said Eddie.

“It should happen,” said Jack. “We invented the bloody game.”

“Back in ’66, my Dad got finals tickets for ten bloody shillings,” Jack added. “What’s that now, eight quid?”

“Yeah, and back then the competition actually meant something,” said Ozzie. The Dutch team was Dutch. The French French. Believe it or not, we fielded a roster full o’ English lads.”

“Imagine,” said Jack grinning.

“We even had the remnants of our Empire. But the bleedin’ traitors were selling us out fast.”

“To this day,” Jack continued, “my Dad says it was the greatest day of his life. Better than his wedding, he says. Even Mum knows it.” Jack had heard the story so many times, it was like he’d been there himself, back in 1966, a full thirteen years before he was born.

The night went according to script. Plenty of good-natured banter with a dose of sarcasm and vitriol, for good measure. Always was with Ozzie in the room. Unfortunately, Jack’s parents didn’t make the two-hour trek down from Newfordshire. They weren’t getting any younger and, truth be told, England’s streets weren’t getting any safer. There was also London traffic. Always a bitch.

The kids took centre stage frequently. “For my birthday, I want a football cake,” Finn declared. “And pizza.”

“Better than Paul’s lad,” Ozzie whispered discreetly. “That kid probably wants a frilly skirt.” The twelve-year-old in question had recently announced he wanted to be a girl. The mother was delighted. The father, not so much. “If the alphabet people get their hooks in your kid,” Ozzie proclaimed, “not much you can do.”

The birthday cake made its appearance, and the obligatory Happy Birthday was sung, followed smartly by a rousing rendition of For He’s a Jolly Good Fellow.

“Blow out the candles, honey,” Lily said. Don’t forget to make a wish.”

Jack didn’t hesitate. I wish I could go to the World Cup Final in 1966. Then, remembering the godawful DEI Seminar, he went a step further. I wish I could go back to the England of old. The real England.

Zing.

A surge of energy ran through him like a jolt of electricity. For a few precious moments, a vision appeared. A crystal-clear image of Wembley Stadium. Old Wembley. The very stadium that hosted the 1966 World Cup Final.

“What’d you wish for?” Ozzie demanded. “You didn’t waste it on those Liverpool foreigners, I hope.”

Jack came back to reality and made a zip-the-lips gesture.

Cake was served and the sugar blast sent the kids into overdrive. They were bouncing off the walls, and with alcohol on board so were some of the adults. By the time it was over, Jack was done and dusted. He couldn’t wait to lay his head down. He’d probably be asleep before it hit the pillow.

“That was some proper good fun,” said Lily.

“It certainly was,” Jack agreed. “I’m rightly knackered now though. Didn’t even have that much to drink.”

“You’re getting old, dear.”

Hey.

She grinned. “You go in and rest, I’ll do the washing up and check on the kids.”

“Aw, thanks honey.”

Her grin morphed into a leer. “Don’t fall asleep, though, loverboy. I’ll be in later with a special present.” She was a vixen, Lily was.

Jack grinned back in anticipation.

 

3. The Time Tunnel

In the bedroom, Jack was overcome with a sense of wellbeing and gratitude. He was a blessed man, his troubles trivial. But this particular spirit of goodwill was above and beyond the norm.

Birthday-related, perhaps? Or something to do with that vision of Wembley? What was that by the way? Some weird premonition?

Zing.

It happened again.

Another flash of Old Wembley. More than a flash. A vision. Distinct and real, no detail spared. This one was more powerful. More prolonged. More persistent. He gazed into Lily’s vanity mirror and a surreal outline of his visage stared back, the likeness blurred, an aura of light surrounding it.

Jesus.

Quite suddenly, a strange sensation engulfed him – mind, body, and spirit. He felt weightless as the image in the mirror blurred further, yet he still perceived it with absolute clarity. In fact, he perceived everything with perfect clarity.

Clarity of thought.

Heightened consciousness.

A deep and fearless curiosity to see what this was all about.

It was no medical event. Not a heart attack. Jack felt threatened not in the least. On the contrary, he felt an overwhelming urge to succumb entirely to…whatever was happening.

Bright light filled his field of vision. His body relaxed, his breathing and heartbeat slowed. He surrendered…and was soon floating through…was it space? Time? Yes, and yes. There could be no doubt. He was travelling through the cosmos, backward in time, observing a parade of visions pass by.

Life events. Momentous events. The COVID pandemic. The Manchester bombing. Brexit. The Fall of the Berlin Wall, a stalwart Ronald Reagan demanding, Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall! Chernobyl. The John Lennon assassination. The election of Margaret Thatcher. Jack witnessed and perceived them all and many more.

At the same time, his personal life was laid bare: his wedding day, the birth of his children, the death of his beloved Grandad. It was as if he was on a three-dimensional – scratch that, multi-dimensional – moving walkway. Actually, more like a tunnel. A Time Tunnel.

He was perceptive to the events around him. He could see, hear, even smell everything as he observed time pass in elaborate waves of sensory profusion. He felt the wind in his hair, the smells of childhood, the emotion of each moment. But Jack wasnt overwhelmed. On the contrary, he comprehended with effortless clarity.

Otherworldly clarity.

Then he saw his destination. How did he know? Was it instinct? Or did it just happen? He wasn’t sure. But it made sense, notwithstanding. July 30, 1966. Saturday. Wembley Stadium.

He panned the swarming crowds and gradually zoomed until he was transported inside. He saw the pitch, the players, the fancy electronic scoreboard. The infamous thirty-nine steps leading to the Royal Box where players collected trophies.

This was old Wembley.

The Time Tunnel slowly faded as visions crystallized into reality and Jack’s consciousness settled into this time and place.

Boom.

He was there. In the flesh.

 

4. 1966 World Cup

Jack had arrived. In 1966. In his seat. Section 38. Wembley Stadium. The place Pelé once called the Cathedral of Football.

He glanced about, wide-eyed, as the crowd buzzed. He spotted West German flags, but Union Jacks were dominant. The skies were grey and bore the threat of rain. But rain would not come. Jack knew this well because his Dad had told him.

His Dad had told him everything and cor blimey, Jack was living it now. As if he’d been transported onto a movie set. But it wasn’t a movie set. It was real. Every detail.

How is this happening?

Jack pinched himself. Nothing happened. He pinched himself again. Still nothing. What the? If it’s not a dream and it’s not reality – what is it?

He surveyed himself. Same green shirt and plaid pants he’d had on at the birthday party. Thank God he’d been wearing sandals. For that matter, thank God he hadn’t changed into pyjamas. Is that how this thing worked? He checked his pockets. No wallet, but his trusty mobile had come along for the journey.

He took several deep breaths and got his bearings. He was a few rows up from the action and could clearly see the lush turf – perhaps a wee bit slick from earlier rain. And the players themselves, from both sides, warmed up on the pitch. He could see them clearly, right down to the expressions on their faces. His eyesight, sans glasses, was perfect. He had the eyesight of his younger self.

There was England’s most beloved footballer, Bobby Charlton. A legendary figure, ambassador extraordinaire for the sport. That’s how Jack knew him. On this day, Sir Bobby was twenty-eight years of age, but his mythical status was already fully formed. Eight years prior, he’d survived the Munich Air Disaster which claimed many of his teammates. He scarcely skipped a beat, going on to win the FA Cup, League Titles, the European Cup, and (spoiler alert) soon to be World Cup. Off the field, Mr. Charlton was humble, as the British are. But on the field, he was renowned for stamina, grit, and a ferocious strike, no matter left or right foot.

There was the twenty-eight-year-old version of Norbert “Nobby” Stiles, the hardnosed five-six defensive midfielder. The Iron Tackler, they called him cause he always went in hard. Some say too hard. And of course, the great Geoff Hurst – substitute for the injured Jimmy Greaves. Not a single fan knew it – save Jack Campbell – but Mr. Hurst was about to produce a performance for the ages.

Jack scanned the fans in his vicinity. Mostly commonfolk it appeared, living their best lives – buoyant, joyful, full of expectation. To say the English squad had the country behind them was understatement. Nay, this team carried the dreams of fifty million Britons. Today, team and nation were one and the same.

As Ozzie said, England was still a real country in 1966. Still ninety-nine percent ethnically English. Yes, this means ninety-nine percent white. Based on what Jack could see, Ozzie was bang on. Jack had yet to see a non-white face – in the crowd or on the pitch. That included the West Germans, so it did.

At that moment, the chap two seats over held out his hand. “Good day, sir. I’m Sheldon Cook.”

“Hello, sir.” They shook hands. “Jack Campbell.”

“I heard you were coming,” the man stated. “Peter cancelled last minute, and his brother made some calls. Seems you were the lucky recipient. How do you know Peter?”

Jack hadn’t considered who was supposed to be in this seat. But by some divine providence, it had become available to him.

“We go way back,” said Jack. “Haven’t seem him in a while, mind.”

Sheldon nodded smilingly. He was a family man, with two bright-eyed youngsters either side of him. Introductions were made and Jack was taken by the joy on their faces. Pristine, untainted happiness.

Sheldon was roundabout Jack’s age – the 2025 version of Jack, that is. Am I forty-three here? He wasn’t sure what the hell he was.

“Think we can take ’em today?” Sheldon asked.

“I’ve a good feeling,” said Jack.

“Me too, but me nerves are shot.”

“My Dad told me they’d win. He guaranteed it, and he’s usually right about these things.”

“I wish I had his confidence. Is he here?”

The question threw Jack for a loop. Good Lord, his Dad was here. Jack opted to lie. “Unfortunately, not. But he’ll be watching on the telly.” Jack was starting to relax. He made a grand show of asking the young lads about their own sporting exploits. They were near in age to young Finn.

“My own boy and girl play, too.”

“Your girl plays football?” The boys laughed in unison.

Jack shrugged toward the boy’s father. “She’s a tomboy.” Note to self. It’s a different era. Girls don’t play the Beautiful Game in 1966.

A vendor wandered into the vicinity and barked out his offerings. Meat pies, crisps, fizzy drinks, tea. Sheldon got the man’s attention and ordered the works for his kids, including a glossy Match Programme. He turned to Jack. “What do ya need, mate? My treat.”

Jack smiled sheepishly. He had no money. “Very kind of you, I’ll take a Coke. Thank you, Sheldon.” As the transaction unfolded, Jack came clean. “Appreciate it, mate. Truth is, I lost my wallet earlier.” He gestured vaguely: “Been a hectic day.”

“Sorry to hear, old sport.” In modern-day England, there’d be high suspicion toward a move like that. But here, trust and goodwill were in abundance. “Tell you what, I’ll get you a programme, too. You need one to enjoy the match.”

Sheldon waved off Jack’s protests. “We’re on the same team today, laddie. We’re all family.”

Jack skimmed the publication with interest. There were articles about key players, their respective sides, their respective countries. By modern standards, it was an amateurish production, but this only added to its charm. For the first time, it sank in – England’s opponent was West Germany. My God, this truly was a different world. A world where the Iron Curtain still divided Europe.

Jack studied the rosters and player bios – nothing but white faces on both sides. And just look at those English lads. Proper English lads, they were. Jack felt a surge of National Pride such as he’d never felt. Englishmen weren’t supposed to feel such a thing. We’re supposed to feel guilt and shame.

Sorry, not today.

Jack had seen a copy of the programme once before at a festival. It was a sought-after collectible, worth a fortune. This copy was obviously mint condition. Hot off the presses. Without thinking, Jack whipped out his iPhone to snap a few photos.

A split second later, it dawned – the space-age gadget wouldn’t jive with the time. Heck, these people barely had colour TV. For them, an iPhone was outright sorcery. In some parts of time and space, they’d burn him alive for witchcraft.

Too late. One of the bright-eyed youngsters, the older of the two sitting to Jack’s left, got an eyeful. “What is that? Wow, look Daddy.”

Jack quickly shut the phone off, but not before Sheldon got a glimpse. “Don’t know, me boy. What have you there, mate?”

Jack sheepishly attempted to cover the phone with his hands. “It’s just a, uh, a special kind of camera.”

“Looked like a miniature television to me,” said the kid.

Sheldon nodded. “Who are you, James Bond? You get that from Q, did you?” Both youngsters giggled.

Jack regrouped. “I…uh…I work for the government.” He said it with a serious tone, then grinned and pocketed the phone. “Not for Q. I’m not allowed to talk about this device. It’s a prototype.”

Sheldon looked at him quizzically. He wanted more, and the awkward moment lingered. However, blessedly it was three o’clock and the game was starting.

Another note to self: No photos! And no Googling players. He grinned. There’s no internet here, you silly goose. Probably no Wi-Fi either, he chuckled at the absurdity of explaining Wi-Fi to Sheldon.

 

5. Victory

The wait was finally over for the packed stadium. Jack knew from memory, 96,000 in attendance, ten percent of them German. Pre-game festivities were brief – national anthems and not much else – and the referee’s piercing opening whistle was bang on 3:00 p.m. local time.

Both teams looked smart in the classic 4-4-2 formation. England in their iconic kit – red jersey, white shorts, red socks. Nothing flashy. No gauche sponsor logos, just the classic embroidered Three Lions crest. The West Germans sported white jerseys, black shorts, white socks. Elegant simplicity.

London bookies made England the 1-2 favourite, but not a single English fan took anything for granted. The game found rhythm quickly. Less than a minute in, free kick Germany fifteen yards outside the England penalty. Moments later, Bobby Charlton with a wonderful touch. Then, a twenty-year-old BeckenbauerDer Kaiser in the flesh – making superlative plays on the ball. He was a midfielder on the day, not yet the magnificent sweeper he’d become. But he was already special.

For the umpteenth time, Jack marvelled at what he was witnessing. This was straight from a science fiction movie. Going back in time?

How is this happening?

Yet it was happening. It was as real as the stars in the midnight sky, and Jack embraced it. Why not? This was a game for the ages and he might as well savour the moment.

The crowd didn’t have to wait long for a goal, but not from the side they wanted. At the twelve-minute mark, poor clearance by the English defender allowed Helmut Haller to put the ball past keeper Gordon Banks.

Yikes. Germany up 1-nil.

It momentarily took wind out of sails, but six minutes on Geoff Hurst tied the match with a powerful header, and English fans were redeemed. By halftime, the game remained all square at one.

The crowd was in fine spirits and Jack and Sheldon relived the tying goal, and a few other close calls. But the youngster to his left soon interrupted. “May I see your camera again, sir?”

Jack smiled at the young man, who was about a year older than Jack’s own lad. Showing off the iPhone was tempting. Oh, the fun he could have playing wizard to these folks. He resisted the urge. It felt…dangerous. Already, Jack was sensing the burden and responsibility of time travel.

“I wish I could, son. But I’m under NDA.” Neither the boys nor Sheldon knew what that meant but Jack didn’t dwell. “Whereabouts you live Sheldon?”

Notting Hill. Born and raised.”

Jack frowned. How’s the neighbourhood?”

“We love it. So vibrant. Full o’ culture, y’know?”

Jack’s frown deepened. He was aware of Notting Hill’s embrace – that wasn’t exactly the correct word – of Caribbean immigrants starting as far back as 1948 with the fated Windrush arrivals. In 1966, few Londoners felt threatened by the influx. After all, this was England. Their England.

Jack knew different. In fact, the inaugural Notting Hill Carnival was set to occur just a month hence. By 2025, the event would be known for violence, with bookies posting an over-under on the number of stabbings. Vast swaths of Notting Hill would eventually become inhospitable to white Britons – Jack knew well – like so many other areas.

The Great Replacement – ethnic cleansing Ozzie called it – would be rapid in Sheldon’s neck of the woods. Already it was in full force, and poor naive Sheldon was putting positive spin to it, God love him.

Jack was tempted to warn the man get out now – but Sheldon was still talking. “…close to everything, Stamford Bridge for one. We’re Chelsea fans, you know. Blimey, it took us just fifteen minutes to get here today.”

“You drove?”

“Course we did, mate.”

Jack raised his eyebrows in appreciation. In modern-day London, traffic and parking made driving near impossible. On the day of a World Cup Final? Crikey, forget about it.

Wha’bout yourself, Jack? Where do you live?

“I’m in Twickenham.” Jack decided to be honest.

“Ah, you’re a rugby fan, then?” It was the home of English rugby.

“Ah sure, but it’s a distant second to this great game.”

“Beautiful spot. Pricey.” Sheldon rubbed thumb and forefingers together. “Government’s paying well these days, yeah?”

Jack shrugged noncommittally.

“I suppose if you’re coming up with space-age gadgets like the one in your pocket, it’s money well spent.”

Another shrug.

“Soon, we’ll have flying cars and men on the moon,” said one of the youngsters.

Jack smiled at the shiny optimism.

“And smart robots,” added the other. “My science teacher told me people in the future won’t even have to work. Not if they don’t want to.”

“I’m not so sure about that,” Jack offered. It was obvious he was being cagey, but he didn’t know what else to do. He didn’t know the rules in this strange…circumstance. Erring on the side of caution seemed advisable.

Again, mercifully, the match started and all eyes turned to the pitch. “Here we go again,” Sheldon announced.

For thirty minutes, the two sides battled fiercely, trading chances including a glorious one by Bobby Charlton himself. To Jack’s mind, the English lads had the edge in play, perhaps buoyed by the crowd’s rousing rendition of The Saints Go Marching In, which had become England’s theme song this World Cup. They also belted out a menacingly loud and powerful Rule, Britannia, and it touched Jack’s soul like nothing before ever had.

My God, he felt the full force of English blood and soil. And then, heightening the moment to a state of pristine ecstasy, a magical moment unfolded. In the 78th minute, following sustained pressure, Martin Peters took a nifty pass from Alan Ball, and struck a clean winner past keeper Hans Tilkowski. The Wembley faithful went into a rabid frenzy.

With just twelve minutes left in regulation, it had to be the clincher. The Cup was England’s. It must be. And as the minutes ticked by, it became more and more obvious. England had this. The trophy was finally coming home.

However, tragedy struck in the 89th minute. After a goalmouth scramble, Wolfgang Weber put home the tying goal with a minute in regulation. West Germany had pulled off a miracle. The shock equalizer forced thirty minutes of extra time. The singing stopped and the smiles vanished. A hush came over the stadium, save ten thousand Germans who were predictably ecstatic.

The anguish in the faces of Sheldon and his boys was enough to break Jack’s heart. He wanted to console them, tell them it was all gonna work out fine. Again, he resisted the urge.

Why, he wondered. Fear? Caution? Uncertainty? Yes, that was it. Uncertainty. For all he knew in this strange parallel universe, West Germany wins. Was there a guarantee the game would play out according to the historical reality?

It had so far. Thus, chances are, it would continue to. “Chin up, lads. Extra time it is. We’ve got this.”

“We were this close, Jack.”

“Don’t worry, I’ve a good feeling.”

“Blimey, me heart can’t take much more o’ this.”

“We’ll be fine.” Jack offered a confident smile, and it seemed to cheer them. Their mood was lifted further by England’s play out of the gate, with Alan Ball, Bobby Charlton, and Geoff Hurst all leading aggressive attacks.

Sensation came in the 101st minute when Hurst took Allan Ball’s cross deep in the penalty and blasted a shot from close range. It slammed the underside of the bar and bounced straight down, appearing to hit the goal line, before being cleared by the German defender.

Confusion ensued. The Swiss referee signaled for a corner, but England protested. Shockingly, the Russian linesman took England’s side in adamant fashion. It was a good goal, he proclaimed. Despite passionate protests from the West Germans, the decision stood.

“It was in,” screamed Sheldon, and his boys echoed the sentiment. Like any proper Englishman, Jack had seen the replay a million times. He’d be first to admit, it was questionable. A portion of the ball certainly crossed the line, maybe most of it. But the whole ball? He wasn’t about to bring that up now, though.

No sir.

Because again, he was lost in the elation. The singing was back with greater fervour and the minutes ticked away. At the 120-minute mark, more theatrics. Close to the final whistle, the referee checking his watch, and Germany pressing for an equalizer, Hurst caught the German defence napping. He found space down the left flank and bore down on the German keeper. He struck a left-footed laser from inside the box and it found the back of the net.

My God.

It had to be the clincher, and it completed Hurst’s hat-trick, cementing him in football lore for eternity. But again, controversy as English supporters had stormed the pitch early. No one cared. Nor did history. Asterisk or otherwise, a win was a win. As with Maradona’s Hand of God, it only added to the lore.

And it was a win. A 4-2 final. English fans were intoxicated with joy and pride, Jack included. England was on top again, right where she belonged. Jack forgot he was in a different era.

He forgot about everything except the precise moment he was living.

 

6. Rule, Britannia

West German grumbling did nothing to dampen spirits of the rabid English fans. They were in a state of mass delirium, as was Jack.

England were World Champions. Finally. Glory restored where it belonged, to the country that gave football to the world. Forget Germany. Forget Latin America. Forget talk of the Southern Hemisphere growing dominant, producing not only the best teams, but the best players. Forget all of that.

England was king of the hill. Top of the heap. Like a phoenix from the ashes, National pride rose up in an unstoppable tsunami of ecstasy. When Bobby Moore collected the great trophy from Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Philip at her side, the Duke and Duchess of Kent looking on, Jack knew in his heart – this was bigger than football. It was spiritual. A religious experience.

No country could match England’s pomp and circumstance, and now, no country could match England on the pitch. He wasn’t the only one who felt that way. As fans poured out of Wembley, he picked up random snippets of conversation: “I can’t believe we’ve bloody done it.”…“I never doubted our lads, not for a second.”…“This is surely the first of many.

Pride and happiness swelled in Jack’s chest, so powerful he felt he may explode. It wasn’t only the win, it was the atmosphere. The people. The English people. Smartly dressed all. No ballcaps, no trainers, no hoodies. Not a drug addict nor aggressive panhandler in sight.

And let it be said, not a burka to be seen, either. Not a hint of violence in the air, even as West Germans mingled among English. The Progressive beast hadn’t spoiled England. Not yet. Even here in the heart of London.

“I’m meeting me mates at the Lion’s Pub,” said Sheldon. “We’ve a table waiting. Fancy joining us?”

“I think I shall,” said Jack. The thought of a few pints was irresistible.

“We witnessed it together, mate. Brothers for life now.” The two embraced, and the young lads looked on approvingly.

The crowds in the street were thick and energetic, and Jack marvelled at the orderliness. The people were wellbehaved and courteous. Even mild-mannered in this, their moment of great glory. And the city itselfEnglish to the core. For once, the people matched the architecture.

Jack had heard of these days, when you could safely walk London’s streets day or night. When everyone spoke English, and practically everyone was White. The rumours were true. He suddenly realized, he hadn’t seen a person of colour the entire day. If he spoke the term – person of colour – odds are no one would know what he meant.

He was witnessing British people in their natural habitat. British people as they were meant to be in nature. The unabashed joy in Sheldon and his lads was a thing to behold. Unlike Jack, Sheldon didn’t fret for his children’s future.

“Are you quite alright, Jack?”

Jack exited his reverie with a grin. “Never better.”

“You were lost in space for a second there.”

“Just enjoying the moment.” Jack gestured toward three gorgeous lasses strutting past in miniskirts. “Can you blame me?”

“Not at all, mate.”

It was the start of the Swinging ’60s, and risqué garments were all the rage. A symbol of cultural change, perhaps not in the right direction, Jack reckoned. Despite the showy display, the women were decidedly more chaste than their 2025 counterparts. The skirts were certainly revealing, but the girls came across not as slutty, but as graceful and elegant.

“I’m taking it all in, Shel. I haven’t walked these streets in a good while.” He glanced around happily. “Almost feels like I’ve never walked them.”

It was true, the environment was familiar, yet vaguely foreign. Take the vehicles. A shiny TR4 here, a sleek Jaguar E-Type there, no doubt with the plush leather interior. Vauxhalls galore. Black Cabs galore. Even the odd Rolls Royce. Shocking how many of the cars were Britishmade back in the day.

Also, no bike lanes. No dreaded ULEZ cameras. No kebab shops or curry houses. Crikey, around here Curry was a surname. And again, it had to be acknowledged – no non-whites. Scratch that, almost none. By now, Jack had seen a few.

Nevertheless, this was London to the core. Pure. Untouched. Unspoiled. Jack was practically shaking with ancestral recognition. Like an electric charge through his nervous system. However, there was a parallel current of sadness. A mourning for what had been taken, almost as surely as if London had been razed to the ground.

Sheldon shot him another puzzled look. “You’re due for a pint, laddie.”

“Couldn’t agree more.”

“This way, follow me.”

Upon entry, Jack was hit with another dose of ancestral nostalgia. The pub was classic English, probably centuries old. Pubs were one aspect of British life that had resisted change, which is probably why the Brits loved them so much.

Yet here in 1966, Jack witnessed authenticity that didn’t exist in 2025. No TVs, no mobile phones, no craft beer, no loud music to dampen banter. Because that’s what pubs were for, right? Fellowship and pints. Nothing more, nothing less.

On this, perhaps the most glorious day in recent English history, the place was jammed. A modern-day Fire Marshal would’ve had a meltdown. And the smoke. It was thick in the air. Everyone smoked, it seemed, and ashtrays overflowed.

There was a masculine energy in the room. A working-class vibe. It was maledominated to be sure, but women weren’t banned, not at all. Discouraged maybe but not banned. The banter was hale and hearty.

 

The lads were class today. Absolute legends, each of ’em.”

“No one can take this away from us.”

“The whole country’s celebrating tonight.”

 

The men were present, in the moment, and Jack met a fine sampling of Londoners. Bus drivers, longshoremen, postal workers. Professional Class, too. He even swapped shoptalk with a banker.

Who you with?” The man asked.

Telling the truth was out of the question – UniBank wasn’t formed until the 1990s. “Barclays.” Jack went with a safe bet – the largest bank in England.

“Brilliant, mate. I’m in currency trading, myself. You know the drill – exchange rates, letters of credit, that sorta thing.” He smiled. “Me hands still sore from updatin ledgers.” He mimicked the motion. “Month end, yknow.”

That’s right, Jack realized. Forget computers, calculators weren’t even on the scene. It was an analog world and these poor saps did everything by hand.

“You know Jamie Cuthbert?” The man was asking. “He’s a good lad. Cheeky bastard, once ya know ’im.”

“The name rings a bell.”

“What sort of work you do there, Jack?”

What to tell this chap? The banking Jack undertook bore no resemblance to this man’s world. “Let’s not talk shop, mate.” He raised his glass. “Not today.”

“Right. Fair play.” The man raised his own glass.

Just then, the barmaid strolled past and some of the men flirted. “Angie, if I ever leave me wife, I’ll be comin’ for ya, luv.”

She was no shrinking violet: “Thanks for the warning, Paul.”

“Aye, she’s a cheeky lass, in’t she.” He pinched her bottom.

To another man, a younger and better-looking specimen, Angie flirted back with full vigour. But the spirit of the moment was never far. Glasses were repeatedly raised, and pints aplenty consumed. From time to time, the singing kicked in:

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!

Britons never, never, never will be slaves.

And again:

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!

Britons never, never, never will be slaves.

Sheldon’s young lads took it all in and made friends for life with others their age. Jack briefly pondered the fact that his own Dad could be at this very pub, but a quick swill washed away those brain-twisting concerns.

By now, people were ordering food, and Jack realized he was ravenous. The menu was as British as they come – fish and chips, bangers and mash, cottage pie. The Asian food blight, as Ozzie called it, had yet to take hold. Jack settled on steak and kidney pie, a bargain at 26p. Sheldon was still footing the bill, and happy to do it.

The sustenance served the men well. It fortified them for another set of rounds. For the family men, however, 9:00 p.m. was nearing. Time to call it a night. Sheldon, for one, had had enough, and his young lads had turned a wee bit mopey.

“Been a great pleasure, Jack.” Sheldon extended his hand.

“Pleasure’s all mine,” said Jack, pulling Sheldon in for a manly hug. “Can’t thank you enough for the uh, hospitality, shall I say. Next time, it’s on me. That’s a promise.” Hugging among men was not common in 1960s England, but with alcohol on board, Sheldon accepted the overture.

“Happy to do it, sir.” Sheldon said, then turned serious. “What’re you gonna do now? How you getting home? Shall I give you cab fare?”

It was a jarring question, and it jarred Jack from the spell of alcohol, World Cup glory, and the love of fellow countrymen. He had no place to go, and the look on his face betrayed that.

“You could stay at mine. We’ve a spare room, nothing fancy. The wife wouldn’t mind.” Sheldon grinned. “She’s an agreeable sort for the most part.”

“I’ll be fine,” said Jack unconvincingly.

“Or I could book you a room, it’s no trouble.”

Jack smiled. “Something posh and grand if you don’t mind. Perhaps the Dorchester?”

Sheldon smiled at the small joke, but he was ready to leave. His young lads, moments earlier full of mischief, were drooping badly. “I must get these tykes home to bed.” He tousled his eldest’s hair.

Jack stared into space awkwardly.

You’re a good man, Jack, that I can tell. But, if you don’t mind me saying, you seem a little lost at times. Like maybe, you’re not in the right place.

Jack rallied his senses. “Look, I’m right, mate. I’ll be fine. Gimme a minute now, would you? I’ll ’ave me a quick Jimmy Riddle and walk out with ya.”

Jack would obviously have to figure something out. He waltzed into the loo, passing a few of his new mates along the way. For a second, uncertainty was replaced by the previous jubilation. What a day, what a day!

With business done, Jack studied his reflection in the mirror, and any sense of normalcy was abruptly punctured.

What is this place? How am I here? How will I return? Will I return?

Emotions overcame him. If I live out my days in this idyllic England-of-old replica – is that what it was? – would I be happier? Perhaps I would. This version of England is clean and pure. Friendly faces all. It is home.

Yet, it wasn’t home. Jack had a home in England to be sure, but not here. Not this era.

He thought of Lily and the kids and his heart ached. Not only for them, but for all the native English living in modern-day dystopian England. A hellhole by comparison, no one could argue otherwise.

Jack could not and would not desert his family. Nor his friends. He had to go back. People needed him. His fears for the future rose to the surface. Fears for his children’s future.

He had to go back. But how?

Would it happen spontaneously? Was there some trigger?

Or would it never happen?

The Wasteland of Windrushistan: DNA, Decay and the Absurdities of Afro-Apotheosis

What is it like to live in a communist country? I no longer ask myself that question. I don’t need to ask it — I know by direct experience. The United Kingdom in 2025 is a communist country in all but name. We’re ruled by omni-surveilling authoritarian ideologues who bombard us with absurdities and lies, preaching equality and practising hierarchy, living in luxury whilst ordinary citizens struggle to survive. Our once-proud cities are dirty, decaying and demoralized, crammed with ever more people from ever less compatible cultures who prey on and parasitize the White natives.

Hungary is still a true nation

But I have to be fair there: the cramming of incompatibles isn’t communist. Nor are the predation and parasitism by aliens on natives. As the leading hate-thinker Vox Day has pointed out, communism was far less harmful for Eastern Europe than so-called liberal democracy has proved for Western Europe. That’s because the communists didn’t open the flood-gates to low-IQ tax-eaters and criminals from the corrupt, diseased and tribalist Third World. Formerly communist Hungary, for example, is still a nation in the true sense of the word: a state whose inhabitants are bonded by blood, united by shared history and a common language. That’s no longer true of the United Kingdom, which is now a core component of Clown World. We’re no longer bonded by blood, no longer united by shared history and a common language. Instead, our true history is traduced and our clownish, crypto-communist rulers provide free translation for dark-skinned invaders who either don’t speak English or mutilate it when they do.

Clown World in Control: one of countless absurdities in the crypto-communist Yookay

All of that is why so many people have adopted the mocking term “Yookay” to describe the multi-racial, multi-cultural mud-puddle that has replaced what was once a great nation. I have another new name to suggest, something that captures the true spirit of what Britain has become. I think we should be re-named Windrushistan. It’s an ugly, hybrid name for what is now an ugly, hybrid place. The “Windrush” honors the ship that in 1948 blighted Britain with the first big influx of Blacks from the Caribbean, as Andrew Joyce explained in his magisterial article “The SS Empire Windrush: The Jewish Origins of Multicultural Britain.” And the suffix “-istan” salutes Islam, the religion of rape-gangs and rapacity, the vigorous and violent faith that is replacing effete and treacherous official Christianity on these islands. Say it again: Windrushistan. Savour the syllables: Wind-rush-i-stan. We’re no longer Great Britain or the United Kingdom — we’re the Wasteland of Windrushistan.

Celebrating Blacks, execrating Whites

Indeed, we’re the Windy Wasteland of Windrushistan. You could hear the wind blowing in great gusts of absurdity and mendacity during the celebration of Windrush Day 2025 in the “UK Parliament” on Monday 16th June. Hansard, the official record of proceedings in parliament, has helpfully captured all the absurdity and mendacity for posterity, as you’ll see below. Note that the celebration of Blacks was accompanied by the execration of Whites — the ordinary, working-class Whites who genuinely built Britain by laboring in her factories and on her farms and who objected with “racism” to the crime and chaos of the unwanted Black invaders.[1] Physicists and fans of science fiction should also marvel at the temporal paradox that took place in Liverpool, a city that the “Windrush Generation” arrived in before they had “built” it. So here’s a little of what was said in parliament:

On 22 June 1948, HMT [His Majesty’s Transport] Empire Windrush arrived in Tilbury docks from the Caribbean, carrying 1,027 passengers and two stowaways. More than half the passengers came from Jamaica, and there were many from Trinidad, Bermuda and British Guiana. […] In 1948, the UK was desperate for labour to help rebuild the country following the devastation of the second world war, and the passengers on the Windrush brought a wealth of skills [e.g. rape, robbery, violence, educational failure]. […]

However, as we remember those stories with affection, our commemorations of Windrush Day must avoid any sentimentality. The contribution of the Windrush pioneers was made in a context of widespread racism, the clearest and ugliest illustration of which was found on signs on the doors of boarding houses — stating “No Irish, no blacks, no dogs”[2] — and which in many situations ran much deeper, often resulting in daily discrimination and humiliation. An egregious example is the appalling and still unaddressed scandal of black children being deemed emotionally subnormal in the 1960s and ’70s and being placed in special schools, where they were denied an education and made to feel inferior. […]

The Windrush generation came to Britain as citizens —invited by Enoch Powell, we should remember — to rebuild a broken nation after the war. In Liverpool, they settled mostly in the south of the city, building a vibrant community and contributing to our culture in many different ways, from music to food to football and to the unique Scouse spirit [“Scouse” is a colloquial term for Liverpool]. They included Lord Woodbine, a Trinidadian who helped The Beatles to achieve fame, but who sadly was written out of history. They worked in the shipyards, the hospitals, the buses and the schools. Against the daily struggles and common racism, they built our city and claimed it as their home. […] Today is a reminder that our diversity is the best of us. For the sacrifice these immigrants made to better our country, we all owe them a debt. […]

I have spoken before in this Chamber about the role the Windrush generation played in not only rebuilding our nation, but transforming our society and culture. My constituency of Clapham and Brixton Hill was completely reshaped by the Windrush generation, with a legacy that is still evident in the people, the culture, the music, the art, the cuisine and in so many other ways. Beyond rebuilding our cities and enriching our culture, the Windrush generation played a crucial role in shaping and sustaining the public services that we continue to rely on every single day. They were the nurses, midwives and doctors who formed the backbone of our NHS, often working long hours in difficult conditions to care for the sick and vulnerable. They were the bus drivers and train operators who kept our transport networks running, ensuring that Britain’s economy kept going. They were the teachers who educated generations of children, instilling in them the values of hard work and perseverance. They served in our armed forces, fighting for a country that did not always recognise them as equals. Their contributions were not just significant — they were indispensable. Without them, Britain would not be the country it is today. (“Windrush Day 2025,” “debated on Monday 16 June 2025,” Hansard, UK Parliament, Volume 769)

For a detailed refutation of those absurd lies about the “indispensable” contributions of unwanted and unneeded Blacks, I heartily recommend this thread at Twitter. To cap all the absurdity and lies, Hansard described “Windrush Day 2025” as having been “debated.” But there was absolutely no debate: there was simply declamation of pious propaganda and logic-free lies. It was a festival of Afro-Apotheosis, that is, the raising of Blacks to divine status in the face of all past history and all present reality. Britain did not need the “contribution” of low-IQ, high-criminality Blacks after the war and Britons — true White Britons — did not want the presence of Blacks. But I can heartily agree with the last line I’ve quoted above from Hansard: “Without [the Windrush Generation], Britain would not be the country it is today.” Yes, without that first opening of the flood-gates — or mud-gates, as they’d be better called — Britain would not be the failing country it is today, the dirty, decaying, demoralized country racked by rape-gangs and pervaded with a sense of fast-approaching dissolution and doom.

A hypothetical heretic

But it’s entirely unsurprising that there was no debate about Windrush Day 2025, because the windy Windrushistanis in parliament were almost all women — traitorous White women like Helen Hayes, Deirdre Costigan, Kim Johnson, Stella Creasy, Lisa Smart and Harriet Cross; self-worshipping non-White women like Dawn Butler, Florence Eshalomi, Bell Ribeiro-Addy, Harpreet Uppal and Sureena Brackenridge. Just as I no longer wonder what it was like to live in a communist country, I no longer wonder whether it was a good idea to give votes to women and allow women to enter politics. It wasn’t. For every tough-minded, clear-thinking and intelligent woman like Ann Coulter in politics there are a hundred — or a thousand — vapid, vaporing female airheads. Women in general don’t like debate. Instead, they like conformity. In a sane society, that can be a good thing, because women will conform to sanity. In an insane society like the Yookay, women conform to insanity.

White British men did not die on D-Day to put Black women like these into the British parliament (left-to-right: Bell Ribeiro-Addy, Dawn Butler, Florence Eshalomi)

And when women conform to insanity, they condemn sanity. Can you imagine what would have happened if someone had tried to introduce genuine debate into that clucking chorus of Afro-Apotheosis in the House of Commons? If someone had dared to air the toxic truth, that Blacks don’t bless Britain but blight Britain? The clucks of approval would have been replaced by squawks of outrage. The airheads would have demanded that the heretic be arrested, be arraigned, be incarcerated! But if our hypothetical heretic had been clever, he could have cozened the cluckers. He could have led them on by calling for the celebration of one of the brightest stars of the Windrush Generation, an under-recognized over-achiever who came to Britain from Jamaica in the 1970s to make an outsized contribution in the face of official opprobrium and unrelenting police hostility. Yes, our hypothetical heretic in the House might have said something like this:

Amidst the chorus of celebration I note with sadness and concern that one giant of the Windrush Generation has been undeservedly overlooked, despite the size and strenuousness of his contributions to Britain over many years. I can truthfully and unequivocally say that the man of whom I speak was performing a job that the so-called white natives of Britain simply would not and could not do. More astoundingly still, he achieved all that he did whilst caring for a disabled wife and whilst facing unrelenting hostility from both the police and the media. Might I ask my colleagues to join with me in saluting Delroy Easton Grant? He is the Jamaican-born giant who has found a permanent and unshakeable place in British history by [and now the clucks of approval would be about to change to squawks of outrage] raping and robbing dozens of elderly White women in a campaign of relentless and remorseless racial terror carried out by night over nearly two decades in South East London. Many of those elderly women endured permanent trauma and suffered premature death thanks to Mr Grant, who is a prime example of the little-recognized fact that Blacks rape old White women at even higher rates than they rape young White women. Indeed, Mr Grant found time in his busy schedule to perform sexual assaults on elderly White men too, cementing his unique place in the annals of British crime and confirming the true nature of the “contributions” made by the Windrush Generation to our country. My colleagues have claimed that Blacks bless Britain. That is an absurd and easily refuted lie. Delroy Easton Grant is one example among many of the obvious but officially unspeakable truth: that Blacks blight Britain.

Bestial Blacks Delroy Easton Grant and Emmanuel Adeniji, two gerontophile rapists who have blighted Britain and Ireland

But there was no heretic like that, of course. Instead the clucking chorus of absurd Afro-Apotheosis went entirely uninterrupted and unchallenged. And one of the Afrolaters — Black worshippers — said this:

In my constituency, the Windrush generation helped to forge the Brixton we know today. In doing so, they made a huge contribution to a community where everyone is welcome, where difference is not feared but celebrated, and where we are not strangers but friends and neighbours. To mark the 70th anniversary of the arrival of the Empire Windrush, talented young people from Brixton designed a beautiful logo, which is based on the pattern of human DNA.

The Windrush generation and subsequent migrants who have come to this country from all over the Commonwealth sparked the emergence of modern multicultural Britain. They are part of us, and part of the UK’s 21st-century DNA. The Windrush generation made an extraordinary and enduring contribution […] (“Windrush Day 2025,” “debated on Monday 16 June 2025,” Hansard, UK Parliament, Volume 769

That was Helen Hayes, the blonde White Labour MP for Dulwich and West Norwood. For understandable reasons, she didn’t mention the knife-crime and acid-throwing that enhance the vibrancy of Black-enriched communities “where everyone is welcome” and “where we are not strangers but friends and neighbours.” And Ms Hayes didn’t mention another noteworthy connection between the “pattern of human DNA” and the “Windrush generation.” That connection was visible in a trial taking place even as Ms Hayes was on her feet in parliament, showering the Windrush Generation with sycophancy and smarm:

Court-artist’s rendition of Ryland Headley, a previously unacknowledged over-achiever of the Windrush Generation (image from BBC)

Man, 92, who allegedly raped and murdered woman in 1967 caught after DNA advances, court told

Detectives caught a 92-year-old man who it is alleged murdered and raped a woman in her home almost six decades ago after advances in DNA techniques led them to the suspect, a jury has been told. An extensive police operation was launched in Bristol in the summer of 1967 after the death of mother of two Louisa Dunne, 75, but her killer could not be found, a jury at the city’s crown court heard.

Evidence relating to the case was stored and last year a DNA match was allegedly made between material found at the murder scene and a man named Ryland Headley, the court was told. Headley, from Ipswich, Suffolk, denies murder and rape. In the prosecution’s opening, Anna Vigars KC said police had never given up finding the killer. She said: “What we are talking about is the murder of an elderly and vulnerable lady in her own home. […]” The jury heard that soon after the murder, Headley moved to Suffolk, where in 1977 he raped two women, threatening to strangle or smother them if they did not follow his orders. Vigars said Dunne had been born in May 1892, when Queen Victoria was on the UK throne and by 1967 was living alone in Britannia Road, Easton, Bristol. She had been married twice, to a city alderman and to a nightwatchman, but both had died. Neighbours knew her as “a local fixture”, always out on her doorstep, watching the world go by.

On 28 June 1967, a number of local women became worried about Dunne after noticing that one of her windows was open. A neighbour, Violet Allen, climbed in and found her dead. A postmortem was performed. Dunne was 5ft 3in tall and weighed less than seven stone (45kg). […] She had abrasions to her face and bruises to the back of the head and her right thigh. The pathologist concluded a hand had been forcibly held over her mouth, and that a bruise across the back of her neck had been caused by a scarf found under her body having been violently tightened. A vaginal swab taken from her tested positive for semen.

Police found a palm print on a window at the back of the house and over the following weeks took thousands of prints from men and boys but could not find a match. Vigars told the jury that though semen had been found, DNA examination was “not a technique in the armoury” of the police at that time. The material gathered in the investigation was boxed and preserved, latterly at the major crime archives at Avon and Somerset police headquarters. The case was looked at from time to time and in 2024 items including the blue skirt Dunne had been wearing were sent off for forensic examination. […] The jury was told forensic scientist Andrew Parry discovered that Dunne’s skirt contained “a large quantity of semen”.

Vigars said: “By 2024, scientists were able to do what was impossible nearly 60 years earlier and examine that semen for DNA. Mr Parry discovered that the semen matched Mr Headley’s DNA with a match ratio that meant it was a billion times more likely to be Mr Headley’s DNA than anybody else’s.” Police found voters’ records from the late 1960s showing that Headley and his wife lived in Picton Street, Bristol, about a mile and a half from Dunne’s home. Vigars said: “Picton Street fell outside the ring of homes where men had been asked to provide a palm print.”

The jury heard that in 1977 Headley raped two women, one aged 84, one 79, in Suffolk, where he had moved soon after Dunne’s death, after breaking into their homes. He threatened to strangle the 84-year-old if she did not do what he ordered, the court heard. Headley told the 79-year-old he had a gun and warned her that, if she did not follow his instructions: “I’ll put a pillow over your face and smother you.” He admitted both rapes and asked for a further 10 offences of overnight burglaries of homes where his fingerprints had been found between 1973 and 1978 to be taken into consideration. After his arrest for Dunne’s murder and rape, his palm print was taken — and experts said it matched the one taken at her home in 1967. (“Man, 92, who allegedly raped and murdered woman in 1967 caught after DNA advances, court told,” The Guardian, 16th June 2025)

So Louisa Dunne was “5ft 3in tall” (160 cm) and “weighed less than seven stone” (45 kg or 98 lbs). And in 1967 she allegedly had a vibrant encounter with one of the Black newcomers who were making such “valuable contributions” to Britain. Ryland Headley’s contribution may have consisted of raping and murdering Louisa Dunne. He certainly raped at least two other elderly White women. Like Delroy Easton Grant, Headland is a prime example of the Black genius for depravity and degeneracy. And like the other victims of these two depraved Blacks, it appears that we can easily understand why Louisa Dunne failed to live out her days in calm and serenity, “watching the world go by.” It was thanks to White traitors at the top and the White-hating Jews who controlled those traitors and supplied them with their ideological script. The traitors and the Jews unleashed the “Windrush Generation” on the unwilling ordinary Whites of the United Kingdom, ensuring that Blacks would commit endless violent crimes against ordinary Whites, drain vast sums of money paid in tax by ordinary Whites, and drive huge numbers of ordinary Whites out of the cities that Blacks were enriching with noise, dirt, crime and chaos.

Two Bestial Blacks from the post-Windrush Generation, Mohamed Iidow and Xyaire Howard, a proven rapist-murderer and a probable rapist-murderer

In 1948, when the mud-gates began to open, the United Kingdom was still a nation. In 2025, it’s no longer a nation and no longer worthy of its older name. No, today we live in the Yookay, today we wander the Wasteland of Windrushistan. But Windrushistan will fall. The mud-flood won’t be reversed without fire and blood, but more and more Whites see the truth and are getting ready to fight to take their country back. That clucking, conformist chorus for “Windrush Day 2025” is more and more seen for what it truly is: an absurd celebration of an unconscionable atrocity. One of the clucking conformists claimed that “we all owe [the Windrush Generation] a debt.” She was lying. In truth, we owe the Windrush Generation death after death after death. They were in fact the Windrush Degeneration, an unwanted invasion of alien Blacks whose low intelligence and high criminality have not blessed Britain but blighted Britain. For proof of the blight, I again heartily recommend that truth-telling Twitter thread.[3] For example:


[1]  At bottom, leftist worship of non-Whites and Muslims is powered not by love of non-Whites and Islam, but by hatred of Whites and Christianity.

[2]  The existence of these infamously worded signs is an endlessly repeated claim for which there is absolutely no evidence, as even a leftist academic once admitted in the Guardian. Writing in 2015, the historian Steve Bruce issued a “plea to Guardian readers. If ‘No Irish’ signs were as common as is asserted, there should be plenty of them remaining in private collections, local archives and the like. … Can we please see some?” No, Bruce couldn’t. He was calling for facts when he should have been kneeling in faith.

[3]  The Twitter thread reminds me to note this: Badly as Trump has erred over Iran, we would be far worse off under cocoa-colored Kamala. If she’d been in the White House today, Elon Musk could well have been in court, in jail or in exile, rather than allowing heretical hate-thinkers to broadcast toxic truths on Twitter.

Trump’s big mistake

Disappointing, disastrous, self-defeating, stupid. There are some adjectives that come to mind in the wake of Trump’s Iran adventure.

I watched Gen. Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff this morning. His message (paraphrasing): “We’re number 1! And we totally kicked ass!” Remember all the triumphalism when the U.S. invaded Iraq and quickly got to Baghdad? We’re still there >2o years later and now those troops and U.S. troops in Syria are likely in even greater danger. From Tucker’s interview with former Pentagon official Dan Caldwell:

Tucker [00:10:00] Can I just say something really cynical? It’d be pretty easy to draw us in to a ground war against, or a full-scale regime change effort against Iran by attacking those troops [in Iraq and Syria] …

Dan Caldwell [00:10:11] I’ve said it publicly, you know, prior to being a DOD, in a lot of ways, those troops in Iraq and Syria were a tripwire to a larger war. Especially after the defeat of the ISIS caliphate, and you can argue whether or not they should have been put back into Iraq and Syria to begin with, but especially after they ISIS califate, they should not have been there. And one of the, there are many crimes in the first Trump administration, but one of the greatest crimes in in the First Trump administration was an active effort by President Trump’s own political appointees in some cases and elements of the military to undermine his stated preference to withdraw, particularly from Syria. And let’s not forget, you had the president’s special representative, I believe for Syria, this guy, Jim Jeffrey, who after he left the administration, ran around Washington, DC, bragging about lying to the president about the number of troops in Syria so that he would be less likely to withdraw them.

Let’s see how the warmongers feel in a few years. Wars aren’t over until the enemy says so, and Iran with its population of 90 million will be there long after whatever the U.S. manages to destroy. Iran realizes that they need nuclear weapons to defend themselves and make other countries afraid to attack them. And it’s at least doubtful that the U.S. and Israel can effect regime change without boots on the ground—not politically viable in the U.S. and likely to be ineffective since they’d be up against Iran’s very large population and territory. And what’s the likelihood of a good regime-change outcome given the U.S. record in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria?

Is Iran really on the verge of a nuclear weapon as Netanyahu has been lying about for 30 years? The whole thing is all too reminiscent of the WMD hoax that got Bush to attack Iraq—a hoax based on lies by Jewish neocons in the Bush Defense Department with strong personal and family ties to Israel.

Iran is a close ally of fellow BRICS countries Russia and China. If Iran goes down with China and Russia doing nothing, it would destroy their credibility and reinforce the U.S. as global hegemon—the neoconservative wet dream since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. I expect Russia and China will stand up and not let this happen. Would they go so far as to aid Iran’s quest for nukes? Russia is already at war with the U.S. Why wouldn’t Russia do whatever it can to prevent a U.S. victory? Russian Security Council deputy chairman and former president and prime minister Dmitry Medvedev makes this clear, along with some other interesting points:

1. Critical infrastructure of the nuclear fuel cycle appears to have been unaffected or sustained only minor damage.

2. The enrichment of nuclear material — and, now we can say it outright, the future production of nuclear weapons — will continue.

3. A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads.

4. Israel is under attack, explosions are rocking the country, and people are panicking.

5. The US is now entangled in a new conflict, with prospects of a ground operation looming on the horizon.

Particularly relevant is Medvedev’s statement that “A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads.” China, Russia, and Pakistan come to mind.

So it’s not at all clear that the attacks on Fordow managed to take out the ability to carry on a nuclear program:

Iran’s IRIB state broadcaster claimed its stockpiles of enriched uranium were “evacuated” from all threes sites prior to the U.S. strikes, another assertion not independently verified.

Now we learn that Iran is on the verge of closing the Strait of Hormuz which will raise oil prices generally, thereby contributing to inflation and especially anger countries like China who get most of their oil from Iran. Why would China want to make a deal when the U.S. just dramatically raised their oil prices?

I agree with Steve Bannon that U.S. involvement could destroy the MAGA movement completely—endangering his ability to deport illegals, get trade deals based on reciprocity, and certainly not end the forever wars. And it certainly won’t help Trump’s stated goal of lowering interest rates as inflation inevitably heats up.

And on a personal note, I feel betrayed given that I have strongly supported Trump since he first ran. A very big reason was that the neocons deserted him during the 2016 campaign—Bill Kristol, Max Boot, Jennifer Rubin and the rest of the Never-Trumpers. Trump’s often-stated opposition to the forever wars was a big reason the neocons jumped ship and a big reason I supported him. But we’re doing it again.

So glad Trump could finally heal the rift with Kristol et al.

A Commentary on the Movie “The Order”

Part One

A movie that came out in 2024, The Order, caught my eye recently because it looked as if it had to do with a book I wrote, so I checked it out.

The Order is about a real-life, six-eight member, racially committed white insurrectionist group in the northwestern U.S. called The Order led by a man named Bob Mathews that engaged in a brief flurry of nefarious activity—bombings, robberies, the killing of a Denver radio call-in host, counterfeiting—in the mid-1980s before winding up imprisoned or, in Mathew’s case, dead.

The Order, directed by Justin Kurzel from a screenplay by Zach Baylin, revolves around FBI agent Terry Husk, played by Jude Law, who travels to Coeur d’Alene, Idaho to track down The Order.  Nicholas Hoult plays Mathews; Tye Sheridan is Jamie Bowen, a young local deputy that joins up with Husk; Jurnee Smollett (Jussie’s sister) is Joanne Carney, an FBI agent with an unexplained history with Husk, possibly romantic; and Marc Maron plays Alan Berg, the Denver radio call-in host.  Husk, Bowen, and Carney are fictional characters, though the events in the film are based on historical fact.  The Order was entered in the Venice International Festival, had a brief theatrical release, and found a home on the streaming platform Amazon Prime.  It has received generally favorable critical reaction.

My connection to the film is a book I wrote in 2001 called The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds: An Up-Close Portrait of White Nationalist William Pierce.1   Pierce (1933–2002) was a notorious racist/Nazi figure (“The most dangerous man in America,” the Anti-Defamation League called him) who founded and led until his death The National Alliance, a white advocacy or virulent white racist organization, depending on how you look at it.  He is best known for writing the infamous and widely read—a half million copies sold—underground novel, The Turner Diaries,2 which has a prominent place in the movie.  My Fame book, as I call it, contains a chapter on Bob Mathews.3   It isn’t listed as a source for the film, but I suspect that it was.

Bob Mathews

This writing isn’t a traditional review of the entertainment and artistic merits of The Order, though there is a bit of that.  Rather, basically this is a consideration of how film and print differ in what they communicate about something or someone using the movie and Fame book to illustrate my points.  Going that route, I believe it necessary to give over Part One to outlining basic facts about The Turner Diaries and Bob Mathews, as they provide the raw material for both the movie and my book.

The Turner Diaries takes place in the period from 1991 to 1999, which, since the book was written in the 1970s, is in the near future.   It is made up of the diary entries of Earl Turner, a member of the Organization, a group that successfully wages what came to be called The Great Revolution in the United States against the corrupt, Jewish-dominated System resulting in a “cataclysmic upheaval,” a “New Era,” not only in America but all over the world.

Turner’s first diary entry: “Today it finally began!  After all those years of talking—and nothing but talking— we have finally taken our first action.  We are at war with the System, and it is no longer a war of words.”

The Turner Diaries makes explicit that the Organization is waging a struggle on behalf of the white race; this is a race war.  “If the Organization fails at its task now,” the fictional Turner writes, “everything will be lost—our [white] history, our heritage, all the blood and sacrifices and upward striving of countless thousands of years.  The enemy we are fighting fully intends to destroy the basis of our existence.”

The book describes Turner’s initiation into the Organization’s elite unit, The Order.  He is given what looks like a monk’s robe to wear and stands in a circle with five similarly robed Organization members for the initiation ceremony.  As members of The Order, they are the prime bearers of the Cause—the survival and progress of their race.  He and the others swear allegiance to the Oath to the Cause and one another. The experience, Turner reports, “shook me to my bones and raised the hair on the back of my neck.”  Now his life belongs only to The Order. “Today I was, in a sense, born again.  I know now that I will never again be able to look at the world or the people around me or my own life in quite the same way I did before.”  He describes the others who participated in the ceremony as “real men, White men, men who are now one with me in spirit and consciousness as well as in blood.”

Turner’s unit needs to raise cash, so they rob Berman’s liquor store and make off with 800 dollars.  In the process, Earl bops a black employee over the head with an “Ivory special”—a bar of soap in a sock.  His compatriot Henry slits Berman’s throat from ear to ear.  When Mrs. Berman enters the scene, Henry lets fly with a jar of kosher pickles and down she goes “in a spray of pickles and broken glass.”

Turner’s unit isn’t alone doing this kind of thing and the Attorney General of the United States announces that the FBI is going to root out the Organization, which he describes as “depraved racist criminals who want to undo all the progress toward true equality that has been accomplished.”

The Turner Diaries is replete with violence from beginning to end against Jews and blacks and traitorous whites—detailed accounts of the executions, murder, of Federal judges, newspaper editors, legislators, and other System figures   One example, an Organization member is near death in a Chicago jail, the doing of black inmates while the white authorities looked the other way.  In retaliation, a member of the Organization blows off the head of the Cook County sheriff with a shotgun.  When a spokesman for the Chicago Jewish community responds by describing the Organization as “a gang of racist bigots,” his head is chopped off with a hatchet.

Other examples of violence:

  • The Washington Post offices are bombed and one of its Jewish editorial writers is blown in half with two blasts from a sawed-off shotgun.
  • One of the Organization’s members is executed for refusing an assignment to assassinate a priest and a rabbi who have advocated race mixing.
  • Mortar shells rain down on the Capitol in Washington D.C. killing 61 (“beautiful blossoms,” “magnificent spectacle”).
  • A bazooka shoots down an airliner heading for Tel Aviv.
  • Three young black males and one of the two white girls with them are killed with a crowbar.  The other girl is shot and killed as she tries to flee.
  • The Israeli embassy is mortared, leaving nothing but a burned-out heap of wreckage and killing all but a few of the 300 people inside.
  • Houston is bombed, killing 4,000 and leaving much of Houston’s industrial and shipping facilities a smoldering wreckage.  Later explosions close the Houston airport, destroy the city’s main power-generating station, and collapse two strategically located overpasses and a bridge.
  • Blacks are shot at random all over the country amid shouts of “White power!”
  • Execution squads shoot, stab, and beat Jews, whose bodies are found strewn on sidewalks, alleys, and in apartment building hallways.
  • Jews and everyone who looks as if he has some non-white ancestry are marched off in columns on a “no-return” trek into a canyon.
  • Nuclear blasts kill 14 million people outright in New York City, with another five million expected to die of burns or radiation.
  • There is the “Day of the Rope.”  Whites in Los Angeles who have “betrayed their race” meet their fate.  Turner writes in his diary entry of August 1, 1993, “Today was the Day of the Rope.  The night was filled with silent horrors: from tens of thousands of lampposts, power poles, and trees throughout this vast metropolitan area the grisly forms hang. At practically every street corner I passed this evening on my way to HQ there was a dangling corpse, four at every intersection. Hanging from a single overpass only about a mile from here is a group of about 30, each with an identical placard around its neck bearing the printed legend, ‘I betrayed my race.’”

Amid these acts or destruction and killing are what amount to lectures by Turner/Pierce on the state of the world:

  • Liberalism is an infantile, pseudo-sophisticated, submissive worldview that is alien to white people.  It is an “egalitarian plague.”
  • Conservatism is a reformist mentality that either won’t or can’t come to grips with the deep futility of the current social arrangements and the need to build something radically different in its place.
  • The women’s movement is an aberration promoted by the System to divide white men and women and thus set the race off against itself.
  • Blacks have exerted an increasingly degenerative influence on white culture.   In order to live in a wholesome way that is natural to whites, whites need their own living space, completely separate from blacks.
  • Most Americans are drowning in a flood of Jewish/liberal propaganda in the media, the schools, and the churches, and don’t even realize it. They have become soft, materialistic herd animals, true democrats, without racial identity and loyalty and without heroic toughness and spirit.
  • We need to dare to envision walking the streets and seeing only “clean, happy, enthusiastic, White faces, determined and hopeful for the future.”  We need to imagine what it would be like if the streets were ours again.

One incident in the book, the truck bombing of the FBI Building in Washington, D.C., has received particular attention because many believe it inspired Timothy McVeigh in 1995 to blow up the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in similar fashion.

After the FBI Building blast, Turner hears a moan and sees a girl about twenty years of age trapped in the rubble, half-conscious, her face smudged and cut, her leg broken, and with a deep gash in her thigh.  He puts a tourniquet on her thigh wound and carries her out to the street. He then becomes aware of the moans and screams of dozens of other victims.  He looks upon a woman, her face covered in blood and with a gaping wound in her head, lying motionless—“a horrible sight,” he writes.   He later learns that approximately 700 people died from the blast.

“There is no way,” Turner writes, “that we can destroy the System without hurting many thousands of innocent people. It is a cancer too deeply rooted in our flesh. And if we don’t destroy the System before it destroys us—if we don’t cut this cancer out of our living flesh, our whole race will die.  We are all completely convinced that what we did was justified, but it is still very hard to see our own people suffering so intensely because of our acts.  It is because Americans have for so many years been unwilling to make unpleasant decisions that we are forced to make decisions now which are stern indeed.”  The “unpleasant decisions” he refers to are in reference to the Jewish and black issues that threaten the preservation of a white America.

The last of Turner’s diary entries is dated November 9th, 1993.  “It’s still three hours until first light, and all systems are ‘go’.”  This is the day Turner will fly off in an old crop duster plane and, staying very low to the ground, destroy the Pentagon with a nuclear bomb.  He will lose his life in the process but gain the recognition and gratitude of his race forever.   He achieves a kind of immortality as one of the Great Martyrs of the Revolution.  He will be honored by all of the generations to come for his enormous dedication, courage, and sacrifice, and for the gift of a grand new way of being that he and others like him made possible.

I began the chapter on Bob Mathews like so:

“The 1983 National Alliance’s annual convention was held in September in Washington, D.C., and Pierce invited a young mine worker from the Pacific Northwest by the name of Bob Mathews to give a talk.  Mathews had been an Alliance member for three years and actively recruiting new members for Pierce’s organization among the farmers and ranchers and working people around where he lived in Washington State.  Pierce asked him to tell the people at the convention about how that effort was going, as well as about the situation generally in his part of the country. Bob wrote out his speech on his dining table at home and flew out to Washington for the conference.

Pierce looked forward to Bob’s talk and publicized it in the monthly bulletin sent out to Alliance members.  He included Bob’s picture and a short write-up on Bob’s recruiting activities.  What Pierce didn’t know was what Bob had in mind to do.  Bob had really taken to The Turner Diaries.  He pored over every word in the book and gave it to his friends to read along with his highest recommendation.  But the thing about Bob was that he wasn’t content to just read the book and agree with what it said.  Bob was a man of action.  He had a fire burning inside him; that is what people said about him.  He was going to create an Order of his own like the one in the book and start a revolution like the one he had read about.   Bob meant business.

Bob’s talk was awaited with a good measure of anticipation by the 100 or so in attendance at the convention because of the picture and write-up that had appeared in the Alliance bulletin.  The Bob Mathews they saw at the podium that day was a boyish-looking man thirty years of age.  He was about 5’7” and had a trim muscular build. He was good-looking with even facial features. His dark brown hair was short and parted to the side and tended to fall forward onto his forehead.  Those who knew Bob said he had hazel eyes that shone with intensity and purpose—that was what you noticed about him when you looked at him, they said.  Most people who came to know Bob saw him as a serious and forceful person and they liked him.  Even those who detested his politics liked Bob the man.  In pictures I have seen of him, he reminds me of an enlisted man home on leave or, another association that comes to mind, the young working-class fathers I see walking past the stores in a shopping mall with their wives, their young child in a stroller.

An audio tape exists of Mathews’ talk.  His voice is youthful.  There is a tension and fervor in his delivery that gives a sense of immediacy and electricity to the occasion:

“My brothers and sisters, from the mist-shrouded forested valleys and mountains of the Pacific Northwest I bring you a message of solidarity, a call to action, and a demand for adherence to duty as members of a vanguard of an Aryan resurgence and, ultimately, total Aryan victory. The signs of awakening are sprouting up across the Northwest, and no more than among the two-fisted farmers and ranchers.  The task is not going to be easy.  TV satellite dishes are springing up like poisonous mushrooms across the domain of the tillers of the soil.  The electronic Jew is slithering into the living rooms of even the most remote farms and ranches.  The race-destroying dogs are everywhere.  In Metaline Falls, we have broken the chains of Jewish thought.  We know not the meaning of the word ‘mine.’  It is ‘ours’: our race, the totality of our people.  Ten hearts, one beat!  One hundred hearts, one beat!  Ten thousand hearts, one beat!  We were born to fight and die and to continue the flow of our people.  The future is now!  So stand up like men and drive the enemy to the sea!  Stand up like men and swear a sacred oath upon the green graves of our sires that you will reclaim what our forefathers discovered, explored, conquered, settled, built, and died for!  Stand up like men and reclaim our soil!  Look toward the stars and proclaim our destiny!  In Metaline Falls we have a saying: ‘Defeat, never!  Victory forever!’”

Bob’s talk received a standing ovation.  He would be dead in a little over a year.”

Part Two

With Part One as background, Part Two compares how the movie and my book treated this material.   My background is in education.   I’m especially interested in how modes of communication, reading a book and watching a film in this case—particularly a mass-market film like The Order—can result in significantly different learning outcomes.  Part Two will be a series of unconnected segments that I hope add up to something of worth.

I’ll start with what I take to be the movie’s version of Bob Mathew’s 1983 National Alliance talk.  It’s midway through the hour-and-fifty-minute movie and the context is different, a gathering at the Aryan Nations enclave in northern Idaho.  Bob is seated in the middle of a large audience listening to a talk by the Aryan Nation’s founder and leader, Richard Butler (1918–2004).

Butler holds up a Bible and says, “This book holds our birthright, but it is not taught in the schools or by our elected officials.  The Promised Land is not for the Jews but rather for the true Israelites, the Caucasians, and you deserve to build that home now.”

Bob stands up.  All eyes are drawn to him.  Butler stops speaking.  Standing tall, Bob states his mind.

Before going into what Bob said on this fictional occasion—I can’t imagine this actually happening—an observation about the casting of Nicholas Hoult as Bob Mathews.

Bob was a fairly short, boyish-looking, weightlifting-pumped, high school graduate, a working-class roughneck.

Actor Hoult is a Brit—mid-thirties, looks his age, around 6’2”, slight of build, somewhat effete (sorry), a pageboy haircut (why?)—who affects the general American accent used by the well-educated.  He came off to me like an Oxford drama school graduate trying his best and doing pretty well with it, but I never believed him as Bob Mathews for a second and that got in the way of my engagement with this movie.

To Hoult/Bob’s talk in the movie.  Compare it to the real National Alliance conference talk in Part One.  Personally, I find a decent fit between the two, including the anti-Jewish references in the movie version, which must have taken some courage on the part of these filmmakers given who passes on their projects and signs their checks in the motion picture industry.

“Good morning my brothers and sisters.  It’s an honor to be here with you.  I’m proud.  If you’re like me, I’m not sure how much more talk I can hear, because that’s all it is, isn’t it?  Talk, talk, talk. Well, I, for one, have had enough of just talk. Now, I know how you feel.  I do. You’ve lost your jobs, your dignity.  I watched my father get knocked down again and again, and he never pushed back, and they tell you that that’s how it works.  You just have to stand there and take it, one link at a time, one freedom at a time, but I won’t do it.  It is time for us to fight.   My friends and family, we’re here for you today because we want you to join us on a mission, putting words into action.  Our brotherhood has broken the chains of Jewish thought and parasitical usury.  We’ve stood tall against the coloreds who have soured our lands. We yeoman farmers are eating, breathing, sleeping, and growing together.  We’ve become one mind, one body, one race, one army!  We’re facing the extermination of our history, our very way of life!  Will you sit back and allow the nation that our forefathers discovered, conquered, and died for be eradicated, or will you stand up like men and fight to survive?  Kinsmen, duty calls.  It is time to take the future all our families deserve!   In Metaline Falls we have a saying.  ‘Defeat never.  Victory forever.’”

Bob receives favorable head-nodding responses from his rapt listeners.

*   *   *

An observation on how these filmmakers chose to tell this story in The Order.

One way they could have gone at it would have been to make Bob the central protagonist.  The movie is about him: he does this, this, and this; we see things from his perspective; other people come into his life as he lives it.  It begins with his National Alliance talk and ends with him being burned to death in a house surround by law enforcement.  That’s how I organized the chapter on him in my book, The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds.  The chapter was about him.   I brought in William Pierce for his take on Bob, but it was Bob’s story, not Pierce’s.

This is not the choice these filmmakers made.  The central characters in The Order are fictional: FBI agent Terry Husk (Jude Law), Husk’s helpmate, local deputy Jamie Bowen (Tye Sheridan), and his fellow FBI agent Joanne Carney (Jurnee Smollett)—all of them superb in their roles, by the way.  Bob Mathews is very present in The Order, but it’s Terry Husk’s (Jude Law’s) movie.

In my view, going that route muddied and complicated the movie’s story line.   To what extent is it a true story and to what extent is it fictional? Really, The Order is two stories: one of them Bob Mathews’ and the other Terry Husk’s.  It jumps back and forth between the two and doesn’t tell either of them completely.   There is a hodge-podge quality to this movie.

Why this approach?  To create a star vehicle for Jude Law, who is a producer of the movie?  The belief that a police procedural would make the movie more interesting, compelling, audience-grabbing?   Were there reservations about making a racist/antisemite like Bob Mathews the central protagonist?  Audiences come to identify and sympathize with lead characters whatever they are like—Richard III, Scarface, anybody—and those currently green lighting movies aren’t going to take well to the prospect of somebody like Bob Mathews coming off looking good.  Mathews types you backhand with KKK and Nazi associations and be done with them.  Whatever the case, while The Order is a good movie as it is, I think it would have been an even better one if they had dared to make Bob its central character.

*   *   *

Soon after Bob returned home from his speech at the National Alliance convention, he gathered together eight men in a barracks-like structure he had erected near his mobile home.  He said, “I’ve asked you to come here because I think we share a common goal.”  Earlier, he had talked to them about forming an Order like the one in William Pierce’s Turner Diaries book, a group of kinsmen who would let their deeds do the talking for them.  Bob’s goal was to carve out a part of eastern Washington as a homeland for whites, purged of Jews and minorities.  They would use The Turner Diaries as a blueprint for getting that done.

Bob told the group that he had a plan.  It involved robbing pornography stores and pimps, bombings, and counterfeiting money.  It also involved assassinating both Jews and gentiles who were contributing to the destruction of the white race.  “I’m telling you now,” Bob said, “if any of you don’t want to get involved in this, you are free to leave.”

No one left.

Both the movie and my book deal with The Order’s initiation ceremony.  It might be useful to compare the two accounts.

My book, Bob talking:

“I’m going to ask each of you to take an oath that you will remain true to this cause.  I would like to remind all of you what is at stake here.  It is our children, kinsmen, and their economic and racial survival. Because of that, I would like to place a white child before us as we take this oath.”  The six-week-old daughter of one of those present was placed in the center of the circle as a symbol of a Caucasian future they were about to pledge to create.  She stared up at the figures looming above her in the glow of candles.  The men clasped hands and recited an oath of loyalty and commitment to their race and cause that Bob had written:

I, as an Aryan warrior, swear myself to complete secrecy to The Order and total loyalty to my comrades.

Let me bear witness to you, my brothers, that should one of you fall in battle, I will see to the welfare and well-being of your family.

Let me bear witness to you, my brothers, that should one of you be taken prisoner, I will do whatever is necessary to regain your freedom.

Let me bear witness to you, my brothers, that should an enemy agent hurt you, I will chase him to the ends of the earth and remove his head from his body.

And furthermore, let me bear witness to you, my brothers, that if I break this oath, let me be forever cursed upon the lips of our people as a coward and an oath breaker.

My brothers, let us go forth by ones and twos, by scores and by legions, and as true Aryan men with pure hearts and strong minds face the enemies of our faith and our race with courage and determination.

We hereby invoke the blood covenant and declare that we are in a full state of war and will not lay down our weapons until we have driven the enemy into the sea and reclaimed the land which was promised to our fathers of old, and through our blood and His will, becomes the land of our children to be.”

The movie’s treatment of the ceremony with the baby underscores that movies with their short running times compel keeping the pace up: condense things, keep it short, move it along.  I could take all the time I wanted in my book.  These filmmakers didn’t have that luxury—get the basic idea across and get on to the next scene.

In the movie, Bob speaking:

“As a free Aryan man, I hereby swear upon the children in the wombs of our wives to join together with those brothers in this circle, for we are now in a full state of war and will not lay down our weapons until we have driven the enemy into the sea.  It is time to reclaim what was promised to our fathers and through our blood and His will, let it become the land of our children to be.  May God protect us.  Amen.”

That’s it.

*   *   *

A difference between my task and the filmmakers’ with The Order, I didn’t have to entertain.  I could write with no compunction that Bob walked into a Seattle branch of Citibank and handed the teller a note and walked off with almost $26,000 dollars.  Unfortunately, that action is not the most cinematic, so the filmmakers felt pressed to hype it.   No notes to a teller.  Masked men with automatic weapons burst through the bank door shouting and threatening and charging around.  You’ve seen the routine in a number of movies.

An armored car robbery:

“Get on the fucking ground!”

“Get the fuck down!”

“Don’t you fucking move!”

“Don’t fucking move, bitch!””

“Move and I’ll blow your fucking head off!”

“Fuck!  Fucking go!”

In reality, the bombs at a synagogue and porn theater did little damage, poof.  It the movie, kaboom!

*   *   *

Speaking of “Don’t you fucking move,” the F-word gets a whole lot of play in this movie, as is does generally in the popular entertainment of our time.  Apparently, it is considered a good way to give strength and credibility to speech as well as to the speaker.

An example of the F-word frequency in The Order.  Jamie messed up in his and Terry’s attempt to capture Bob and the others during an armored car heist and Terry reams him out for it.

“Fucking hear me?”

“I’m sorry.”

“Fuck.”

“I’m sorry.”

“Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck!  Cocksucker.  Fuck me, man.”

At this point, agent Carney comes onto the scene and lets Terry have it—he hadn’t done a good job either.  I picked up a subtext in this exchange of a minority woman putting a white man in his place, which is also a feature in popular entertainment these days.

“What a fucking shit show that was!  You find the cars?  Don’t ever fucking do that shit to me again.  You’re not in the lead anymore, Terry.  You don’t get to run off on your own without fucking telling me first!”

“There wasn’t time.”

“Bullshit.”

“I was with Jamie.”

“You were with Jamie?  Well, how’d that fucking work out for you, huh?  Considering you motherfuckers let the target get away.”

*   *   *

Though others are depicted in the movie, the only killing I know about that anybody in The Order committed was the murder of the controversial Jewish radio call-in host in Denver, Alan Berg.  It later became the basis for the film Talk Radio directed by Oliver Stone.

One of The Order had lived in the Denver area and was very put off by Berg, who went off on monologues on the joys of oral sex, the flaws in Christianity, why whites are afraid of blacks, and how white women fantasize about sleeping with black men.

Bob and several others in The Order drove to Denver and ambushed Berg getting out of his car in front of his apartment late at night after one of his shows.  One of the members of The Order, not Bob, started firing from close up.  Bullets hit Berg in the face, neck, and torso. The garage door behind him splintered from the spray of bullets.  When Berg was found lying face up in a pool of blood, the cigarette he had been holding was still lit.  Autopsy reports couldn’t be sure how many shots there were because Berg was twisting at the time he was shot, although it was probably around 12 (the movie says 34).  Two slugs struck near Berg’s left eye and exited on the right side of his neck.  Others hit the left side of Berg’s head and exited from his neck and the back of his skull.

Berg and the killing of him was a couple paragraphs in my book.  Berg gets a lot of time in the movie.

His exchange with a caller accompanies the opening credits.

“You’re saying Jews use the blood of Christian babies for, what was it?”

“Well, for their services, their rituals, their dinners, so they can take over the world.”

“For their dinners?  Oh, okay, I see.  So, do they serve it in cups, this Christian blood?  Is it a drink, or is it more of a condiment, like gravy that we can pour over food?  Because I’ve never been to one of these rituals, so I don’t know.”

“Are you making fun of me, you son of a bitch?”

“No, sir, not at all.  You don’t need my help for that.  I just want to know how I can take over the world, me.  See?”

“You’re trying to bait me, but I’m just trying to answer your question, you dumb kike!”

“All right, that’s enough.  Lot of antisemitism cooking here today.  Thanks, caller, for that load of puritanical garbage. You know what my problem is with every fanatic fundamentalist, from the Catholics to the Orthodox, to the KKK.  The one thing you all have in common, and you are too ignorant to see it, is that you are too inept to get by in the world, so your only recourse is to try and curtail the enjoyment of others.  Well, there it is.  It’s a great country, but we’re all still trapped in our minds.  I happen to believe that most people are decent people.  I really believe that.  Until tomorrow at KOA, this is Alan Berg, and be safe.”

The scene shifts to three men—twenties, early thirties, it’s dark and difficult to see—in a car listening to Berg.

“Hey, gimme that bottle.  You hear this shit?”

“Yeah, yeah, yeah.”

“This fucking Jew, man.”

“Yeah.”

“Ah, fuck.  Fuck him.  He needs a couple of barrels in his mouth.”

About an hour into the movie, Berg on the air again.

“See, I just want to know what to do when I get to hell, because apparently, so you said, all my friends are there.  So, I just want to know what I’m walking into.”

“See, there you go.  You don’t get it ‘cause you’re just a kike.  You’re making fun of something that’s sacred to Christians and you don’t get it.”

“Oh, okay, make it about Jews.  What do you know about Jews?  Jews to you people is some sort of mythological creature, some sort of beast.  You don’t know anything about the Jewish people.  It’s just an easy target, because you’re too afraid to see what’s in yourself, because you have somebody to blame for your life, because you can’t really blame the people that have put you in the position you are in, whether it’s a government that doesn’t care for you and has taught you to believe the alternative or it’s something within yourself.  You can’t face yourself, so it’s the Jews, but the one thing you believe is that the only good Jew is a dead Jew.  I hear this all the time.  People say things are dirty, things are ugly, things are changing.  They don’t like the new neighbor on their street.  They don’t like the new synagogue in town.  And when you hear this all day, you might think we are filled with hate, it’s almost irreversible.  But this may surprise you coming from me, but I think it is actually decent.  That’s why they call in, they want to talk.  They want someone to connect with.  I think people want to give love.   They want to say, ‘You’re all right.   Let’s sit together, let’s have a beer.’  But they are afraid they won’t get it back.  But I think our better instincts will prevail, but it’s got to start somewhere.  So I encourage you to do that tonight.  Put some good out there, because our words, our ideas, that’s going to live on. That’s what matters after all.  And that’s all for me, folks.  This is Alan Berg, KOA Denver, signing off.”

Then Berg’s murder in front of his garage.   Multiple shots fired.  It’s late at night and dark and it’s tough to see exactly what happened.  An aerial shot shows Berg’s dead body sprawled in the driveway.  Terry later says, “They butchered the guy.”

*   *   *

The Turner Diaries book is repeatedly shown in the movie.  I think the filmmakers do a fairly good job of describing its contents given the time restraints film imposes.  The biggest criticism I have is they get across that Bob has taken on the grand task of the Organization in the book, to transform the U.S., when he had the far more modest aim of making eastern Washington State a place for white people to live in their natural way.

Terry and Jamie go back and forth describing what’s in The Turner Diaries to an unseen group that includes us in the movie audience.  You can compare what they say with what I wrote about the book in Part One.

“The men who killed Alan Berg have splintered off from the Aryan Nations and formed a new group.  They are responsible for a series of robberies and murders, and they are inspired by the doctrine in this book [holding up a Turner Diaries paperback].  They’re using this book as a map.”

“It tells a fictional story of a group of white separatists raging a race war against the United States government.  There are six steps in the book.  Recruiting, fundraising, training.  Assassination is step five.  Armed revolution.  Large scale terror attacks.”

“Poisoning city water supplies, bombing federal buildings, seizing the Capitol.”

“Day of the Rope, when race traitors are hung.”

“There are plans to assassinate the president.’

“This terrorist group have a name?”

“In the book they are called ‘The Order.’”

*   *   *

The movie makes Bob a killer when in real life he wasn’t.  Running from a Portland motel, he shoots Jamie in the chest.  Blood pouring out of him, Terry leaning over him lying in an alleyway, we watch Jamie die.

In my book, I reported:

“Somehow Bob got out of there [the motel] and ran about two blocks down the street and got behind a concrete pillar next to an apartment complex.  Bob later said it was at this point he decided to stop being the hunted and become the hunter.  A couple of officers chasing him ran up to the pillar and Bob fired, wounding one of them in the shin and foot. Bob later claimed that he had at first aimed at the officer’s head, but when he saw that he was a white man he lowered his aim.”

My guess is that a central character dying in an alley in a blood-soaked shirt is more dramatic than an anonymous police officer getting shot in the shin and foot and that prompted the movie to have Bob take out Jamie in this fashion when nothing like it ever happened in real life.  As far as I can see, there were no limits to poetic license in the minds of these filmmakers.

*   *   *

Toward the end of the movie, Bob makes it to a safe house—or so he thought—on Whidbey Island near Seattle.

He’s shown typing something.  He hands its pages to a member of The Order.

“What’s this?”

“A Declaration of War.”

“Who am I sending it to?”

“Congress, the House of Representatives, the White House, The New York Times, The Denver News.  Everyone.”

“Why?”

“It’s happening.  The war has begun.”

“Fuck.  There’s no fucking army.  Everyone’s gone.”

“Cattle die, kinsman die, I too shall die.  But one thing that I know that never dies. It’s the fame of a dead man’s deeds.”

I was taken by hearing the reference to the title of my book.  It’s from an old Norse poem that William Pierce recited frequently, the idea being that what will live on after his death and give him the respect he doesn’t have now in his life are the positive memories of what he did with his life on earth.

The movie doesn’t deal with the substance of The Declaration of War.  Here are excerpts from the book.

“It is now a dark and dismal time in the history of our race. All about us lie the green graves of our sires, yet, in a land once ours, we have become a people dispossessed.”

“By the millions, those not of our blood violate our borders and mock our claim to sovereignty. Yet our people only react with lethargy.”

“A great sickness has overcome us. Why do our people do nothing?  What madness is this?   Has the cancer of racial masochism consumed our very will to exist?”

“Our heroes and our culture have been insulted and degraded. The mongrel hordes clamor to sever us from our inheritance. Yet our people do not care.”

“Throughout this land our children are being coerced into accepting non-whites for their idols, their companions, and, worst of all, their mates. A course which is taking us straight into oblivion. Yet our people do not see.”

“Not by accident but by design these terrible things have come to pass. It is self-evident to all who have eyes to see that an evil shadow has fallen across our once fair land. Evidence abounds that a certain vile, alien people have taken control over our country.”

“All about us the land is dying. Our cities swarm with dusky hordes. The water is rancid and the air is rank. Our farms are being seized by usurious leeches and our people are being forced off the land.”

“They close the factories, the mills, the mines, and ship our jobs overseas. Yet our people do not awaken.”

“The Aryan yeomanry [small landholders] is awakening. A long-forgotten wind is starting to blow.  Do you hear the approaching thunder?  It is that of the awakened Saxon. War is upon the land. The tyrant’s blood will flow.”

“We will resign ourselves no more to be ruled by a government based on mobocracy. We, from this day forward, declare we no longer consider the regime in Washington to be a valid and lawful representative of all Aryans who refuse to submit to the coercion and subtle tyranny placed upon us by Tel Aviv and their lackeys in Washington. We recognize that the mass of our people has been put into a lobotomized, lethargic state of blind obedience and we will not take part anymore in collective racial suicide!”

“This is war!”

*   *   *

Something that didn’t make it into the movie that I considered important enough to include in my book was a letter Bob sent to a small weekly newspaper in Newport, Washington on November 25th, 1984, a couple weeks before his death.

“It is logical to assume that my days on this planet are rapidly drawing to a close.  Even so, I have no fear.  For the reality of life is death.  I have made the ultimate sacrifice to secure the future for my children.  As always, for blood, honor, for faith and for race.”

*   *   *

The climax of the movie: law enforcement, including Terry, has Bob surrounded in the Whidbey Island house.  He’s alone.   A SWAT team storms the house but is driven off by Bob’s shots through the floor from the second floor.

The lawmen set the house on fire.  Terry goes into the burning house to try to get Bob to come out.  No.

Bob gets into a waterless bathtub and dies in the flames.

What I wrote:

“On December 7th, the FBI had the Whidbey Island house surrounded. They’d caught up with Bob again.  He was alone in the house. This time, they were going to be sure that he didn’t get away.  One hundred agents surrounded the house. They cut off his electricity. They attempted to negotiate through a bullhorn.  ‘Come out and we won’t harm you.’  Bob was having none of that.  He wasn’t coming out of there.  His hand mangled and throbbing [he was shot escaping from the Portland motel], he opened fire with an automatic weapon.

The standoff went on through the night and into the next day.  By this time, the press had converged on the site.  The FBI lofted in tear gas. Bob must have had a gas mask.  He continued to fire—da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da.

They issued an ultimatum.  ‘Give up or we’re coming in to get you.’

More automatic weapon fire from Bob.

At 3:00 p.m. on December 8th, a SWAT team went into the house. When they got inside, bullets rained down on them through the ceiling from the floor above. The SWAT team returned fire as they retreated.

Later that evening, after it had gotten dark, a helicopter flew over the house and dropped white phosphorous illumination flares onto the roof. The house ignited and flames shot one hundred feet into the air.  Bullets came ripping through the walls from inside the burning house—Bob was still firing away! The agents kept down as the slugs whistled through the night air and split the trees above them.

Then everything was still.

The next morning, in the charred ruins of the house they found a body burned beyond recognition.  Dental records determined it to be that of Bob Mathews.”

Endnotes

  1. Robert S. Griffin, The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds: An Up-Close Portrait of White Nationalist William Pierce, FirstBooks Library, 2001.
  2. Andrew Macdonald (Pierce’s pen name; everyone knew Pierce wrote the book); The Turner Diaries, second edition, National Vanguard Books, 1980.
  3. 3. The Fame of Dead Man’s Deeds

The UK Has Voted to Allow Anti-Social, Woke Women to End Their Bloodlines. Rejoice!

On 17th June 2025, after almost no debate whatsoever because it was merely a proposed amendment to a broader crime bill, the British parliament voted for the most liberal abortion laws in the world by a large majority. Even though abortion is only legal up to 24 weeks gestation, under this law women will not be prosecuted for ending their pregnancies, even if they are 9 months pregnant. Indeed, the baby may be late and, thus, normally already born at its level of gestation.

Apparently, the UK has been prosecuting women who are already very upset and vulnerable and such women should be above the law because of their “feelings.” The feelings of the mother come first, due to a number of prosecutions that have upset left-wing MPs, mainly female ones. For example, one woman, during Lockdown, told the doctor she was 6 weeks pregnant and obtained abortion pills. In reality, she was 26 weeks pregnant. She was prosecuted and was, inexplicably, found Not Guilty, even though she went to hospital and dishonestly claimed she’d had a late-term miscarriage rather than a still born induced by the pills.

A number of conservative UK commentators have remarked that this is, basically, legalised infanticide. Even left-wing firebrand George Galloway has tweeted that it marks the UK’s descent into Sodom. The British are now the Phoenicians, some have remarked, sacrificing their infants to Maloch.

I am sympathetic to these ideas. Naturally, the MP who proposed the bill was an extremely ugly woman; I mean literally circus ugly. From some photos, you’d genuinely think Tonia Antoniazzi was a man, while in others she is more like a fairy tale witch; vile both inside and out. I suspect that she is high in mutational load. This would explain both her physical repellence and her extreme left-wing and very low-empathy views. After all, as I have shown in my book Woke Eugenics, under pre-Industrial, harsh Darwinian conditions we were selecting for a Fitness Factor that included genetic mental health, physical health (a poor immune system means you won’t produce a symmetrical phenotype), and general conservatism, as this is associated with altruism, being pro-social and being group-oriented, vital under conditions of harsh group selection.

Tonia Antoniazzi

A variety of studies have shown, unsurprisingly, that on many markers left-wing people are genetically sick: more likely to be sickly children, uglier, shorter, more often mentally ill (especially high in anxiety and depression), and more likely to have Cluster B personality disorders such as Narcissism with its attendant low empathy. The genetic component of these kinds of psychological traits and conditions is at least 50%, based on twin studies, and in some traits it is even higher. And this leads to an interesting question. What is the psychological nature of the kinds of women that have abortions?

According to a 2014 study in Social Science and Medicine entitled “The role of stress, depression, and violence in subsequent pregnancies among women having a first abortion,” such women are high in anxiety and depression and also in emotional dysregulation. In other words, they are high in the Cluster B personality disorder known as Borderline Personality Disorder. Sufferers feel a constant sense of emptiness, intensely fear abandonment, and, centrally, are highly emotionally dysregulated. They behave like stereotypical naughty children: tantrums, attention-seeking, manipulation; anything to get what they feel they want in the moment. They are fickle, due to constant self-doubt, and prone to black and white thinking known as “splitting;” where you either love or hate the same person depending on your suddenly shifting moods. Clearly, these neurotic women are much more likely to be left-wing than conservative. These woman want abortions, and their offspring, had they lived, would very likely have been psychologically similar to themselves.

This study is line with a much earlier study, from 1992, “Personality Characteristics of Women Who Had Induced Abortions” in the journal Association for Interdisciplinary Research in Values and Social Change. It found that women who undergo abortion have a markedly different modal personality compared to those who do not. They score higher than controls on histrionic characteristics (dramatic attention-seeking), Narcissism (which includes low emotional empathy and low altruism) and antisocial personality (psychopathy, which also includes low emotional empathy and low altruism). So, females who have abortions, compared to controls, are likely to be unpleasant, anti-social people and these traits are significantly genetic.

They are also more likely to be left-wing. This is firstly because conservatives will be likely to eschew abortion for religious reasons or due to their higher empathy and sense of responsibility, and, secondly, because being left-wing is predicted by being mentally unstable and by having Cluster B personality disorders. This was found in the study “The Dark Triad traits predict authoritarian political correctness and alt-right attitudes” in the journal Heliyon. Leftists were high in Narcissism and Machiavellianism while the authoritarian, anti-freedom extreme right, who I’d aver are almost as bad as the far left, were high in the other Dark Triad trait, psychopathy.

But in essence, abortion involves nasty, anti-social, virtue-signalling left-wing women ending their own bloodlines in a context in which the traits involved are strongly genetic. Leftism itself is as much as 60% genetic. The law passed in the UK is, therefore, Woke Eugenics in action. It is eugenic.

Wokeness seems to be a group-level adaptation that will return deracinated, genetically sick Europeans to genetic health. Surely, the kind of women who want abortions should be allowed, nay, actively encouraged to have them. Think how selfish, nasty and unnatural you’d have to be to kill your baby at 9 months gestation, as English Law now effectively permits. And that baby will almost certainly grow up to be very like its mother. What can possibly be wrong with letting such a woman snuff-out her own bloodline?

Her offspring will not only be left-wing, and thus destructive of adaptive traditions that keep us in our evolutionary match and thus happy and safe, but, likely, criminally inclined.  The study “The Dark Triad as a predictor of criminality: Evidence from the Add Health Study” in the Journal of Criminal Justice has demonstrated this in depth. Criminal behaviour is about 60% genetic. This law will reduce criminality. Indeed, according to “The impact of legalized abortion on crime” in the Quarterly Journal of Economics the legalization of abortion in the early 1970s in America is estimated to account for approximately 50% of the observed drop in crime rates between 1991 and 1997. Specifically, the study attributes a 20–25% reduction in violent crime and a similar reduction in property crime to increased abortion access.

Put simply, this law is a leap forward in the process of Woke Eugenics and the return to sanity. Conservatives should put their sentimentality aside and rejoice as more and more deeply unpleasant people remove themselves from gene pool. Rejoice!

Sacred Sex-Beasts: How a Rape-Gang Report is Another Step Towards Civil War in Britain

Operation Voicer. Why is it so little known? The left could surely use it to counter the “racist narrative” that importing non-White men into the West is bad for White women and girls. Yes, Operation Voicer was the police investigation into a gang of the most depraved and disgusting sex-criminals. They were raping babies, filming their crimes, and sharing the footage on the dark web:

Police combed the suspects’ electronic communications and established that contact between them began on adult online sex forums, which are publicly accessible and legal to use. Investigators recovered Skype chat logs that recorded conversations between the men, which police described as disgusting and abhorrent. The exchanges — which were never meant to have been discovered as the men went to great lengths to destroy their online activities — included references to “nep”, a term investigators had not come across before. It is a shortening of “nepiophile”, a person sexually attracted to babies and toddlers. There were also references to controlled drugs and over-the-counter medicines, with members of the ring openly discussing what dosages were needed to drug children of different ages. (“Seven members of ‘terrifyingly depraved’ paedophile gang jailed,” The Guardian, 11th September 2015)

The White baby-rapists whose rich and vibrant gay identity was erased by the leftist media (image from the Guardian)

All of those sickening sex-beasts were White men — every last one of them. And they might still have been raping babies in 2025 if one of the gang hadn’t spontaneously confessed his crimes to the police in 2014. So why don’t the left use Operation Voicer to shame the pro-White racists who oppose non-White immigration? The answer is simple: leftists don’t do that because the baby-rapists are the wrong kind of White men. In their reports on the case, the Guardian, BBC and Wikipedia do their best to “erase” a core component of the men’s rich and vibrant sexual identity. But one word in one sentence of one Guardian report hints at the truth: “A baby, aged between three and seven months at the time of the abuse, and two boys aged around four have been identified as victims.” Can you spot the word? That’s right: it’s “boys.” The Manchester Evening News was less reticent: “A child rapist involved in a paedophile ring which sexually abused babies and toddlers was a manager at a well-known local charity […] Chris Knight worked at OutdoorLads, a social group for gay and bisexual men, for around five years until he was suspended when he was arrested in November last year [2014].”

Yes, the baby-rapists were members of what I call the Glorious Gay Community or GGC. Also members of the GGC are two men charged in June 2025 with raping a baby to death in northern England. Once again, the Guardian has done its best to erase the men’s rich and vibrant sexual identity. Unfortunately for the Guardian, it’s easy to read between the lines when the story is about two men adopting a baby boy:

A secondary school teacher has appeared in court accused of the sexual assault and murder of a 13-month-old baby boy he was adopting. Jamie Varley, 36, who was a head of year at a school in Blackpool, is also accused of a number of counts of assault, cruelty and taking and distributing indecent images relating to Preston Davey. Varley was in the process of adopting Preston along with the co-accused John McGowan-Fazakerley, 31. Both men appeared in court on Friday, nearly two years after police were called to Blackpool Victoria hospital, where the one-year-old died on 27 July 2023. (“Blackpool teacher charged with sexual assault and murder of baby,” The Guardian, 13th June 2025)

The two gay men accused of raping a baby boy to death in 2023 (photos from Twitter)

Again, the two men are White, but again they’re also gay and therefore entirely unsuitable for anti-White leftist propaganda. The left refuses to admit that pedophilia is more prevalent among homosexual men than among heterosexual men. It appears that baby-rape too is more prevalent among homosexual men. But homosexual men are a sacred minority on the left, so Operation Voicer cannot be used by leftists to counter another toxic truth about another sacred minority. The second toxic truth is that sex-crime is more prevalent among non-White men than among White men. Much more prevalent. That’s just been admitted by a leading leftist in her National Audit on Group-Based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse. Dame Louise Casey was appointed to carry out the audit by the Labour government in January after Elon Musk criticized that government over Britain’s rape-gang epidemic. Unfortunately for Labour, Casey has been honest rather than obfuscatory. The BBC reluctantly reports some of her honesty about another sacred minority:

One small example of how Pakistani Muslim men are massively over-represented in sex-crimes (graphic from Louise Casey’s rape-gang report)

One key data gap highlighted by the report is on ethnicity, which is described as “appalling” and a “major failing”. It says the ethnicity of perpetrators is “shied away from” and still not recorded in two-thirds of cases, meaning it is not possible to draw conclusions at a national level. However, the report says there is enough evidence from police data in three areas — Greater Manchester, South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire — to show “disproportionate numbers of men from Asian ethnic backgrounds amongst suspects for group-based child sexual exploitation”.

It adds that the significant number of perpetrators of Asian ethnicity identified in local reviews and high-profile prosecutions across the country also warrants further examination. The report says more effort is needed to explore why it appears perpetrators of Asian and Pakistani ethnicity are disproportionately represented in some areas. […] The review also notes a significant proportion of live cases appear to involve suspects who are non-UK nationals or claiming asylum in the UK. (“Key takeaways from grooming gangs report,” BBC News, 16th June 2025)

The toxic truth is slowly starting to prevail over leftist lies. Not that the left is going to give up without a fight. The veteran leftist liar Polly Toynbee was still trying to hold the line — and the lying — in her response to the rape-gang report. She wrote in the Guardian that it was “inadequate” to record “ethnicity” in only “a third of cases.” I’m surprised that a writer as good as Toynbee used the feeble adjective “inadequate,” which is by no means the mot juste. And Toynbee didn’t explore how and why this “inadequacy” has arisen in leftist institutions that are usually obsessed with recording “ethnicity” and exposing “racial disparities.” She then announced: “[H]ere’s the latest from the data that has been recorded: 83% of suspects are white, 7% Asian, 5% black.”

Fancy that. Polly Toynbee doesn’t appear to read her own newspaper. Four days before her valiant attempt to carry on lying, the Guardian had published a report about the trial of a Pakistani Muslim rape-gang in the northern town of Rochdale. Here’s one line from the report: “Girl A told the jury she could have been targeted by more than 200 offenders but said ‘there was that many it was hard to keep count’.” And how many of those offenders went on trial in Rochdale? The report revealed that seven did. 7/200 = 0.035 or 3.5%. You can find the same thing in every other non-White rape-gang trial: the victims of the gangs always report far more abusers than are ever arrested and prosecuted. As I wrote at the Occidental Observer in 2018: “You’ve heard about specimen charges, selected when a criminal has committed too many offences for a court to deal with speedily and efficiently. Now meet specimen defendants, selected when a ‘community’ contains too many criminals for the authorities to charge without embarrassment.”

Seven Pakistani Muslim child-rapists out of possibly “more than 200

I based that conclusion on reports in the Guardian. If a knuckle-dragging racist like me could understand the truth from reports in the Guardian, why couldn’t the hugely intelligent Polly Toynbee? It’s simple: because she prefers leftist lies to the toxic truth (and, of course, she isn’t really either intelligent or a good writer). But not all leftists prefer lies to truth. As I’ve also written at the Occidental Observer: “not all leftists are collaborating with or trying to conceal the rape-gangs.” I then listed some of the honorable exceptions: the journalists Anna Hall and Julie Bindel; the Labour politicians Ann Cryer and Sarah Champion; the former policewoman Maggie Oliver and the social worker Jayne Senior. Now I’ll add two more honest leftists to that list: Dame Louise Casey, who has begun to speak the truth in her just-published report on the rape-gangs, and Raja Miah, a brown-skinned Muslim from Oldham, another of the rape-gang redoubts in northern England. Raja Miah is a leftist insider who went rogue, because he refused to join the cover-up about the Pakistani rape-gangs. In other words, he refused to join the Labour party’s war on the White working-class. Then again, he’s Bangladeshi, not Pakistani.

Raja Miah, the rogue Bangladeshi leftist who refused to join Labour’s war on the White working-class (image from Andrew Gold’s channel at YouTube)

I don’t think that Bangladeshis are good for Britain, but I’m in no doubt that Pakistanis are worse. We are not all the same under the skin. Some groups, like homosexual men or non-White men, commit more and worse sex-crime than heterosexual men or White men. But Pakistanis are a lot worse than Bangladeshis. This is a toxic truth that the mainstream left has done its best to deny, decade after decade. Now the toxic truth is beginning to emerge. But there is no genuine cure for Third-World pathologies in the West except the removal of Third-World people from the West. And that won’t happen without civil war, which the evil White racist Enoch Powell prophesied long ago. In 2025 the respectable military historian David Betz expects civil war to arrive soon in Western Europe. Casey’s report is another step towards the fulfilment of Powell’s prophecy.

Two Styles of Moral Thinking: Reciprocity vs. the Unique Rightness of the In-Group

Philosophers have been debating the nature of justice since antiquity without ever coming to agreement. Formally, justice means “giving every man his due.” In other words, it concerns the distribution of rewards and punishments or (more broadly) of the good and bad things of this world to human beings. The debate really concerns what principle ought to determine the distribution. This is what philosophers are trying to establish when they argue over the nature of justice.

Although no conclusive agreement has ever emerged on the question, some general principles appear to have been thrown up by the debate itself. One such principle is reciprocity. The idea is that one necessary (but probably insufficient) condition for justice is that the same principles a person (or group) applies to himself (or itself) must also be extended to rival claimants.

The issue of reciprocity arises in debates over racial nationalism. White nationalists seek to create White ethnostates, and this may appear prima facie unjust because it requires the exclusion of other possibly quite decent and worthy people from such states. This is, of course, precisely the injustice of which nationalists’ opponents accuse them.

The nationalists’ answer is that they want nothing for their own group that they would not be happy to allow others: every ethnicity should be free to form its own ethnostate. So, while these other groups may indeed be excluded from our countries, this does not deprive them of a homeland of some kind—one from which they are even free to exclude us in their turn.

We can see from this example that the nationalist and his opponent—whom we may call the integrationist, the antiracist, the cosmopolitan, or any of a number of other terms—actually do agree on something: both argue in terms of reciprocity, supporting political arrangements as just only if they apply the same principles to all. The integrationist wants every country opened up to everybody, while the nationalist wants a particular homeland for every group—and thus (indirectly) for every individual. Both agree, in other words, that justice requires reciprocity, and both apply this principle in their thinking, even though they arrive at different and contradictory political programs.

One consequence of this situation is that no appeal to justice-as-reciprocity can decide the point at issue between integrationists and nationalists. Any verdict in favor of one doctrine or the other must be based on some other consideration, such as its relative compatibility with human nature. I would suggest that the tribal nature of man might be especially relevant in this context.

It is likely that the disposition to reason morally in terms of reciprocity is stronger in some people than others, like virtually all human dispositions. And racial realists will easily understand that if this is the case, such a disposition almost certainly differs across genetic groups as well. I would expect to find thinking in terms of reciprocity most common in Europeans and their descendants, although I admit never having made an empirical study of this.

One great European expression of the importance of reciprocity, or applying the same principles to others that we would claim for ourselves, is what the philosopher Immanuel Kant called his categorical imperative: “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” A maxim is a rule of behavior. So what Kant means is that rules of behavior possess moral legitimacy only if they can be applied in the same way to everyone. The essence of morality, in his view, lies in not making exceptions in one’s own favor.

For example, it would be advantageous to me to take anything I wanted from anyone else: in other words, to steal. But if this principle were applied universally, there could be no security of property for anyone, and civilization would quickly collapse back into savagery. So the maxim “steal whatever you desire” fails to conform to the categorical imperative, whereas the maxim “do not take things that do not belong to you” does conform to it. The latter rule can thus be morally legitimate, while the former cannot. A similar argument could be made about lying, which if it became universal would completely destroy social trust and thus also result in the collapse of civilization. The rule that we should tell the truth, on the contrary, can be universalized and is therefore morally legitimate.

In his book Why Race Matters, the Jewish-American philosopher Michael Levin suggests that conformity to the principle of reciprocity is a basic feature of what he calls “Caucasoid morality.” In tribute to Kant’s formulation of this principle in his categorical imperative, Levin calls persons who think morally in terms of reciprocity “kantian:”

A kantian can be expected to see things from a variety of perspectives. He will follow general rules, not constantly seek to make an exception of himself. He knows that other people take their own ends as seriously as he takes his, so he does not treat others as mere resources. Nobody wants his own preferences overridden for the sake of someone else’s, so a kantian will not selfishly override the preferences of others. A kantian who wishes others to serve his own ends attempts to recruit them as he would wish to be recruited, by persuasion or bargaining rather than threat, coercion, or deception. Kantians are aware that they sometimes need help, so they are inclined to help others. Since a kantian like everyone else wants to be able to rely on promises, he is trustworthy. (Why Race Matters, 211–212)

This is, in fact, a reasonably good description of our everyday conception of what a good person is, although it may not include the whole of moral virtue (e.g., heroic self-sacrifice for the group). Levin points out that applying such moral principles requires some intelligence, since it involves an ability to abstract from one’s personal interests. So while there certainly exist bad persons of high intelligence, there may be limits to how good (in the kantian sense) a person can be without some intelligence. This helps to explain why kantian behavior may be more common among races with higher intelligence, e.g., among Whites than Blacks.

My impression, as already stated, is that European descended people are especially prone to moral reasoning in terms of reciprocity. I will not try to prove this thesis conclusively within the confines of an essay, but I can point out how it might explain certain cultural misunderstandings which arise in our age of mass immigration and multiculturalism.

For example, I once came across a story about a Christian pastor who visited a Mosque in an immigrant neighborhood in Europe. During his visit, the resident Imam presented him with a copy of the Koran, which the man politely accepted. The pastor then extended an invitation to the Imam to come visit his church, which the Imam proceeded to do. There, the pastor politely presented him with a copy of the Christian Bible. The Imam drew back in horror, fearing contamination from the infidel’s disgusting and sacrilegious book, in such clear contradiction to everything contained in the Holy Koran.

It would, I think, be safe to observe that this Muslim Imam did not reason morally in terms of reciprocity. But that does not make it impossible for us to understand his behavior. He was a Muslim, after all: he believed in the divine origin and unique rightness of his particular faith tradition. If God really did dictate the Koran and reveal his will to Muhammad in a way he never did to any other human prophet, then the Imam was correct to act as he did. Infidel dogs such as that polite Christian pastor are bound for the flames of hell, and such a fate is no more than what they deserve for their inexplicable failure to recognize the obvious truth of Muhammad’s claim to be God’s final and most perfect prophet!

In other words, rather than reasoning morally in terms of reciprocity, the Muslim reasons in terms of the unique rightness of his in-group, the ummah or worldwide community of Muslim believers. Many writers have noted this aspect of Islam. Frithjof Schuon, e.g., writes of Muslims’

curious tendency to believe that non-Muslims either know that Islam is the truth and reject it out of pure obstinacy, or else are simply ignorant of it and can be converted by elementary explanations; that anyone should be able to oppose Islam with a good conscience quite exceeds the Muslim powers of imagination, precisely because Islam coincides in his mind with the irresistible logic of things. (Quoted in Serge Trifkovic’s The Sword of the Prophet, p. 199)

Their implicit faith in the rightness of the authoritative traditions of their in-group is so powerful that they are unable to place themselves outside of it even in their imaginations, as Schuon notes. This is, of course, directly contrary to the practice of the kantian as described by Prof. Levin, who “can be expected to see things from a variety of perspectives.” Communication between an observant Muslim and a European who thinks in terms of reciprocity is thus inherently difficult and cannot be overcome by mere good will on either side: that European pastor will inevitably see the problem as getting the Imam to reason in terms of reciprocity, while the Imam will see the problem as the pastor’s failure to convert to Islam. The two ways of reasoning are simply incommensurable. This is one reason the presence of any significant number of Muslims within Western societies will always be problematic.

The same failure of communication due to different styles of moral reasoning can be met with in other contexts as well. One example is holocaust commemoration. Many European gentiles are easily recruited to support this cause out of a sincere horror for the killing of the innocent. They see the holocaust as an especially horrifying example of man’s inhumanity to man. It is irrelevant for them that the particular case involved Germans killing Jews; it would have been just as wrong and just as horrifying if it had involved Jews killing Germans instead.

But some European gentiles eventually come to the realization that many Jews do not see matters in this way at all. For Abraham Foxman, e.g., the holocaust “was not simply one example of genocide but a near successful attempt on the life of God’s chosen children and thus on God himself.” It would have been an entirely different matter if Jews had been killing Germans rather than the other way around, for the Germans are not God’s chosen children! In Foxman’s way of looking at things, there can be no reciprocity when one is a Jew, for his in-group is unique and not commensurable with any other human group. It would be positively wrong to apply the same standard to Jews as to the other peoples of the world. He even comes close to identifying his own group with Almighty God.

Elad Barashi is an Israeli television producer with ties to the current governing coalition in Israel. Regarding that country’s ongoing war on Gaza, he recently unbosomed himself as follows:

[W]ho is the man who doesn’t want to see Gaza burned to the ground by the IDF’s fire? Who is the man who defends and has mercy on these Nazis? Who is the fool who says there are ‘innocents’ in Gaza? Who is the despicable scoundrel who wants to let them flee to Arab countries or Europe freely?… The 2.6 million terrorists in Gaza deserve death!! They deserve death!! They deserve death! Men, women, and children—by any means necessary, we must simply carry out a Shoah against them—yes, read that again—H-O-L-O-C-A-U-S-T! In my view—gas chambers. Train cars. And other cruel methods of death for these Nazis. Without fear, without weakness—just crush. Eliminate. Slaughter. Flatten. Dismantle. Smash. Shatter. Without conscience or pity—children and parents, women and girls—all of them are marked for a cruel and harsh death…. Who is the brave man who will decide to bring a total Holocaust to Gaza, so that rivers of blood will flow from it, so that rotting Gazan corpses pile up in mounds…. (X post, since deleted but available here)

He goes on, but this sample of his thinking is perhaps adequate for our purposes.

Mr. Barashi’s reflections might be usefully understood in the context of frequent Jewish warnings against facile holocaust comparisons which trivialize that event’s allegedly unique horror. Here we see someone not simply comparing current events with the holocaust but actually calling for a new one: no “never again” for this Jew!

But, of course, the holocaust Mr. Barashi wishes to see is not really the same as the late unpleasantness in Eastern Europe. In fact, it will be the farthest thing imaginable from the Nazi holocaust, because this time it will involve Jews killing Palestinian “Nazis.” For the essential question in assessing holocausts is not how many deaths they involve but whose ox is getting gored. The case where Jews are being killed is not simply distinct from the case where Jews are doing the killing: they are polar opposites. One is the greatest horror in all of human history, while the other is more than justified and rejected only by the unpardonably weak—such as Jews who want to make peace with their neighbors.

If European gentile thinking turns decisively upon the principle of reciprocity, much Jewish thinking turns upon the principle of Jewish uniqueness. It is easy to see that the two principles are precisely opposed to one another. For Kant, the essence of right behavior lies in not making an exception of oneself, and the principle can apply to groups as well as individuals. For the Jew, the fundamental fact about the world is the Jew-Gentile distinction, along with the entirely exceptional status of his own people.

However, we must not rush to conclude that this un-Kantian way of thinking, so difficult for many European-descended people even to wrap their minds around, is a specifically Jewish trait: the Muslim, as noted above, also sees his religion as universally and uniquely true, something that gives the ummah or community of Muslim believers a status not unlike that which the Jewish nation holds in Jewish thinking. Both are, of course, entirely incompatible with justice-as-reciprocity, and problematic in any group residing among Europeans prone to thinking morally in those terms.

Even if I am correct that such thinking is especially characteristic of Europeans, it is only fair to ask whether the contrary style of thinking—viz., in terms of the unique rightness of an in-group—has not also sometimes characterized us. One can certainly make a case that it has, citing certain teachings of historical Christianity in support. The Gospel of John depicts Christ as saying “No one comes to the Father except through me.” This has traditionally been understood to mean that there is no salvation outside Christianity (although Catholics and Protestants argue over whether this means communion with Rome or personal faith in Christ). That would make Christians the unique depositories of spiritual truth, and thus incomparable with all other people in the world. If this sounds vaguely Jewish, that is no accident. For most of Christian history, most Christians have held to the doctrine of supercessionism, which understands Christians as heirs to the divine promise made to Abraham (Genesis 12: 1-3) and understands the Christian Church as having replaced (or “superceded”) the Jewish nation as God’s chosen people.

Although it embarrasses many contemporary Christians, the traditional understanding of these doctrines was that non-Christians are bound for eternal damnation after death. The early North African Christian writer Tertullian wrote graphically of his fantasies of seeing Christ’s pagan enemies suffering in the flames of hell. This is not so different from what we find in Islam. When I ask Christians about this awkward aspect of their faith tradition, they usually admit that it makes them uncomfortable, but say they have faith in God to do whatever is right. In their minds, this probably does not include roasting all Buddhists in eternal fire.

Europeans did not always view their religious traditions as having a unique claim to truth. First-time readers of Herodotus’s Histories are often surprised to find him writing of foreign peoples worshiping Greek gods: e.g., the Egyptians worshiping Apollo. Of course, the Egyptians did not have any god named “Apollo.” Instead, they had a god named “Horus.” When Greeks heard Egyptians telling stories about Horus, he sounded more like Apollo to them than like any of the other Greek gods. So they concluded that “Horus” was simply the Egyptians’ name for Apollo. This is called an interpretatio Graeca. Herodotus uses the procedure in describing the religious life of all foreign peoples he describes.

What Herodotus never does is claim that only the Greek gods are the true gods, while the Egyptians and everyone else worship false gods, for which blasphemous practice the Greek gods are sure to punish non-Greeks after death. At one point he declares: “I have no desire to relate what I heard about matters concerning the gods . . . since I believe all people understand these things equally.” In other words, no one stands in a privileged relation to the divine. It is a kind of reciprocity concerning religion: your gods are probably as valid as mine. When modern European Christians think in a similarly tolerant and easygoing way about alien religious traditions, they may be succumbing to liberal modernity—but they may also simply be returning to a way of thinking long characteristic of their non-Christian ancestors.

Where did the less tolerant aspects of historical Christianity come from? Many would say they first came into the world with monotheism itself: in other words, with Judaism, the world’s first monotheistic religion. It does not seem to have occurred to Jehovah’s first worshipers that Baal and Ashera might be alternative Canaanitic names for their own God. Why not? One obvious possible explanation is that Jews are not Europeans—and neither were their ancient Israelite ancestors who first formulated monotheism. The same goes for Islam, which shares with Judaism the idea of a special and particular relation to the divine in which outsiders do not participate.

Just as intolerance and the unique rightness of in-group tradition are not absent from European history, the ability to think in terms of reciprocity is not necessarily entirely lacking in non-European peoples. It was, after all, the Jewish academic philosopher Michael Levin whom I cited as formulating justice-as-reciprocity in a useful way. And even Orthodox Jews who recognize the authority of the Talmud and rigorously separate themselves from all gentiles may understand the value of practicing justice-as-reciprocity among themselves. Indeed, such Jews are especially noted for high levels of in-group trust.

Finally, we should ask ourselves whether or not it is acceptable or even advisable for European-descended people to think partly in terms of the inherent claims of our in-group rather in terms of reciprocity. We might point out, e.g., that this is simply how the game of evolution is played: all persons and groups want to get their genes into the future for no other reason that the genes are theirs. Why should Europeans be any different from platypuses in this regard? We all want to survive and reproduce, and if any group does not wish to do so, it will not be long before another, healthier group comes along that will be happy to replace it.

So while we are sincere in acquiescing to the existence of homelands for non-Europeans from which even we ourselves may be excluded, our ultimate political aims have a purpose which transcends a mere willingness to practice reciprocity. Fundamentally we want what all living organisms want: to perpetuate our kind. Justice-as-reciprocity is an important component of European moral thinking, but not its sole and ultimate horizon.

In sum, while all human groups reason to some extent in terms of both reciprocity and the interests of the in-group simply because it is the in-group, Europeans are probably especially prone to the former style of thinking and non-Europeans to the latter. As a practical matter, we must be aware of both styles of moral reasoning. We should be willing to practice reciprocity with all who are willing to practice it with us—in other words, to practice reciprocity reciprocally. But when we encounter outsiders committed to the supposedly unique claims of their in-group, we must counter with an unapologetic commitment to our own.