Page 7 – The Occidental Observer

The Disunited Kingdom

April 19, 2026/17 Comments/in British Politics, Featured Articles/by Mark Gullick

“To be born an Englishman is to win first prize in God’s lottery”. The phrase is often misattributed to Johnson or Kipling, but was most likely uttered by Sir Cecil Rhodes. If it is true, then any White Englishman today could be forgiven for wondering just how bad second prize is. England has not declined to the level of Zimbabwe, as Rhodesia was renamed when Sir Cecil’s name was removed and White governance ended, but it has started on the journey. When Rhodesia was given back to Blacks in 1980, it soon followed a predictable downward spiral from the “bread-basket of Africa” to its current state of vying with South Africa for the title of most violent and wretched country among Africa’s many contenders for that honor. Perhaps Britain doesn’t have a sufficient Black population to compete in that field. At least, not yet.

When “Britain” is under discussion, “England” is what is generally meant, and the British Empire was essentially the English Empire. Of course, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland provided men and material, the Scottish shipyards built ships and the Welsh provided coal and copper. But England was both engine-room and pilot of Empire, and so is the country least forgiven for what is now seen as one of history’s unforgiveable sins against the brown races, despite all evidence to the contrary. When the Right talk of “anti-Britishness”, it is England that the political class and their fellow travelers really despise. This can be traced back at least to John Prescott, Tony Blair’s token working-class Deputy Prime Minister around the turn of the millennium. He would regularly talk of “Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the regions.” That is what the Left would love to see: England as merely regional, divested of even its name.

England is, for all that, still a part of the United Kingdom which, if it were a consumer product, would surely be in breach of the Trade Descriptions Act. “Division” is a key word in the government’s lexicon of lies, and the phrase “those who seek to divide us” rolls off the tongue of the political class with a practiced ease. It is the government, however, that seeks to divide, specifically the White population from the various sects and sub-sects attendant on identity politics. In terms of diversity, equally routinely referred to as “our strength”, you can have it in any color as long as it is not white. In various pieces of government propaganda, Whites are portrayed as toxic, non-Whites as put-upon victims or heroes. In reality, a zone which is anathema to the ruling class, it is Whites who are being victimized.

That Britain faces a bleak future affords no pleasure in the observation. Acerbic English journalist Julie Burchill coined a word to describe a particular style of doom-laden, pessimistic journalism produced merely to sell newspapers; Amockalyptic. (She had actually forgotten that this was her invention, and was rather grateful when I reminded her). But any serious observer of the state of Britain at present would be hard put to strike an optimistic note. Politically, economically, culturally, and societally, Britain is headed inexorably towards what Guillaume Faye, the French co-founder of the nouvelle droite, called a “convergence of catastrophes”:

A series of ‘dramatic lines’ are approaching one another and converging like a river’s tributaries with perfect accord… towards a breaking point and a descent into chaos.

Of the various tributaries currently threatening to burst the dam in the UK, the first and most serious problem is the economy.

The public finances would not stand an independent audit if the UK were a company. The ratio of debt against GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is estimated as anything between 97% and 104%. It is scant consolation that the debt/GDP ratio in America is 105%, and 112% in France. Britain is far from being the only Western country currently swimming in shark-infested waters, financially speaking. The consensus among economists seems to be that the ratio should not exceed 40/100, but it seems that this yardstick is invalidated by Japan, which is currently running at a ratio of 250% and don’t seem to be suffering economic hardship.

But there is one crucial difference in that Japan does not borrow externally but only from Japanese banks, creating a financial virtuous circle which does not exist in the UK or other European countries which borrow from the type of pirates who bury their treasure in tax havens such as the Cayman Islands. The annual interest on the British debt now exceeds the defense budget, taxes are at their highest since the end of World War II, and shortfalls in public-sector spending are increasing steadily with no signs of slowing. Welfare benefits in Britain have just exceeded the revenue from income tax for the first time in history, reaching £333 billion against the £331 billion raised annually in tax weal. One in five British people do not work, and 2.8 million are registered sick or disabled. There has been a whole new raft of what counts as a disability, with nervous “disorders” such as anxiety and stress now being valid reasons to be signed off as sick and therefore under no requirement to look for work. Britain is the only G7 country to have lower employment than before the Covid pandemic. And every day, the shirking class are joined by largely unemployable migrants who are housed, fed, and paid by the tax-paying, mostly White public. Local government is shambolic and just as profligate as the public sector. Over half of British councils report that they expect to be bankrupt within five years. There has been a 29% cut in funding overall in the last 15 years, and the services which tend to be cut or removed are youth services, libraries, and social services rather than diversity teams and migrant services. Britain’s NHS (National Health Service) pays over £60 million annually just for translation services.

The waste is truly scandalous. I have worked for the NHS in four different capacities, one of which was handling CSSD (Central Sterile Supplies Department) for Britain’s second-largest hospital, St. George’s in Tooting, south London. In the last week of March, the end of the British financial year, all sorts of mystifying things would turn up in the delivery bay: paintings, vinyl chairs, curtains. I asked one of the depot guys what this was all about. He told me that if the hospital failed to spend the same amount as it spent the previous year, its budget would be cut by the amount of shortfall. The fault in this scarcely needs pointing out. Hospitals are not subject to the same laws of supply and demand that private-sector companies are. You decide whether you want to buy a car or a computer or a ladder. You do not choose to break your leg or get Hodgkin’s Lymphoma. And yet hospital accounting is run along private-sector lines.

As for management, all NHS trusts have full diversity teams, and it is not easy to see why they are required. As a youngster, in 1977, I spent a long time in hospital in Surrey, a county bordering London. It was the first place I had seen Black people in any number. I played for a hospital cricket team in my home town, and was one of two Whites in the team, the other being a Kiwi wicket-keeper. And yet diversity officers on high salary are felt necessary for probably the most diverse employer outside football’s Premier League. They do nothing that is required for anyone’s health, and spend most of their time looking for examples of racism.

And nothing will change. The NHS, begun in 1948 by Labour Prime Minister Clement Attlee, is a sacred beast in the UK, and no politician aiming at election would dare to suggest streamlining it. I once spoke to an asset-stripper, hedge-fund type at a party, and asked him which section of the British public sector he would most like to get his hands on if it were a private company, and he didn’t miss a beat in his reply: the NHS. And that was 20 years ago. There are 7.25 million people currently on NHS waiting-lists, around 10% of the population. That population is itself ageing, and the strain on health resources worsens daily with more illegal immigrants arriving on the coasts of Kent. Some of this influx is “health tourism”, whereby immigrants take advantage of a free service which was originally designed for the indigenous British, and for which they pay a large proportion of their income tax. Long-vanished diseases such as TB and diphtheria are on the rise as the arrivistes bring their scurvy into the country with them, and the National Health Service is actually an international health service.

In terms of infrastructure, it is hard to believe that Britain once built an empire, as today it is unable even to build a railway. The HS2 railway program to link the south and the north is now many years, even decades, over schedule, and it cost £66 billion to build the 140 miles of track which have been laid. By comparison, Spain laid 2,500 miles of track for $70 billion. Britain pays over eight times the European average for infrastructure, and convoluted requirements for planning permission and land use rival those here in Central America, notorious for its reams of necessary documentation.

As for food, the UK is composed of islands, and imports are made more expensive by a lack of road linkage (excepting the Channel Tunnel). Britain imports 48% of its food, and 83% of its fruit. This is absurd, as anyone who has ever flown over Britain and seen how green it is will know. Britain could be food-independent, but instead 12% of British households are food insecure. Any supply-chain interruption exposes Britain’s vulnerability. With education, the sector lies in a state of economic and ideological ruin. There is approximately £260 billion in unpaid student debt, most of which will never be repaid. This means that my brother in England is paying tax to fund White students who are being taught to hate him.

School buildings are crumbling, educational standards are dropping, and truancy and violence in the classroom are also at highs. University courses are increasingly useless, and more likely to render a student both unemployable, and ideologically slanted when they do find a job. An arts graduate is more likely to bring a list of grievances to the workplace than efficiency. The head of the CBI (Confederation of British Industry) reported that the standard of graduate interviewees was increasingly woeful. That was 25 years ago. Things are unlikely to have improved in the interim.

Education itself is now entirely run by Leftist ideologues at every level, and one piece of apocrypha serves as an example of the occupation of the education system by the hard Left. An English YouTuber recently recounted a story told to him by the 14-year-old son of a friend. The boy was in class and the lesson was on slavery, as these ideological topics gradually replace worthwhile subjects of the past now deemed too White for consideration. The mostly White class was told by the teacher that if anyone even mentioned either Britain’s role in the dismantling of the slave trade, or William Wilberforce, architect of that culmination, they would be ejected from the classroom.

As for defense, the country which held out against the Nazis as European countries fell like dominoes is unable even to join its supposed allies in current conflicts. The British Army’s equipment plan is £15 billion short, and the UK is seriously underprepared for a war, as President Trump’s Iranian offensive showed. The British Navy, who once famously “ruled the waves”, was unable to send more than one ship to the Gulf, HMS Dragon, and that broke down en route. The rest of the fleet is undergoing maintenance. Trump was understandably incensed at this pathetic response, and the “special relationship” is becoming a thing of the past.

Crime is rising exponentially. Prisons are 72% overcrowded and at 99.7% occupancy. The British government’s response to this is to arrest and imprison more people for social media comments than any other country in the world, meaning that violent criminals are being released to make room for this new class of lawbreaker. £2.8 billion is required to stabilize prisons, with just over half a billion having been allocated. Prisons are largely Muslim-run, micro-caliphates which will radicalize a low-IQ Muslim faster than the internet ever could.

There are currently over 50,000 immigrants who are currently on the missing list, 736 of them with criminal records. When one or more of them strikes, as they surely will, the tinderbox that England currently is will flare. The Surrey town of Epsom, idyllic and bucolic, has just seen anger take to the streets after the brutal gang-rape of a woman outside a church. The police have yet to release the details of the suspects, despite Epsom having as many-high resolution CCTV cameras in place as the rest of the country, the most surveilled in the Western world. Coulter’s Law applies here, after Ann Coulter: The longer the police refuse to describe an assailant, the more likely he is to be non-White. Essex police recently dropped a new facial recognition scheme as it proved 30% more efficient in recognizing Black faces than White.

Demographically, the seeds of Britain’s demise as a majority White nation are currently being sown, to the undisguised glee of the BBC. The White British, and this extends across Europe, are breeding at well below the replacement rate, while Muslims have children at well above that rate. This is why the government recently removed the two-child benefit cap. This check on benefit payments was designed to stop the type of welfare harvesting Blacks operate in the US, but the British government will be absolutely aware that removing the cap benefits Muslims and not Whites. In fact, it penalizes Whites as they pay the vast majority of taxes.

Then there is the political stance of the current government, whose authoritarianism no one saw coming. The most difficult thing for the British people to accept is that its government is not incompetent but malevolent. When Starmer’s policy advisers see that their boss’s popularity is at an all-time low in the polls, the most rock-bottom figures for any PM since polling began, they are not concerned. If government policy is hated by the people it affects, then these people are performing their duties as globalist shills, just as their masters would wish and have installed them to do. The British uniparty may be coming to an end, but there is no guarantee of a new dawn. Nigel Farage is hardly Right-wing, even if such a thing did exist in any significant way. He is a Thatcherite libertarian who wants revenge on the political system that has shut him out for so long. He has already been corrupted by power, even before he has got it, and his “CivNat” approach to candidature in local elections has repelled many on the Right. While Rupert Lowe is the best bet in terms of old-school conservatism, it is unclear whether he will achieve anything more than splitting the Reform vote.

One thing can be said with certainty. The coming summer in the UK is not going to be a summer of love. There are three events in the cards, and one or more will happen. Firstly, a political assassination similar to that of Charlie Kirk. It could easily have happened to Konstantin Kisin, a Russian Jewish émigré who has relocated to the UK. He is nothing like Kirk; he’s a center-Right, very intelligent, very capable commentator, and he does not have a clearly insane wife. But someone rushed him with a box-cutter recently and it could have gone either way.

Secondly, a serious terrorist attack framed under the false flag of the “far Right” will almost certainly be in the planning stages. Accusations of being “far Right” fulfil the same function as those of “White supremacy” used by the Biden and Obama administrations. White supremacy is just another word for history correctly interpreted, but the Democrats have weaponized it and it is a formless smear, lacking in definition and reduced to a pure performative, in the sense used by the philosopher of language, J. L. Austin. Thus, the word is not descriptive nor is it meant to be. It is used purely to create a pejorative brand, a “word-spell”, in the same way Orwell described the use of “fascist” in Politics and the English Language.

Thirdly, street-level clashes between White British and Muslims are already occurring and will proliferate. There will be war, amockalyptic as that may sound. England today is more Burchillian than Churchillian, but the English will have to “fight them in the streets and towns”.

So, it is difficult to give a cheery prognosis for the old place. There is a trend among British YouTubers on the dissenting Right for showing clips of the United Kingdom, and England in particular, as it once was. These idyllic, nostalgic videos have become almost memetic, and show White people in the streets and parks during my 65-year lifetime, unconcerned and untroubled, and living lives that may as well be as far removed in time as those of the Tudors. Against these tableaux, they juxtapose footage from modern Britain. Black youths rampage down once-quiet streets like cockroaches from a septic drain. Muslims occupy Trafalgar Square for their obeisance. The streets of Britain’s second city, Birmingham, are filled with rubbish through which rats skitter, after a two-year strike by rubbish-collectors in one of the first cities whose council is officially bankrupt. Their response has been to bring in vermin experts, and charge the residents for people who will surely fail in their appointed task.

Some of this footage of erstwhile Britain comes from the 1960s and 1970s, when Whites were in charge of Rhodesia, then the bread-basket of Africa due to its maize crops — “mealy-meal” as the illiterate Africans called it. Things have changed somewhat since the colonial heyday of Sir Cecil and the other Englishmen who had no idea what the world they had created would become and how their ability and firmness of purpose would create a new Africa in the old country. Now, to be born an Englishman is just a lottery, and there are no prizes.

Irish police smoothly switch from helping to pepper spraying fuel protesters

April 19, 2026/2 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Ganainm

Fuel protests blocked streets, and some ports and refineries from Tuesday to Saturday. Slow moving convoys of trucks and tractors clogged motorways. A third of petrol stations ran out of fuel, causing panic buying, enthusiastically hyped by MSM.

Our Chieftain Michael Martin, called it “national sabotage” on Wednesday. Big Jim O”Callaghan, our hard drinking Justice Minister, called for Army help on Thursday morning. The Army did not show until Saturday evening. They were unarmed and had a couple of heavy lift tow trucks.

Cops helped and facilitated the protests for four days. Slow driving and blocking roads are traffic offences. For whatever reason, for four glorious days, the Gardai Siochana did not arrest people. Then they whipped out the pepper spray. They have arrested several people since on charges of dangerous driving. One day they escort you with smiles ón your peaceful protest. A week later they arrest you on charges of dangerous driving.

On Sunday, after a panic Cabinet meeting, the government knocked ten cents off the tax on fuel. It’s not enough, of course. The war is pushing the price up and half the price of fuel is tax. The US can sell petrol for about a euro per litre. Spain, fellow slaves of the EU, can sell petrol for 1.50. Why does Paddy have to pay 2 euro?

Niallis O’Connor, one of the first protestors at the port of Foynes, gives credit to Garda Superintendent Martin Fleming for the peaceful conduct of the protest, explaining how they agreed to allow water treatment chemicals and fuel for emergency workers through the blockade.

It is bizarre that for four full days Gardai allowed blockades of O’Connell St in Dublin and of oil refineries and some ports. It could take the state three or four hours to assemble a hundred Gardai to quell a protest in a rural town. Any longer than that and it is clear the Gardai were helping the protests. They have happily tear gassed and baton charged peaceful protests about immigration, so why were they so obliging this time?

Gemma O’Doherty reckons the whole protest is a psy-op: The lack of fuel will make many angry at the protestors and the genuine protestors will be noted by the cops and prosecuted and jailed in a few months time, without any publicity. Then again, Gemma thinks everything is a psy op. Infiltrators are present, of course, but the vast majority of protestors seem honest.

Were the cops told to allow the blockades develop? Or was it a soft mutiny? Rank and file Gardai are potentially sympathetic to the protestors. Did they make excuses to their bosses for not removing the blockades sooner?

If the price of fuel is the problem, blocking a fuel depot will only increase the price and it is a stupid tactic. A much better tactic is what happened in Castlebar, Co Mayo. Junior government Minister Alan Dillon has an office there. On Sunday, one hundred trucks and tractor spent four hours outside his office. No damage was done and nobody was arrested or pepper sprayed.

Big machines intimidate. They don’t mean to, but they do, even if they are parked and the engine is off. Parking a hundred big machines outside a politician’s office intimidates him and his staff but does not inconvenience people as much as a fuel shortage.

MSM, even more bizarrely, gave lavish coverage to the protests, even going so far as to allow some of the protestors airtime. They also publicised protests before they happened. This never happens with anti-Covid or anti-immigration rallies.

Were MSM instructed to promote the protests? Or do MSM journalists want cheaper petrol too?

Our Minister for the Media, Patrick O’Donohue , was furious at the relatively balanced coverage and threatened an investigation by the Media Commission. This is run by the comically Jewish looking and outrageously English Jeremy Godfrey. There are six million ethnic Irish on the island and none of us are good enough to be the boss of the Media Commission. Thank God for immigration.

O’Dohonue was slapped down by his bosses, Michael Martin and Simon Harris. They know that the MSM have much unpublished dirt on politicians. O’Donohue later admitted he “made a hames of what I was trying to say”.

Seamus Dooley of the National Union of Journalists complained bitterly:“During the past week many journalists were abused by protesters, including key personnel involved in organising blockades.”

Seamus is probably understating things. It wasn’t many journalists insulted, it was all journalists.

Oddly, despite the abuse the journalists suffered, they did mention the protestors’ viewpoint and even allowed some to speak. The moral of the story might be that if you want the MSM to report reasonably accurately, you must first fiercely insult them face to face.

The Journal.ie are totally MSM, but they are allowing very sarcastic comments on their articles. Snide remarks about money spent on refugees, the fascist nature of our government and even the Israeli question are all acceptable. It’s like listening to Tucker Carlson.
.
Nothing lasts for ever, and this mutually respectful protestor/police/media dynamic was broken on Saturday when Garda used tear gas and thuggery to remove non-compliant farmers. In fairness, everyone was warned before the tear gas was used. And the cops didn’t actually kill anyone. They could have killed people and escaped punishment, so it is to their credit that they didn’t. Despite the threats from the Minister, there are nó reports of machinery being damaged by the police.

It took three days after the threat to use the Army, before they actually turned up. Is this a sign they were not enthusiastic? In the end, there was no need to use tow trucks. When faced with overwhelming police numbers, most truckers and farmers just drove their machinery away by agreement.

Politicians used deliberately provocative actions and deliberately insulting language. They were obviously goading us. The farmers were accused of dancing to Tommy Robinson’s tune. Fianna Fail politicians told protestors in Galway they could attend talks between Government and official farm and trucking representatives. But when the lads went up to Dublin, they were told their names were not on the list.

Michael Martin said the protests were “national sabotage”. This is the same man who sneered at us Irish as “mongrels”

The arrogance and aggression displayed by politicians was surprising. They were seeking to provoke the population not placate us. At their next EU meeting will they boast about how they insulted us and will the EU leaders roar with laughter as the Irish explain how they rig their elections?

Some government politicians are grumbling openly, but nobody is brave enough yet to challenge the Chieftain. Martin first became a Minister in 1997

One junior Minister voted no confidence and he and his brother have left the Government and joined the opposition. Michael Healy-Rae is from a family of independent refugee-loving populist politicians. They are wealthy and make money from renting properties to refugees. The only person convicted of electoral fraud in the 2024 elections worked for a company owned by the Healy Raes.

The protestors have support from the Independent Ireland political party. Sinn Fein and socialist politicians have got some insults from the protestors, but they still want to support the protests. They did not climb on the anti-Covid or anti-migrant bandwaggons but they are allowed try to climb on this one.

Protests continue, without blockades, but the helpful publicity from the MSM has completely stopped, with the exception of local radio and Raidió na Gaeltachta. Somebody has given the order.

In related news, a man got onto a US Hercules C-130 aircraft parked in Shannon Airport and attacked it with a hatchet. These planes cost 160 million bucks and it was “extensively damaged”. Once again, Iron Age technology defeats modern tech. The tough guy cops and soldiers had to bring a ladder to the plane before they could get onto the wing and arrest him. Our guy, 47 years old, just shimmied up.

Daithi O’Corrain is the man’s name and it is surprising that for such a minor alleged offence the evil feminist lady judge (Patricia Harney) did not give him bail. You get bail for rape, savage assaults and even murder. Daithi translates as David. David against Hercules.

It is suprising that someone could evade all the 21st century security at the airport and damage a military plane. There must be many Irish police and soldiers who have contempt for the Israelis. Did Our Guy have some help from insiders?

There is something you could do which might, just possibly, help Daithi. It’s very dangerous, but you won’t have to leave home to do it. And it won’t take long.

The President of Ireland can issue pardons for any criminal offence. This power is rarely used. The President of Ireland is Catherine Connolly. Until her election last year, she was a great friend of the Palestinians and a passionate critic of Israeli genocide, terrorism, anal rape, canine rape, baby eating, foreskin-selling and general racism. Since her election she has kept her mouth firmly shut about the Palestinians, despite the daily massacres.

You could write to her to ask for a pardon for poor Daithi. It is very unlikely she will do this. She is a typical feminist coward. But if ten thousand or a hundred thousand petitions arrived? If Tucker Carlson asked for an interview with the prisoner and anti-war Congresspeople signed a letter of support?

This is dangerous because Irish police will put you on their enemies list. But if you are already on your own police enemies list, it won’t make much difference if the Irish police also hate you.
Her address: Aras an Uachtaran, Phoenix Park, Dublin. Email: info@president.ie

You could write a líne or two of encouragement to the man himself:
Daithí O’Corrain
Limerick Prison
Mulgrave Street
Limerick
V94 P8N1
IRELAND

Beir Bua

Revilo Oliver papers: Does Integration Equal Progress?

April 18, 2026/3 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Kevin MacDonald

The paper discussed here (Does Integration Equal Progress?) was found among the papers of Prof. Revilo P. Oliver (1908–1994), a professor of classics at the University of Illinois and an important racialist thinker who was quite aware of Jewish influence in opposition to the interests of White Americans. He was entirely in the mainstream of conservative thinking until expunged from the movement by William F. Buckley. Wikipedia:

Oliver was an early book reviewer for National Review from 1956 until May 1960 when he was ousted by its editor, William F. Buckley Jr, for his public antisemitism.^[9] Oliver also wrote for The American Mercury.^[2] Buckley, who aimed to make conservatism more respectable to Americans averse to antisemitism and extremism, kept a close friendship with Oliver but acknowledged privately that Oliver was antisemitic.^[10]

In 1958, Oliver joined as a founding member of Robert W. Welch, Jr.‘s John Birch Society, an anti-communist organization.^[11]^[12] He was a member of its national board and associate editor of its magazine, American Opinion.^[13]^[1]^[12] In 1962, Buckley repudiated Welch and the “Birchers”, saying they were “far removed from common sense” and urging the GOP to purge itself of Welch’s influence.^[14] The repudiation drove a wedge in Buckley’s friendship with Oliver.^[10]

Revilo Oliver paper: Does Integration Equal Progress?

Oliver’s article makes two main points. First, he was aware of the importance of Jewish influence on the demise of thinking in terms of race and biologically based race differences. I was particularly gratified to notice that he used the same quote from Melvin Herskovits, a Boas protégé, that I use in Chapter 2 of The Culture of Critique, on the influence of Franz Boas:

[Boas’s] protégé Melville Herskovits (1953, p. 23) noted:

[T]he four decades of the tenure of [Boas’s] professorship at Columbia gave a continuity to his teaching that permitted him to develop students who eventually made up the greater part of the significant professional core of American anthropologists, and who came to man and direct most of the major departments of anthropology in the United States. In their turn, they trained the students who . . . have continued the tradition in which their teachers were trained.

This quote and much else also appeared in Carleton Putnam’s Race and Reason: A Yankee View (Public Affairs Press, 1961) and shows clearly that even in the 1950s there was a significant community of intellectuals who understood the importance of Jewish influence on thinking about race and were aware of race differences in intelligence and ability to inhibit biological tendencies seated in the more evolutionarily ancient parts of the brain. Regarding intelligence, Oliver notes:

There is reason to believe that hot climates shape human evolution in ways which inhibit, or at least do not adequately stimulate, the growth of mental capacity. In their book, Geography of Intellect, Nathaniel Weyl and Stefan Possony state: “Tropical man is shaped by evolutionary forces to enable him to lose body heat by sweating; this dictates a specific somatic, or physical, structure and accordingly, he is lean, attenuated and has a high ratio of skin surface to bulk. this tends to produce narrow pelves and heads with subnormal cranial capacity. In the case of the Negro, there is a good deal of evidence that the smaller brain capacity means a more than proportionate reduction in the capacity of the new brain, namely, those cortical areas which are specifically adapted to the higher process of reasoning.3

Such reasoning fits well with the later writing of authors such as J. P. Rushton and other who have emphasized that northern climates favored intelligence and foresight needed to plan for a long winter when crops could not grow. Instant gratification was strongly selected against. —

These findings are broadly compatible with my own work emphasizing the importance of prefrontal cortical control of impulses (MacDonald, K., 2008; Effortful Control, Explicit Processing and the Regulation of Human Evolved Predispositions. Psychological Review, 115(4), 1012–1031). Here Oliver quotes a Prof. J. J. Connelly on brain differences in prefrontal control between Blacks and Whites:

Comparing the two large groups of Whites and Negroes, while the variability is large and there is much overlapping, the mean values reveal significant differences. The dimensions correlate well with what we might expect from a knowledge of the cranium in the two races. The Negro brain is on the average relatively longer, narrower, and flatter, than the brain of Whites. The frontal region, as measured by the projectional distance to midpoint of central culcus, is, relative to the total length of the brain, larger in male Whites than in Negroes, while the parietal is larger in Negroes than in Whites…It can be said that the pattern of the frontal lobes in the White brains of our series is more regular, more uniform than in the Negro brain,..The White series is perhaps slightly more fissurated and there is more anastomosing of the sulci [indicating greater complexity more apparent in higher primates]. It is a matter of frequencies.

I do not discuss race differences in this paper because it is impossible to get a paper published in a mainstream psychology journal that has an evidence-based discussion of race differences in brain size or anything else. It’s interesting that Putnam discusses interviewing academics who personally accepted the importance of race differences but were afraid to say so publicly:

Most of them expressed their reluctance in terms of a temporary condition. One was about to publish a book and he felt it more important in the long run to keep the track clear for the book than to declare his position now. Another had a confidential assignment for his state that he must first perform. Another said, “I cannot commit academic suicide. I still have work to do. But when I retire—!” Another was simply “biding his time.” How much of this was rationalization, arising from a timidity that ought to be overcome, I would not venture to say. It was easy enough for me, a man entirely independent of control, to speak—indeed it made my obligation unavoidable. It was less easy for them. (p. 21)

So even in the 1950s the academic world was being rigorously policed to favor environmentalist views on race and punish dissenters. However, Richard Lynn has written on race differences in prefrontal control (Race Differences in Psychopathic Personality: An Evolutionary Perspective; Washington Summit Press, 2018), summarized in my Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition:

People who are low on Nurturance/Pair Bonding are prone to psychopathic personality—exploitative interpersonal relationships, lack of warmth, love, and empathy, an inability to form long term pair bonds and close, confiding relationships, and lack of guilt or remorse for violating others’ rights. The finding that males in the general population are three times as likely as females to be categorized with Antisocial Personality Disorder[1] fits with the robust sex differences in this system. Psychopathic personality, which is characterized by lack of empathy and social bonds, is associated with having many sexual partners, an uncommitted approach to mating, sexual coercion,[2] many short sexual relationships, sexual promiscuity,[3] and lack of nurturance of children.[4]

In terms of race differences, the Nurturance/Love system is a central aspect of a slow life history strategy,[5] with the result that it is expected that African and African-derived populations will be less prone to affectionate pair bonding and paternal investment in children, and more prone to short-term sexual relationships. Indeed, while African mothers are sensitive and responsive to babies’ needs, mother-child interactions in prototypical African cultures are devoid of the warmth and affection that are typical in European cultures.[6] Thus Mary Ainsworth, a pioneer in attachment research, found that Ugandan babies were quite securely attached despite the fact that their mothers rarely showed any affection toward them—a phenomenon also noted by Robert and Sarah LeVine for another African group.[7]

Prefrontal Executive Control (PEC). Having a reputation as conscientious and dependable is important for being accepted in a moral community [a central institution of social control in individualistic Western cultures]. A relatively recent trend in evolution, especially in the Primate line, has been the evolution of a centralized control system able to integrate and coordinate lower-level adaptations. This top-down Prefrontal Executive Control (PEC) system control enables coordination of specialized adaptations, including all of the mechanisms associated with the Behavioral Approach System (BAS) [e.g., proneness to reward seeking].[8] PEC involves explicit processing of linguistic and symbolic information and the top-down control of behavior. Unlike the automatic processing typical of the BAS, it is able to evaluate complex contexts in order to generate behavior that is adaptive in contemporary human societies with their constantly changing, highly complex environments.

For example, emotional states resulting from adaptations designed to react to evolutionary regularities may place people in a prepotently aggressive state energized by anger [e.g., an insult]—an emotional state that is one of the subsystems of the BAS [Behavioral Approach System] discussed above. However, whether or not aggression actually occurs may also be influenced, at least for people with sufficient levels of the the PEC system, by explicit evaluation of the wider context, including explicit evaluation of the possible costs and benefits of the aggressive act (e.g., penalties at law, possible retaliation). These explicitly calculated costs and benefits are not recurrent over evolutionary time but are products of the analytic system evaluating current environments and producing mental models of possible consequences of behavior.

Individual differences in PEC are most closely associated with the personality trait of conscientiousness.[9] Conscientiousness involves variation in the ability to defer gratification and pleasure (both related to the BAS) in the service of attaining long-term goals, persevering in unpleasant tasks, paying close attention to detail, and behaving in a responsible, dependable, cooperative manner. Not surprisingly, conscientiousness is also associated with academic success;[10] indeed, higher conscientiousness is likely the reason for the finding of sex differences favoring females throughout the school years, including college.

Conscientiousness refers to “socially prescribed impulse control that facilitates task and goal-directed behavior”[11] and is thus central to understanding undercontrolled behaviors associated with psychopathic personality.[12] Specifically, variation in PEC is central to understanding the difference between controlled and uncontrolled aggression—i.e., the difference between an impulsive act of aggression carried out in anger because of an insult versus a well-planned attack of revenge carried out in cold blood. Variation in PEC is also central to controlling reward-oriented behavior, another central component of the BAS.[13] Individuals with low levels of prefrontal control are prone to impulsivity, substance abuse, and have low levels of emotional control, including relative inability to control anger, a prime motivator of some types of aggression.

Richard Lynn’s Race Differences in Personality: Whites as More Generous and Empathic than Other Races

Richard Lynn’s Race Differences in Personality provides a welcome review of the personality literature related to race differences that fits well with the material on personality discussed above.[14] Studies from the United States have consistently found a rank ordering of races on behaviors related to psychopathic personality—highest in Blacks and Native Americans, followed by Hispanics, lower in Whites, and lowest in Asians, especially in Northeast Asians. The variables studied in the research included conduct disorder, direct measures of psychopathic personality, measures of sexual promiscuity (indicating less proneness to pair bonding and being high on the BAS), conscientiousness (Blacks vs. Whites only), criminality, school suspensions, emotional intelligence (Blacks vs. Whites only), drug and substance abuse, child abuse, and self-esteem (linked to the BAS: individuals high on the BAS are prone to high self-esteem and self-confidence). An important exception to this rank ordering is in behavior related to altruism and charitable giving (see discussion below). In general, as with IQ, race differences are greatest between Whites and Blacks and much attenuated between Whites and Northeast Asians.

Given the data on European individualism and its effects on mating patterns (highlighting the importance of love and pair bonding in choice of marriage partner compared to more kinship-oriented societies), I suggest that the differences between Northeast Asians and Whites are best explained mainly by differences in Prefrontal Executive Control. The results for Blacks clearly indicate higher levels of the BAS, lower on Love/Nurturance, and lower on PEC.

So Prof. Oliver was correct to emphasize race differences in the ability to control impulses. The academic world was hostile to such ideas back in the 1950s and remains so today.

[1] American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 (Washington DC, 2012).

[2] Martin L. Lalumiere and Vernon L. Quinsey, “Sexual Deviance, Antisociality, Mating Effort, and the Use of Sexually Coercive Behaviors,” Personality and Individual Differences. 21 (1996): 33–48.

[3] Robert D. Hare, Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) (2nd ed.) (Toronto: Multi-Health Systems, Inc., 2003).

[4] Andrea L. Glenn and Adrian Raine, “Psychopathy and Instrumental Aggression: Evolutionary, Neurobiological, and Legal Perspectives,” International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 32 (2009): 253–258.

[5] Aurelio J. Figueredo et al. “The Psychometric Assessment of Human Life History Strategy: A Meta-analytic Construct Validation,” Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences 8, no. 3 (2014): 148–185.

[6] Kevin MacDonald, Emily Patch, and Aurelio José Figueredo, “Love, Trust, and Evolution: Nurturance/Love and Trust as Two Independent Attachment Systems Underlying Intimate Relationships,” Psychology 7, no. 2 (2016): 238–253.

[7] Mary D. S. Ainsworth, Infancy in Uganda (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1967); Robert A. LeVine and Sarah E. LeVine, “Parental Strategies among the Gusii of Kenya,” in Robert A. LeVine, Patrice M. Miller, and Mary Maxwell West (eds.), Parental Behavior in Diverse Societies (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1988): 28–35.

[8] MacDonald, “Effortful Control, Explicit Processing, and the Regulation of Human Evolved Predispositions.”

[9] Ibid.

[10] Oliver P. John and Sanjay Srivastava, “The Big Five Trait Taxonomy: History, Measurement, and Theoretical Perspectives,” in Lawrence A. Pervin and Oliver P. John (Eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, 2nd ed. (New York: Guilford Press: 102–138.

[11] Ibid., 121; italics in original

[12] Adrian Raine, “Psychophysiology and Antisocial Behavior: A Biosocial Perspective and a Prefrontal Dysfunction Hypothesis,” in Daniel M. Stoff, James Breiling, and Jack D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of Antisocial Behavior (New York: Wiley, 1997): 289–304.

[13] MacDonald, “Effortful Control, Explicit Processing, and the Regulation of Human Evolved Predispositions.”

[14] Lynn, Race Differences in Personality.

Mikhail Bakunin vs Karl Marx and the Jewish Question

April 17, 2026/7 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Jose Nino

Mikhail Bakunin is remembered as the founding theorist of modern anarchism, a man who dedicated his life to the abolition of all systems of domination and who warned with prophetic accuracy that Marxist states would create new ruling classes rather than liberate the masses.

Mikhail Bakunin

His admirers in the anarchist space celebrate him as a champion of human freedom who spent years in solitary confinement for his beliefs, escaped from Siberian exile, and inspired revolutionary movements across Europe. Tucked away in the dark corners of Bakunin’s voluminous literary output is a persistent, antisemitic thread that has been obscured by the passage of time.

Mikhail Aleksandrovich Bakunin was born on May 30, 1814 into Russian landed nobility at the family estate of Premukhino in the Tver Governorate, northwest of Moscow. His father had served as a diplomat in Italy before returning to manage an estate that included over 500 serfs. The young Bakunin abandoned a military career, immersed himself in Hegelian philosophy, and eventually found his way to the revolutionary circles of Paris, where he consorted with Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Karl Marx.

The revolutionary wave of 1848 transformed Bakunin from a philosophical radical into a man of action. He fought during the February Revolution in Paris, attended the Slav Congress in Prague, and participated in the Dresden insurrection of May 1849. His arrest led to a death sentence that was commuted, followed by extradition first to Austria — where he was sentenced to death a second time, again commuted — and then to Russia. In May 1851, he was placed in solitary confinement in the Peter and Paul Fortress in St. Petersburg, where he spent three years before being transferred to Schlisselburg Fortress for three more years, then exiled to Siberia in 1857.

His escape from Siberian exile in 1861 became legend. Bakunin made his way through Japan and then by ship from San Francisco through Panama to New York before crossing to London, where he would spend the remainder of his life constructing the anarchist creed he preached until his death in 1876. He built networks of interlocking secret revolutionary societies, participated in an insurrection in Lyon in 1870 and helped plan an anarchist uprising in Bologna in 1874, and became the central figure of the anarchist faction within the International Workingmen’s Association.

Bakunin’s anarchism rested on a profound conviction that all systems of domination, whether the state, the church, or capitalism, must be abolished simultaneously. He argued that “to exploit and to govern mean the same thing” and viewed the state as an instrument of domination and exploitation serving a privileged ruling class — one that applied equally to monarchies and representative democracies alike.

He envisioned a post-revolutionary world of freely federated communes organized from below, with voluntary associations of producers starting locally but organizing internationally. He championed the right of every people to self-determination and opposed colonialism and imperialism. In his 1867 essay Federalism, Socialism, Anti-Theologism, Bakunin declared: “liberty without socialism is privilege, injustice; and that socialism without liberty is slavery and brutality.”

His most enduring contribution to political thought was his warning that a revolutionary state run by socialists would not wither away but would instead create a new ruling class of party officials and intellectuals governing in the name of the proletariat. In Statism and Anarchy (1873), he directly challenged Marx’s concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat, arguing that any post-revolutionary state would perpetuate itself indefinitely rather than dissolve.

Bakunin and Marx first met in Paris in 1844 and maintained an initially cordial if wary relationship. Marx even sent Bakunin a copy of the first volume of Capital. But their disagreements ran too deep for friendship to survive.

Marx believed the working class should seize state power through a “dictatorship of the proletariat” as a transitional instrument to build socialism. By contrast, Bakunin believed any state, even a workers’ state, would inevitably reproduce class domination. Marx favored centralized political organization while Bakunin advocated federalism and spontaneous worker action. Marx placed the urban industrial proletariat at the center of revolution while Bakunin also embraced the peasantry and the poorest workers, especially in Russia, Spain, and Italy.

The conflict was also bitterly personal. Marx wrote that Bakunin was “a man devoid of theoretical knowledge” and “in his element as an intriguer.” Bakunin believed Marx “lacks the instinct of liberty” and “remains from head to foot, an authoritarian.”

The crisis came to a head at the 1872 Hague Congress (The Hague Congress of the International Workingmen’s Association (aka the First International)). Bakunin could not travel to the Netherlands without risking arrest, and in his absence, Marx engineered his expulsion from the International on charges of maintaining a secret society within the organization and fraud related to an unfinished translation of Capital. The anarchist wing regrouped at the Saint-Imier Congress eight days later and founded the Anti-Authoritarian International, permanently splitting the socialist movement into wings that remain divided to this day.

Bakunin perceived that Marx had conspired against him and assumed that Marx sought to centralize control of the International. Bakunin framed the entire conspiracy in antisemitic terms, as a specifically “Jewish” plot.

The Russian anarchist intellectual’s antisemitism appeared in rudimentary form as early as 1851. While imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress, Bakunin wrote his Confession to the Tsar, in which he criticized Polish independence leaders for their favorable attitude toward Jews. Bakunin’s aversion to Jewry grew stronger after his conflict with Moses Hess, a German Jewish socialist and proto-Zionist who represented the Marxist wing of the International and published a two-part critique in the Paris newspaper Le Réveil on October 2, 1869.

Bakunin responded with a long unpublished letter titled To the Citizen Editors of Le Réveil, in which he declared something that his friend Alexander Herzen immediately found disturbing. Herzen read this letter and complained to Nicholas Ogarev with a single question that captured the bewilderment of those who knew Bakunin best: “Why all this talk of race and of Jews?”

Between October 1871 and February 1872, Bakunin wrote a note titled Supporting Documents: Personal Relations with Marx that was originally intended for Italian allies but never sent. First published in 1924 in volume 3 of his German collected works, it contains some of his most disturbing writing:

Himself a Jew, Marx has around him, in London and France, but especially in Germany, a multitude of more or less clever, intriguing, mobile, speculating Jews, such as Jews are everywhere: commercial or banking agents, writers, politicians, correspondents for newspapers of all shades, with one foot in the bank, the other in the socialist movement, and with their behinds sitting on the German daily press — they have taken possession of all the newspapers — and you can imagine what kind of sickening literature they produce. Now, this entire Jewish world, which forms a single profiteering sect, a people of bloodsuckers, a single gluttonous parasite, closely and intimately united not only across national borders but across all differences of political opinion — this Jewish world today stands for the most part at the disposal of Marx and at the same time at the disposal of Rothschild. I am certain that Rothschild for his part greatly values the merits of Marx, and that Marx for his part feels instinctive attraction and great respect for Rothschild.

Throughout the passage, he sought to synthesize his broader critique of the state with specific observations regarding the role of Jewish financiers in the global economy:

What can there be in common between Communism and the large banks? Oh! The Communism of Marx seeks enormous centralisation in the state, and where such exists, there must inevitably be a central state bank, and where such a bank exists, the parasitic Jewish nation, which speculates on the work of the people, will always find a way to prevail…

In his February–March 1872 letter To the Comrades of the International Sections of the Jura Federation, perhaps his most extensively antisemitic text, Bakunin expanded his theories into sweeping generalizations about Jewish people as a collective.

Every Jew, however enlightened, retains the traditional cult of authority: it is the heritage of his race, the manifest sign of his Eastern origin. … The Jew is therefore authoritarian by position, by tradition and by nature. This is a general law and one which admits of very few exceptions, and these very exceptions, when examined closely confirm the rule.

He attributed Marx’s authoritarianism to his “threefold capacity as an Hegelian, a Jew, and a German.” In Statism and Anarchy, his 1873 book written in Russian, Bakunin described the creation of the German nation state as “nothing other than the ultimate realisation of the anti-popular idea of the modern state. … It signifies the triumphant reign of the Yids, of a bankocracy under the powerful protection of a fiscal, bureaucratic, and police regime which relies mainly on military force.”

Ultimately, Bakunin’s willingness to look past the superficial constraints of his day and directly identify the intersection of finance, state power, and Jewish influence and proneness to authoritarianism remains his most vital, yet ignored, lessons. While his contemporary successors in the anarchist movement have devolved into willing foot soldiers for the Jewish-dominated post-World War II order, a resurgence of Bakunin’s brand of judeoskepticism is long overdue. It is time for a new generation of dissidents to pick up Bakunin’s mantle, shedding the baggage of modern ideological constraints to confront the reality of Jewish power head-on.

Out of Africa: The Jewish Elephant in the Room

April 17, 2026/12 Comments/in Featured Articles, Race/by Pierre Simon

A lie produces flowers but no fruits.
African proverb

“You and I, indeed, all of us, all over the world, are Africans under the skin; brothers and sisters separated by barely two thousand generations. The old divisive concepts of race are scientifically false,”1 notes Spencer Wells, the Boasian anthropologist responsible from 2005 to 2015 for the Genographic project of the National Geographic. Led by Susan Goldberg, its Jewish editor in chief from 2014 to 2022, this popular magazine has become a formidable weapon of globalist propaganda whose sole purpose is to promote mass immigration, multiculturalism, inclusion, egalitarianism, race-mixing, and the negation of the concept of race.2 Although the Genographic project has been shelved, the following views on race and evolution remain consistent under current Editor in Chief Nathan LUMP (non-Jewish) since 2022:

Based on evidence from the Genographic Project and other scientific research projects, humans of the past and present can trace their origins to a single ancestor living in Africa 60,000 years ago.

It is genetically proven that all humans are 99.9% identical. Human beings do not fall into neat physical categories that some people call “race.” The differences between us — like skin colour and hair texture — evolved as humans adapted to different environments. Yet these differences constitute less than 1/10th of 1% of our genetic makeup.

These opinionated notions are repeated almost verbatim by the many social agents involved in promoting immigration, multiculturalism, miscegenation, and race denial such as the African-born recently arrived Quebecer Éric M’Boua: “[…] it has been scientifically proven that humanity originated on African soil. This makes us citizens of the same land called AFRICA [sic].” In an article published in the Huffington Post Quebec, Mr. M’Boua, whose enthusiasm for race mixing and multiculturalism knows no bounds, backs up his statement with a lecture by Spencer Wells, quoted above, presented on the platform TED Talks, Ideas Worth Spreading. 3

Is Eric M’Boua right? Has it been proven scientifically that humanity originated in African soil? Can humans of the past and present trace their origins to a single ancestor living in Africa 60,000 years ago? What is the truth of the matter? Where does this notion come from? Why is it important?

Afrocentrism

The doctrine of Afrocentrism which originated in the United States during the civil rights movement of the 1960s and the creation of post-modern Black Studies programs in American universities has played a significant role in the promotion of the Out of Africa hypothesis. The author of this doctrine is the African anthropologist, Cheikh Anta Diop. He believed that Africa was not only the matrix of humanity, but that the ancient Egyptians were “Negroes” and that humanity owes them all of civilizations and primary inventions. According to the African history specialist, Bernard Lugan, Anta Diop was also convinced that “whites who could not admit this contribution of ‘Negroes’ had then created modern Egyptology in order to destroy the evidence of Egyptian negritude by eliminating black mummies and highlighting only white mummies.”4

With his best-selling book, Black Athena. The Afroasiatic roots of Classical Civilization, Jewish author Martin Bernal played a major role in the spread of the African origin of humanity. He claimed that Whites had deliberately obscured the immense cultural contribution of Asia and Africa to European civilizations for racist and antisemitic reasons.5 While his primary political aim was anti-racism and postcolonial revisionism (building on Afrocentric scholars like Cheikh Anta Diop), his Jewish background provided personal motivation and shaped his focus on combating antisemitism and racism.6

Out of Africa Film

There is no evidence, at first sight, of a direct or intentional impact of this Jewish-produced film on the notions promoted by the National Geographic. However, the film almost certainly played a significant, positive role in the public’s ready acceptance of these ideas. It indirectly created a specific emotional and intellectual backdrop by presenting Africa as a “lost paradise,” a place of profound beauty, and majesty. The aura and prestige of the Stars Meryl Streep and Robert Redford lent the continent a new kind of romantic legitimacy in popular culture. The title itself—Out of Africa—is a powerful, simple, and positively framed phrase. In 1985-86, it was on everyone’s lips: winning 7 Academy Awards including Best Picture. The term “Out of Africa” entered the cultural lexicon associated with love, loss, beauty, and a return to origins. The film’s core is about a deep, personal, and transformative connection between a European woman and Africa—its land and people; it echoed a theme of “origin” and “return.”7

Mitochondrial Eve

But what gave these notions their scientific credentials is the “Mitochondrial Eve” study by geneticists Allan Wilson, Rebecca Cann, and Mark Stoneking published in 1987 by the journal Nature.8 The famous phrase, “We Are All Africans Under the Skin,” was then widely popularized by the Jewish controlled main stream media9. At the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance, the good news was also promoted by eminent scientists such as the Jewish geneticist Axel Kahn:

The surprise of recent scientific discoveries is indeed that man has no more genes than the donkey or the ox, and even much less than the toad… All men are in fact of great genetic homogeneity, because their common ancestor is young in terms of the evolution of life; he lived over 200,000 years ago in Africa. All the continents seem to have been populated from a population whose groups would have left Africa 70 000 years ago. Skin color, which plays such an important role in racial prejudice, does not reflect genetic divergence so much as a progressive browning of the skin as one moves from the north to the equator. There is more genetic diversity, on average, within individuals of a particular ethnicity than between two different ethnicities, even if they are apparently as dissimilar as Scandinavian or Melanesian populations.10

Globalists and liberal anthropologists of the Boasian school, such as Spencer Wells, quoted above, have meanwhile become obsessed with this notion.11 The fact that we all came out of Africa the day before yesterday, and that we are therefore all fundamentally similar, makes it much easier to mix populations and races, and to make them accept the world dreamed by John Lennon in his song “Imagine.”

Fortunately for those who do not like to be tossed around in the dreamer’s washing machine like a basket of dirty laundry, thanks to advances in anthropology and genetics, there are many reasons to believe —until proven otherwise, as science never stands still and is open by definition to revision of established truths—, thanks to advances in anthropology and genetics, that Africa is not the cradle of the major subspecies of mankind: Caucasoid (light skin, originating in Europe, Middle East, North Africa, parts of South Asia); Mongoloid (East Asian features, epicanthic folds, originating in East/Southeast Asia); Negroid (darker skin, originating in sub-Saharan Africa); additional minor groups: Australoid (Indigenous Australians, some Pacific Islanders) and Capoid (Khoisan peoples of southern Africa).

Multiregional Hypothesis

According to the multiregional view of paleoanthropologists Alan G. Thorne and Milford H. Wolpoff of the Australian National University, mitochondrial DNA is not the only source of evidence; “Mitochondria Eve is not the first woman to come out of Africa. Fossil remains and artifacts represent more reliable evidence.” As Thorne and Wolpoff state, the principal human races began to evolve well before the appearance of anatomically modern humans Homo sapiens. Contrary to mainstream thinking races did not evolve as a result of modern humans leaving Africa to colonize the rest of the world some 60 000 years ago as promoted by National Geographic. They trace racial characteristics as far back as two million years ago to the extinct human species Homo erectus.12

Anatomically modern humans evolved from this more ancient form simultaneously in different parts of the world, and it was during this period that the racial characteristics of Homo sapiens emerged 300 000 years ago. Stating that all humanoids originated in Africa means very little, but gives the false impression that all of humanity is an undifferentiated African magma. There is no single recent dispersal for modern humans; humans originated from Africa and then slowly developed their modern forms in every area of the Old World.13

As noted by Kerry Bolton in his book Babel Inc., this was also the view of eminent anthropologists Carlton S. Coon of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists who stated that today’s races evolved separately, in different continents, over different periods of time: “if Africa was the cradle of mankind, it was only an indifferent kindergarten. Europe and Asia were our principal schools.”14 As geneticist, R.R. Gates states, “isolation has been the great factor or at any rate, an essential factor in the differentiation of races.”15

DNA sequencing allows us to affirm that Europeans of the Caucasoid subspecies are descended from three strains, none of which is African:

The Western European hunter-gatherers, the stem population of all Europeans;
The ancient North Eurasians, whose genes are found in all Europeans and inhabitants of the Near East, notably in the Turks;
The farmers from Anatolia, whose genomecontainsgenes from the above hunter-gatherers (mainly in Mediterranean populations, but not in Danubian and North-European populations).16

Evolutionary Surge of Domestication

Since humans started farming roughly 10 000 years ago, for example, new races emerged that had very little or no resemblance to the originals. In their book, The 10,000 Year Explosion, scientists Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending explain that since the beginning of domestication, evolution has been roaring along 100 times faster than during the Stone Age, that it is “madly galloping off in all directions,” and that “the biological equality of human races” is “about as likely as a fistful of silver dollars all landing on edge when dropped.” 17

Now, for the second National Geographic idea:

It is genetically proven that all humans are 99.9% identical. Human beings do not fall into neat physical categories that some people call “race.” The differences between us — like skin colour and hair texture — evolved as humans adapted to different environments. But these differences make up less than 1/10th of 1 percent of our genetic makeup.

The racial reality that the “out of Africa crowd of the left” refuses to accept makes it possible, among other things, to determine in each race the length of pregnancy, the weight of a baby at birth, its precocity, its aggressiveness (the crime gene, MAO-A), the size of its brain, its intelligence and chances of success, physiological adaptations (lactose tolerance, altitude and skin pigmentation adaptation) and even its response to certain drugs and its predisposition to suffer from certain diseases (sickle cell anemia, malaria), cancers, or mental diseases such as schizophrenia. These differences are the product of evolutionary pressures—not social constructs.18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25

While we are identical to all other humans in more than 99.9% of the 3 billion elementary bases of which our DNA is composed, this 1/10 of 1% of our genetic makeup is of paramount importance, for it actually contains the blueprint for all our physical, physiological, and psychological differences not only between individuals, but also between races.26, 27, 28

The above scientific facts are an affront to the cherished idea of the “we are all Africans under the skin” crowd that believes that races are a category of the mind, the human brain hasn’t changed much since modern Homo sapiens appeared 300,000 years ago, and that we are all the same under the skin and in the head.

The intention is to challenge notions of biological hierarchy and racial prejudice by insisting on our shared origins and our common DNA, but using human evolutionary history and genetic characteristics to justify modern migration policies and social-political decisions is a disastrous category error—mixing paleoanthropological and biological facts with socio-political decisions has led to the present chaotic world we live in.

The Jewish Elephant in the Room

It was Jewish liberal pseudoscientist Franz Boas who at the beginning of the 20th century led the assault on the idea that race was the primary source of the differences to be found in the mental or social capabilities of human groups. He professed that race is merely a category of the mind or a social construct not found in nature, and that behaviour is strictly shaped by environment.29

As a result, by the middle of the twentieth century, educated Americans no longer thought Darwin and evolutionary theory were relevant; they referred to human differences in cultural terms, and believed that all human races were equal. Research on evolution ceased, and the profession of anthropology completely excluded genetic studies on race.

This fundamental shift away from race as a biological construct was the result of an ideological shift rather than a scientific shift. At the time, America was a racially homogeneous White Anglo Saxon Protestant country. Immigration to the US was restricted to people of European descent. Antisemitism was common. So, the goal of Franz Boas and his Jewish students was firstly to break the immigration laws which stopped their kind from immigrating to America, and secondly, to make the country more Jew friendly as Jews can only prosper and be safe in the world when the respect for pluralism, the accent on tolerance, the emphasis on individual liberties and egalitarianism are the dominant values. But to fit a square peg in a round hole, Boas based his conclusions on incomplete information, inferences, guesses, and unverifiable assertions ranging from the possible to the preposterous. It was a long and challenging road but this fake Boasian science eventually led to the Hart-Cellar act of 1965, a landmark piece of legislation that opened wide the gates of immigration to non-European populations.30

Likewise, and for the same reasons, prominent Jewish Harvard scientist Stephen Jay Gould had a major influence on the public’s views on immigration, race, and intelligence. In his book The Mismeasure of Man, for example, he falsely claims that evolution could produce people as different as Australian Aborigines and Europeans, but the brains of the two groups, and therefore, their intelligence, could be exactly the same, a notion that has been thoroughly debunked. So, why would Gould say such a thing if it is false? Was he just mistaken? Or, did he commit fraud like Franz Boas to advance his ethnic/ideological agenda? As evolutionary psychologist Kevin MacDonald says in his book The Culture of Critique, one of the prominent themes of Gould’s book was how hereditarian views on intelligence had been used by the “Teutonic supremacists,” aka the Nazis, to discriminate against his race and justify its persecution. Gould’s views on this subject as well as the IQ debates of the 20s and their link to the immigration issue and eventually the Holocaust are the reasons why he falsified his studies. As MacDonald notes, this “illustrates how skill as a propagandist and ethnic activist can be combined with a highly visible and prestigious academic position to have a major influence on public attitudes in an area of research with great implications for public policy.”31

Then there was the enormous influence of Jewish linguist Noam Chomsky’s theory of language which claimed that “the general principles underlying the structure of particular languages across the world, the rules which determine the form of their grammar, in such languages as English, Turkish, Yoruba, or Chinese, are indistinguishable in their degree of sophistication.” Chomsky’s goal “was to offer a theory of language consistent with the ideological claim that all humans are genetically equal, in order to encourage the integration of non-White races in the West and make Whites feel there was nothing special about their cultural achievements by reducing all languages down to their lowest common denominator.”32 

What about National Geographic? How does it fit in? Well, it belongs to Walt Disney Corporation. It’s Jewish CEO, Robert Iger, is a notorious liberal advocate, like a disproportionate number of his coreligionists and for the same reasons listed above.33 According to journalist Alyssa Rangel of Culture Wars, after the death of Walt Disney and his brother Roy, this family-oriented business was transformed into a progressive, DEI, anti-racist, LGBT-pedophilic oriented stronghold.34

Moreover, one of the major shareholders of Disney is asset management firm BlackRock. Its Jewish CEO Larry Fink is the interim chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF) and BlackRock is a WEF strategic partner. Fink has also participated in Bilderberg and Trilateral Commission events. Big Pharma, the Industrial Military Complex, BlackRock and other firms such as Vanguard, State Street, as well as the Open Society Institute of Jewish currency speculator George Soros are broadly aligned with the money-lenders of Wall Street, the City of London, and the UN-related sustainable development goals of Agenda 2030, a vehicle for a globalist “New World Order” aiming to undermine national sovereignty, control populations, and make the richest richer.35

In short, Franz Boas, Stephen Jay Gould, Martin Bernal, Axel Khan, Noam Chomsky, Suzan Goldberg, Georges Soros, Robert Iger, Larry Fink are all ethnic activists who support a social engineering political agenda rather than a humanitarian one. In fact, advocating an ideology of cultural pluralism, anti-racism, tolerance, and egalitarianism as a model for Western societies, has been the “invisible subject” of Jewish activists in finance, politics, academia, media, and the entertainment business— “invisible,” notes Kevin MacDonald, because the racial interests of its advocates are hidden by their discretion on their racial identity, humanitarian objectives, and the language of science.36

In the final analysis, Jewish activists are the main advocates of the “Out of Africa” trope. Whether this “Jewish elephant in the room” truly believes in this trope and whether he thinks race is a category of the mind, all humans are truly equal, and open society, mass immigration, and the mixing of racially and culturally incompatible populations are good for mankind is an open question. Judging by their notoriously strong tribal affinities and Israeli policies on immigration, multiculturalism, and race mixing, it can be argued that the Out of Africa theory is one of the many group evolutionary strategies that Jewish power uses in a deceptive way simply because “it’s good for the Jews.”37

Dr. Jones and the St. Joseph’s County Library: Sorry, Doc, The Problem Ain’t One Board Member — It’s Much Worse

April 16, 2026/in Featured Articles/by Josephus Tiberius

The internationally famous Catholic intellectual, Dr. E. Michael Jones, a couple of years ago released an interesting podcast, How The St. Joe County Public Library Enables Genocide In Gaza, in which he discusses — and complains about — the failure of the three-person St. Joseph’s County Board of Commissioners of St. Joseph’s County to appoint a new member of the St. Joseph County Library Board in place of a former eminent lawyer named Alan Feldman. Feldman, in private life a distinguished lawyer at a large law firm, apparently supports retaining a homosexual-promoting book in the children’s section of the library. He, together with the Library Board back in July, rejected requests by parents to move the book to another section of the library. (Apparently the parents were too polite to ask for the complete removal of the book from the library itself, let alone its burning in a public ritual).

This alarming attitude, in the view of Dr. Jones and most reasonable people, would be ample reason for the eminent lawyer’s immediate removal from the Library Board. As well as the removal of the other Library Board members who voted to keep the book in place. Mr. Feldman, however, unlike the other Members of the staggered-term Board, was alone up for re-appointment (or removal) in December of 2023.

Fortunately for the “good guys”, a while ago, the County Board flipped from 2-1 Democratic to 2-1 Republican. The new Republican member was (and is, as she is still serving on the Board) a pro-family Catholic named Amy Drake. Seeing Feldman’s term renewal coming up, Drake licked her chops, reasonably assuming that, now, the County Board was majority Republican, the County Board could replace Mr. Feldman with someone less “edgy” on the homo front. Wrong. According to Dr. Jones, the other Republican on the County Board “stabbed Amy in the back” and voted to continue the eminent Mr. Feldman Esq. for a third 4-year term. (Commissioners reappoint St. Joe County Library’s preferred board member.)

Dr. Jones seemed to imply in his podcast that this betrayal — if in fact it was (there are a number of well known Republican could care less about “pro-family” issues, and we have no way to know what promises were, or were not, made to the unfortunate Amy) was facilitated by the holding — by a Republican group? — of an event discussing the Hamas-Israel situation across town two hours after the start of the County Board meeting (and possibly not before the end of that meeting). Dr. Jones’ suggestion is that this Israel meeting — which apparently turned into a pro-Israel love-fest, to the discomfiture of Dr. Jones — drew all the voters who otherwise would have attended the County Board meeting. This — I guess — reduced the number of “witnesses” to the “backstabbing” of the good Amy. Or something. Whether the presence of those “witnesses’ might have intimidated Amy’s shameless Republican colleague into voting against Mr. Feldman cannot be known. In the event, the local newspapers reported that, aside from one speaker, all the attendees loudly supported Mr. Feldman.

Look, this is all very complicated. And since the Library Board has seven (7) members, what difference would the removal of one member make anyway, at least in the short term? Had the rest of the Board disagreed with Mr. Feldman, they could have outvoted him 6-1 at the July meeting in which they voted to keep the book where it was. In addition, as can be seen from our discussion below, it is not clear that their vote would have meant anything if the library administrators wanted to keep the book there.

Thus, Dr. Jones’ complaints are a bit confusing. However, his podcast does spark the viewer’s interest in whether and how the entire Library Board might be removed and how it was selected in the first place. Then you could ditch the entire damn Board and presumably scour the library for its objectionable books and nix any future “drag queen” hours, the local ADL be damned.

Of course, the doings of a library in St. Joe County may seem like small potatoes, given that the county is relatively small and with little national significance. However, what happened in St. Joe has been occurring around the country. Day after day we read of presumably “red” state small town libraries hosting drag shows and piling up stacks of homosexual books, all of which the locals seem unable to stop.(1) How could public libraries in small-town red areas end up with drag queen hours and homosexual texts that the locals cannot seem to prevent or remove? These are public libraries, after all. Can’t the “public” in those towns simply change the local library management and put a stop to this nonsense?

So maybe it is instructive to look at exactly how Indiana local libraries are set up. Perhaps Indiana is not too dissimilar from other states in this respect. In particular, because it is a “red” state. This may give us a clue to the problem we face nationally.

And indeed it does. Sadly, the problem is far worse that Dr. Jones suggests. It is not the problem of one small-town politician cutting a deal that is unattractive. No, it is an entire structure that has effectively removed local library control from the local community.

Under Indiana statutory law, enacted by the Indiana legislature, so-called “local” libraries may be established by vote of any Indiana county board. So far so good. However, the precise governance of these libraries are set forth in the statute in excruciating, debilitating detail. Not so good.

First, the county board establishes a local library by first establishing a “Library Board” consisting of seven members.

The County Board selects these members. Thereafter, everything is in the hands of the Library Board. The County Board has no further say. In fact, since the library system, once created, is an independent taxing entity (like a local school district), it appears that the County Board cannot even exercise indirect control by reducing county appropriations to the library — since it makes no such appropriations. The sole power the County Board has thereafter is the naming of new Library Board members when the old members’ 4-year staggered terms expire. It can only remove existing Library Board members for some form of “cause,” so, in effect, it has no real “mid-term” removal power, since any removal on the grounds of “homo promotion” will undoubtedly be ruled a violation of free speech by a judge. To replace a majority of the board would, therefore, take many years!

In turn, the Library Board also appears to have very little direct operating power. Its only apparent role in governing the local library is the initial power to name an “administrator” and a number of sub-administrators. Thereafter, the Library Board apparently has no power, other than to open, finance, and/or close physical library facilities and, it seems, to establish an annual library budget and, upon the retirement of the “administrator” or one of the assistants, to hire a new person to replace the departing administrator. Crucially, unlike most businesses, the Library Board may not fire any of these administrators at will. The Board may fire an administrator only for, again, some form of “cause”.

So the crucial decision is the initial hiring of a library “administrator”. Thereafter, the local library in Indiana is essentially a self-guided missile, going wherever the “administrator” wants it to go, County Board and Library Board be damned. Now, presumably in the budget-setting process the Library Board has some trading “wampum” with which it can induce the “administrator” into desired courses of action. But is it a great system where the only oversight is the nuclear-bomb threat of defunding the entire system to punish one administrator?

And the Library Board is not even free to appoint anyone it thinks proper. It may only appoint persons that have a state “credential” as a library administrator from a separate, statewide board — the so-called “Credentials Board”. That board is nominally appointed by the Governor of Indiana. However the appointments must be of a certain number of eminent state officials. The likelihood that the Credentials Board will have any sympathy with “parochial lower-class” local mothers is probably low, given the elite subset of persons from which such officials are usually selected. In fact, the likelihood that they will defer to standards set by the odious American Library Association or other similar organizations is probably very high. This is a major problem.

In addition, to be a library administrator, you need a masters in library science, almost certainly from a masters program accredited by the ALA. Predictably a huge part of the ALA’s current mission statement is that the curriculum, faculty, and facilities (??) must emphasize “diversity equity and inclusion”, ALA Standards for Accreditation of Master’s Programs in Library and Information Studies Adopted by the Council of the American Library Association (the Council), November 30, 2023, by request of the Committee on Accreditation (“ALA Accreditation Standards”). Thus, a nationwide system has been established much like the schools of education, which only low-IQ persons who are — or are educated to become — heavily “woke” attend. It appears clear that the uniform product of this “educational” system will be exactly the kinds of people who, even before entering, would support drag queen story hours. And since “diversity, equity, and inclusion” has been defined to mean inclusion of homosexuals and those who commit every kind of sexual perversion, these future administrators will have been brainwashed into thinking that any attempt by “uninformed” parents to block homosexual or similar material from the libraries is a violation of fundamental civil rights — like another Inherit the Wind Scopes Trial, like the Hollywood blacklist!! Unthinkable!! After all, they are the experts. And they learned in school that inclusivity towards homosexuals and transsexuals is a mandatory part, and perhaps the MOST IMPORTANT PART of a library’s mission.

Clearly, with this system in place, each local town is now set up for a major cultural conquest of the unsuspecting inhabitants and the brainwashed janissaries produced by ALA — accredited institutions.

It should be noted that this system is a perfect way to weed the “common people” off the habit of reading books. Instead of hiring a 60-year-old 145 IQ blue stocking Radcliffe graduate bookworm (whom you can’t hire since she would drop dead rather than go through a duller-than-dull MLS program), you will have to hire a 110 IQ MLS graduate who — at that IQ level — probably does not even like books. In fact, books probably bore her to death.

If you were wondering why so many libraries are now stacking CD’s and movies, why all libraries feel it is necessary to host noisy “events” in their main reading rooms all the time, now you know the answer. These drones cannot imagine why anyone would want to sit silently in a completely quiet library reading room and study one book after another. In fact, many library administrators no longer enforce what used to be the longstanding “no talking in the library” rule. Many libraries seek to introduce computers, entertainment equipment and the like while de-accessioning as many of their books as they can. This caters to that part of the community that likewise has no interest in books and, of course, drives away people interested in using the library to study or read books. Gradually, local communities will lose the idea that reading books is even desirable.

For the powers that be, that is a good thing. A populace that is well-read is an enemy to centralized, bureaucratized control mechanisms such as Davos, the UN commission on Climate Change, EEOC, the Bush family….

To add insult to injury, the “only” basis on which the Library Board may select an administrator is the comparative superiority of his credentials! Since the “quality” of those credentials will undoubtedly have been pre-determined by the presumably woke Credentials Board, the Library Board in fact has very little room to name a non-woke library administrator. It might try to do so, but, if push came to shove and a court case were brought by the unsuccessful MLS aspirant where a non-MLS Ph.D. in English Literature, e.g., Dr. E. Michael Jones himself — were selected instead, it is likely that the Library Board would lose. So, if it wished to hire a non-woke administrator, it would undoubtedly have to hide its tracks and create an artificial record supporting the “superior” credentials of the non-woke appointee, as well as the fact that the views of the appointee on pro-homosexual books and drag queens were given no weight. Of course, if such a subterfuge were uncovered later, that could mean big trouble for the Library Board members, since such gaming would probably violate the public meetings and public records laws of Indiana, as it would in most states. See the following story from Tennessee — another ruby red state: “Tennessee librarian fired for not moving kids LGBTQ books to adult section”. My prediction? The town will lose.

Thus, even in the initial selection over which the Library Board has nominal power, that power is close to illusory.

So when you work through all this mess, the Indiana library system works like this:

Local counties can decide to establish or not to establish a local library.
Once the county establishes it, the library is run solely by persons selected by ALA-selected candidates

Translation: You set up the library. You pay for it forever. Then, the American Library Association names the guys that run your library and, thereafter, those guys run the library any way they damned well please. Since the Library Association of America now backs every woke agenda on earth, including transgenderism and homosexuality, liberalized race relations, and anything pro-Jewish, so will their hand-picked administrators, and that is why you have the shit you do at your library and why you can’t do anything about it.(2)

You don’t like it? Go fuck yourself.

That is the problem. Not the eminent Mr. Feldman.(3)

Can this be changed at the State level? The Democrats will never change it. How about the Republicans? Well, the big Republicans in most of these states — think the Bushes — are so disconnected from real life they think people complaining about these issues are just lower-class crazies. They probably laugh about such complaints at their country clubs, since the only reason for Republican control of government is tax cuts and increase business subsidies. Didn’t you know that?

Furthermore, these people don’t go to yer grungy public library. They simply buy books they want on Amazon and build de-facto private libraries or use the capacious private libraries at their members-only luncheon clubs (e.g., the University Club in New York City — 100,000 books).

These people don’t use yer grungy public parks — who would do that? When they want fresh air and exercise they go to their country clubs or go yachting on the “Sound” or, perhaps, lake Michigan.

These people don’t go to yer grungy public school. Their kids have private schools and go to private universities.

The super elite don’t even stay in hotels when they travel. They stay in correspondent private clubs, with travel details arranged by subservient ultra-helpful employees of their local clubs.

To make it worse, their businesses — not to mention their political campaigns — probably depend on Jewish financing; they probably know the elites running the Library Association of America and don’t want to piss them off. They may in fact be buddies with the board members. So when someone wants to dismantle the whole set of institutions inhabited by people like them and their financiers, they think that “someone” is out of his friggin’ mind.

So, you want pornography out of your public library? Good luck bro.

As a betting man, my money is still on pornographer “I do it because I hate Christ” Al Goldstein, Al Goldstein — Wikipedia. Certainly not on the mothers of St. Joe’s County. What do you think I am? A sucker?

_______________________

1/ St. Joseph’s County appears to be balanced between two “reddish” rural districts and one urban (read the city of South Bend) “blue” district, consisting of a lot of welfare recipients, homosexuals like “Sec Trans” Buttigieg, and a formerly Catholic college popularly known as “Notre Dame” (of “gipper” fame), i.e., deep blue as the deep blue sea except for the one spot of fiery red periodically erupting out of the house inhabited by Dr. E. Michael Jones.

2/ Why was such a crazy system set up in the first place? Well, Indiana, like most states in the 1920’s, was not a big friend of the Catholic Church. One of the Protestant (statewide) majority’s big beefs with the Catholics was the expansive Index Librorum Prohibitorum put out by the Pope and his Curia,. The Index Librorum might have been a nifty idea had it only prohibited porn and faggotry. Undoubtedly the Protestants would have warmly supported it in those days (not so much these days). Unfortunately, the Index also prohibited works such as “works of David Hume — all”, Les Miserables, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, Gallileo’s Diologues— you get the idea. Obviously, the idea of allowing a local Catholic-majority community to induce its local library to throw out half of what the University of Chicago would call the “great books” just to satisfy the Pope was anathema to the ruling Baptists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, and Seventh-Day Adventists. One can only guess that they devised this centralized system to preserve what, in their view, was the essence of Western Christian Civilization and the American experiment from the foreign Papist dictators and their barbarian adherents in the U.S. Sadly, however, though the Index Librorum terminated in 1962 around the time that the Catholic Church itself committed suicide, the super-centralized library system did not. This gave an opportunity for enormous power to whomever grabbed those centralized levers of “library power”. Inevitably, as always, the centralized system has now been taken out of the hands of 60-year old blue stocking Protestant women and put in the hands of pink-haired lesbians and Jews, for whom the sexual revolution is just beginning. Hence, drag shows at your local library. What a disaster.

3/ The only solution is to get the state legislature to repeal all laws regulating the local libraries and replace them with a simple statute empowering local county boards to establish and run local libraries any way they please, with no credentialing required and at-will hire and fire power over all administrators (and library board members if the county board chooses to create one). That done, the election of a new slate of county board members, mirable dictu, will actually have significance. Until then nothing can, or will, change.

LYDIA BRIMELOW: Alas, Prayers Didn’t Sway Judge Kraus. Now My Family Needs Help

April 16, 2026/2 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Lydia and Peter Brimelow

No normal American family can stand up to lawfare costs

LYDIA BRIMELOW WRITES: We asked you to pray for a miracle and you did, thank you, but it just wasn’t God’s will.

New York State Judge Sabrina Krauss has denied our motion to dismiss New York State’s lawsuit against Peter and myself, separately from the VDARE Foundation. Now the case will also move forward against us personally. It only took her only one day to decide.

We’ve seen this before. Ultimately, it was the cost of compliance with Discovery demands that forced us to suspend the VDARE.com website, even before we were charged with anything. We couldn’t keep the writers and the lawyers both paid at the same time, and the lawyers weren’t—and aren’t—optional.

This time, the Discovery is aimed at our family as well.

Discovery means endlessly expensive invasive demands, endless document production, and endless legal bills. And that’s the point—this is the “process as punishment” that the NYAG’s own Rick Sawyer bragged about [2:13] to the Anti-Defamation League’s 2022 conference, He said that, although “Hate Speech” i.e. VDARE’s criticism of immigration policy is protected under the First Amendment, he could get around that because “it sucks to be sued, because it’s massively expensive, opening up one’s whole life to discovery, ruining one’s credit and inflicting huge opportunity costs.”

Still, we do not know what miracles might lie ahead. There are appeals pending on the VDARE side. The tide could turn.

But, regardless of our faith, we must prepare for the fight in front of us.

My husband and I are immigration patriots. We have committed no crime. For 25 years, Peter ran VDARE.com in the face of unwavering hostility, educating the public about the negative effects of mass immigration. He is a loving father

and grandfather

For more than 10 years I was the publisher of VDARE.com, raising money in spite of massive censorship and deplatforming and facing every challenge with creativity, resolve and more often than not, with joy. I am a wife, and a homeschooling mother of our three young children.

VDARE.com did not go down out of scandal or abuse, and definitely not from lack of support from our wonderful donors.

It was destroyed by lawfare from New York State Attorney General Letitia James. And I am standing here asking for personal help because the she is now trying to destroy my family and our beliefs.

What we need now is money.

Discovery is expensive. We have $38,500 raised through Givesendgo toward our $50,000 goal.

But so far, we have already paid out about $35,000 on our personal legal bills and the hard part hasn’t even started.

If you have already given: thank you. You have kept us in this fight.

If you can give again: please do. The hardest part is still ahead.

And please, keep praying. Miracles do happen. We just haven’t seen ours yet.

Sincerely,

Lydia Brimelow

Please donate by credit card here or by mail to PO Box 677, Berkeley Springs, WV 25411.

And—Thank You, and God Bless.