Petliura and the Pogroms in Interwar Ukraine, Part 1

/27 Comments/in , /by

The fall of the Romanov dynasty saw Russia descend into chaos and even as the First World War was raging, yet more conflicts would spring up. In Ukraine, the violent confusion that came with the end of the Romanov’s empire has become particularly controversial because of the impact it had upon Jewry living there. One figure in particular is contentious, Symon Petliura, who for much of the last century has been vilified as a murderer of Jews. His death and its aftermath have had an impact not only in Ukraine but elsewhere in Europe, particularly France, where the trial of his Jewish assassin would have effects still felt to this day.

Symon Petliura

After the first Russian revolution ended the monarchy, leading members of the Ukrainian intelligentsia came together to form the Central Rada. The Rada was not initially in favour of independence, but began acting almost immediately as if they were an independent government. With the rise of the Bolsheviks, however, they would proclaim an independent Ukrainian People’s Republic. The leader of this new entity was the historian and socialist Mykhailo Hrushevsky. Indeed, all the members of the Rada were socialist to some degree or another, including Symon Petliura. The first incarnation of the Ukrainian People’s Republic would prove short-lived thanks to the Bolsheviks, who, in January of 1918 successfully captured Kiev. With the help of the German and Austro-Hungarian armies, the Bolsheviks were driven out shortly thereafter. However, instead of the Rada the new Ukrainian government was that of the conservative Pavlo Skoropadskyi. He was proclaimed Hetman, but his Hetmanate did not last the year. His government was overthrown by the Directory, which was led by Volodymyr Vynnychenko, Fedir Shvets, Andrii Makarenko and Symon Petliura. The Directory was in many ways a continuation of the Central Rada as both were socialist, both claimed leadership of a People’s Republic and many of the leading figures in the Directory, like Petliura, had been part of the Central Rada in 1917.

Even after the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk and the end of the Great War in Eastern Europe, conflict raged on. The Bolsheviks saw their chance to once again strike at Ukraine, but they were not the only rivals the Directory had to face. So-called White armies  — conservative forces loyal to an autocratic Russia of some description, often monarchist but not exclusively — and even an army of   led by the Ukrainian Nestor Makhno were also vying for control of Ukraine. Read more

Harvey Weinstein: Pomsta a dominance jako židovské pohnutky

/1 Comment/in /by

Harvey Weinstein, Heidi Klum a Uma Thurman na udílení Zlatých glóbů 2014

Autor: Kevin MacDonald

Nejnovější článek Edmunda Connelyho o Harveym Weinsteinovi a fenoménu šiksy se zabývá i motivem pomsty. Touto optikou je pak konání Weinsteina a dalších Židů výsledkem nenávisti ke gójům, vyvolané jejich vnímáním dlouhé tradice antisemitismu. Ta je samozřejmě z velké části iluzorní či přehnaná, mezi Židy je však tato „truchlivá“ verze jejich dějin rozšířená do té míry, že představuje jeden ze základních stavebních kamenů židovské výchovy i jejich smýšlení o sobě samých.

Motiv pomsty je důležitý – snad i klíčový – při snaze pochopit klíčové aspekty židovského chování. V Conellyho článku citované pasáže z knihy (židovského spisovatele Philipa Rotha – pozn. DP) Portnoyův komplex však zdůrazňují dominanci a sexuální soupeření před pomstou, což naznačuje i další možný výklad tužby po šiksách (k termínu šiksa/šikse viz Jidišismy v českém lexiku bod č. 31 – pozn. DP) pomocí nástrojů evoluční psychologie: skutečným hlavním motivem by tedy mohl být kontrola přístupu k ženám nečlenské skupiny. Při mužském soupeření bývají právě ženy tou nejžádanější odměnou – ostatně ženy coby válečná kořist jsou v lidských dějinách všudypřítomným konceptem. Vítězní muži se logicky zmocňují žen svých poražených protivníků, stačí si jen vzpomenout na mongolské harémy po celé podmaněné Asii, nebo i chování našich dávných indoevropských předků.

Téma pomsty zmínil ve své kontroverzním článku i Mark Oppenheimer:

Jako chlapec snil Portnoy o mytické šiksa-bohyni, které dal přezdívku Thereal McCoyová (chápete? /slovní hříčka Theresa/Thereal jako „the real“, tedy „skutečná“; McCoy jako typicky WASP příjmení – pozn. DP/), která bruslí „ve své modré parce, červených klapkách na uši a buclatých bělostných palčácích – Miss Amerika na ledě! Se svým jmelím a švestkovým pudinkem (ať už je to cokoliv)“, ale jako dospělý získává skutečnou ženu, které dává přezdívku Opička. A jak že ji ponižuje? Nutí ji k představení s italskou děvkou. Jistě, nakonec se k nim přidává, ale napřed je nechá zinscenovat scénu z mizerného filmu – ne však hollywoodského, ale toho z XXX údolí San Fernando. A její přezdívka, Opička? Ta má původ v příhodě z doby ještě před tím, než ji Portnoy poznal, kdy se seznámila s perverzním párem, který po ní chtěl, aby je sledovala při souloži a při tom pojídala banán. Za tuto pro Portnoye vzrušující minulost se jí dostává zvířecí přezdívky. Chce ji pro její „hereckou“ minulost. Read more

The Origins of Swedish Multiculturalism

/101 Comments/in , /by

How Sweden became Multicultural
M. Eckehart
Helsingborg, Sweden: Logik Förlag, 2017

This brief (96 pages) study of the historical origins of Sweden’s multicultural policy was published ten years ago in Swedish, but has just now been made available to the English reading public. It is not a history of immigration to Sweden, which would require a much longer treatment, but of the spread and triumph of the multicultural idea. Massive extra-European immigration only happened afterwards, partly as a consequence of this shift in thinking.

In the early 1960s, when the story begins, the most significant minority ethnic groups in the country were of northern European stock: Finns were most numerous, followed by Estonians and the Sami, or Lapps, native to northern Sweden itself.

But following the end of World War II, others began arriving. In 1963–4, calls for restricting immigration began to be heard. This helped spark a series of debates in the press on the status of ethnic minorities in Sweden. It is generally agreed that the multicultural policy formally inaugurated in 1975 had its origin in these debates; but as the author of the present study points out, the background of the debaters and their motivations have seldom been inquired into.

Their initiator and most important contributor was David Schwarz (1928–2008), a Polish-born Jew who arrived in Sweden in 1950 for medical treatment related to typhus and tuberculosis he had contracted while a concentration camp inmate in Germany.

On October 21, 1964, Schwarz published “The Foreigner Problem in Sweden” in Dagens Nyheter, one of several Swedish dailies published by the Jewish-owned Bonnier Group, writing:

Before the Second World War Sweden was relatively restrictive with regards to allowing in refugees. The need for labor was not as great as it is today, and some professions feared foreign competition. But by the end of the war the government’s attitude changed, and over time 14,000 Jews and many others were transferred here from the German concentration camps. Simultaneously tens of thousands of Baltic refugees and several thousand stateless people fleeing the Russians came. Since then Sweden has continued to receive foreigners […] In other words Sweden got a large group of people, approximately 400,000, who were not born in the country.

Schwarz went on to argue that immigrant groups should face no pressure to assimilate; they should unconditionally be permitted to retain their cultural particularity. He recommended the appointment of a parliamentary inquiry with a view to formulating a culturally pluralist immigration and minority policy. Read more

National Action, Islam, and Britain’s Lamentable Terrorism Priorities

/52 Comments/in , , /by

The failed improvised explosive device claimed by ISIS


The irony couldn’t have been stronger, nor the despair it engendered more stinging. For ten days the British government, the media, and hostile anti-White social elements had binged on feigned panic and self-satisfaction following the arrest and charging of seven young ethno-nationalists for ‘terrorism’ and ‘race hate’ offences (see here and here). During the course of this Orwellian ‘Ten Day Hate,’ few paused to consider the fact that none of the alleged activities of these individuals met any dictionary definition of terrorism. They were allegedly members of the non-violent, and dubiously proscribed organization ‘National Action.’ They had allegedly engaged in ‘racist’ online conversations. It was claimed they had placed ‘offensive’ stickers around a university campus. But were they terrorists according to the Oxford Dictionary, and most legal understandings of the term? Had they engaged in “the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims”? No such charges had ever been made by the British criminal justice system against National Action, and they have not been made against the recently arrested men.

But you wouldn’t have guessed that from the hyperbolic government statements that poured forth in the hours and days after the arrests. We were told that jailing these young men was a matter of grave national security. The Guardian enthusiastically waded into the fray, reporting that, because some of those arrested were soldiers, the nation should beware a mass ‘neo-nazi’ infiltration of the British armed forces. Interested parties began agitating for yet more non-violent White advocacy groups to be banned. The nebulous threat of ‘racist extremists’ was everywhere and yet nowhere.

And then, just we were reaching peak hysteria about the ‘terrorism threat’ from the ‘Far Right,’ reality reasserted itself, and the stickers and pranks were forgotten. A Muslim terrorist, later claimed by ISIS, left an improvised explosive device on a busy London train at Parsons Green with the intention of causing mass death and destruction. A further rebuke to the delusions of the masses, and the manipulations of the elite arrived in the form of the growing realisation that the bomber may have been working with a former ‘child refugee’ from Syria, a man who had been taken into the home of an elderly and cartoonishly altruistic British couple.

In the final act of this Islamic plot, the device failed to activate as its designers had intended. But in the chaos which followed the burst of flame and rancid smoke, Britons received a perfectly-timed reminder of what terrorism really is, and from which quarters it truly emanates. Read more

Who Commits Murder in America?

/30 Comments/in , /by

Most Americans suspect that Blacks commit the majority of crime in this country. They are, in a word, correct. However, the government takes great strides to cover this up. From the federal on down to the city level, our rulers are loathe to release data on crime that includes racial breakdowns. Such data disrupts the preferred narratives about race in this country.

However, there are a handful of cities that do let the public see the numbers, and, no matter the city, it is Blacks who are running riot. Philadelphia is one those few forthright cities, so we will start there. To begin, here are the demographics for the city in 2016, according to the US Census:
44.2% Black
34.9% White
14.4% Hispanic
7.4% Asian
2.6% mixed
0.9% American Indian
0.2% Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

Here is the demographic makeup of arrestees for shootings, both fatal and non-fatal, that same year in Philadelphia:

For shootings, Blacks were just shy of doubling their share of the general population, with 80.3% of arrests. Whites were the opposite — just shy of halving their population share at 18.5% of arrests. Asians arrest rates, at 0.6%, are about one twelfth their share of the population. Read more

The Notion of Racial Diversity in German Academia and National-Socialist Legislation, Part 2

/29 Comments/in /by

Men and women in traditional folk costumes from the island of Susak, Croatia. Susak is one of the smallest islands in Europe, having the most endogenous population in Europe. Most of Susak’s descendants live in New Jersey, USA.

Introduction:

What follows are more translated excerpts on race, taken from rare and difficult-to access books written by prominent National Socialist legal scholars, with the focus on “acquired traits” vs “inborn traits” and how they interacted in the proposed NS racial legislations. This explosive topic, particularly in modern and highly multiracial USA and the EU has been covered recently in more details by prominent sociobiologists, aka “race scholars,” Richard Lynn, J. Philippe  Rushton, Arthur Jensen, Kevin MacDonald and others. The main intent of this essay, however, is not to glorify National-Socialism or absolve it from some of its crimes, but to indirectly point out that in the so-called free liberal democracy there are subjects that are carefully being avoided by humanities professors and studiously shunned by politicians of all colors. As long as historical truth, particularly in the analyses of various World War II vicitmhoods, is being defined by state attorneys and judges and not by social scientists and historians, and as long as the discussion about race is being left over to rabble-rousing ideologues and college agitators, the much vaunted free speech in the West will remain an empty buzzword.

**                                               **                                               ** 

According to these examples there can hardly be any doubt that man’s hereditary endowment, having been examined in diverse areas of human genetic predispositions, has been subject to well-established regulations for the rest of living nature. These findings, however, have a far-reaching and decisive significance for the assessment of the doctrine that all men are equal. This doctrine is known to be one of the main pillars of the teaching structure of Marxism. The adherents of Marxism have found in the dogma of equality of all people the justification for their internationalist attitude. In fact, if all people are indeed equal, one must logically come to the conclusion that the segregation of peoples and nations against each other is a condition defying any inner justification, and therefore needs to be dismissed. Thus, Marxists of all colors cling to the hopeless equality dogma as their last straw of hope. Certainly, they cannot seriously dismiss the overwhelming abundance of the already examined Mendel’s case studies on the effectiveness of the laws of inheritance. But they (Marxists) know how to help themselves by providing themselves with another dogma: namely, that in human heredity there could be other rules designated for humans, which may also come into play.   Dr. Gustav Franke, Vererbung und Rasse: eine Einführung in Vererbungslehre, Rassenhygiene und Rassenkunde (München: Deutscher Volksverlag, 1938, 1943), (Heredity and Race; An Introduction to Heredity Teaching, Racial Hygiene and Race Studies), p. 97.

Read more

Ted Gold and the Jews of Weatherman, Part 2

/42 Comments/in , /by

Ted Kaptchuk and Ted Gold from the Columbia Spectator, Volume CXIV, Number 76, 10 March 1970

Go to Part 1

Weather Terror: the New York Cell

After the Flint War Council, the Weathermen organized quasi-underground cells or “collectives” in various major cities, and began planning a terror campaign. They renamed the group “Weather Underground.” The leadership assigned Gold to one of the several Weather groups based in New York. John Jacobs, always militant, led one group. Terry Robbins, a shrimpy New York Jew who was one of the strongest advocates of the terror policy, headed the main cell, which was tasked by the leadership with finding targets to bomb. At least two gentile females were members of Robbins’ cell: Cathy Wilkerson, Robbin’s girlfriend, and Diana Oughton, Bill Ayers’ girlfriend. Also present was Kathy Boudin, member of the prominent leftist Jewish Boudin legal family. Robbins, Gold, and the women based themselves in Wilkerson’s family townhouse on 11th Street in Manhattan while her parents were on vacation.15

Gold matched the others in adopting the idea of “bringing the war home,” the Weather motto for making America’s “White power structure” feel the violence that they were inflicting on the Vietnamese. Jonathan Lerner, fellow Weatherman, recalls that he and Gold had discussed planting a bomb on a Chicago railroad to kill workers returning home at night.16 Rudd remembers that Robbins and Jacobs “would rant, “White people are pigs. This whole society has to be brought down. We have got to defeat White-skin privilege.”17 In the last days before the fatal explosion, the once mild-mannered democrat Ted Gold issued a warning that anyone defecting from the group would be subject to death, with the strong implication that he himself would kill them.18

Robbins’ cell began building a nail-studded shrapnel bomb to plant at an Army dance at Fort Dix, New Jersey. There was just one snag in their planning. None of them knew how to make a bomb.

Just before noon on March 6, 1970, the day of the planned bombing, Terry Robbins was putting the finishing touches on the crude dynamite bomb in the basement of the townhouse. He mistakenly detonated what proved to be a tremendously powerful device. The bomb instantly ripped Robbins and Diana Oughton apart. Robbins was a bit more than ripped, actually. He was shredded. The collapsing townhouse crushed Ted Gold.

I have to confess that it brings me some pleasure to relate this exquisite misadventure. Three communist terrorists destroyed with their own infernal device. Cathy Wilkerson and Kathy Boudin, occupied upstairs, were stunned but unfortunately escaped. Boudin later descended into a front “revolutionary” organization (the May 19 Communist Organization) for a sordid group of coked-up Black faux revolutionaries and helped get three gentlemen killed in the Brink’s armored car robbery in 1981. (Gold’s old buddy, the Jew David Gilbert, another “mild-mannered idealist,” is still in prison for that one. So is Judy Clark. Can you guess her ethnic background? Gilbert, described as “luminously brilliant” by a former professor, and Clark resorted to the hilarious stratagem of denying the legitimacy of the court—because they were revolutionaries you know—and refused to mount a defense. The court consequently and logically sentenced them to forever in the slammer. Boudin, however, accepted good legal advice from her father and got out after twenty years. Last time I checked she was working as—what else!—a professor at Columbia University.) Read more