|
|
|
After the looting
So the news comes in, and it is news of a revolt by, for all intents and purposes, London’s young blacks, increasingly copied elsewhere. But a revolt against what? Certainly elements of the left are trying to make capital out of “government cuts”. “Disaffection” and the misery of unemployment are also being dusted off and lovingly presented as cause just. But it is already clear that the anti-white ramp that was constructed out of the black riots of a generation ago, and which resulted in the invention of “institutional racism”, will not be entertained this time round. These riots are too plainly organised. The motive of the rioters is too obviously to loot and burn. No one is going to experience the exquisite agonies of liberal guilt on behalf of a mistreated looter or disaffected arsonist. “Sorry, young man, there is such a thing as responsibility, and it isn’t as though government hasn’t made huge efforts over the last two and half-decades to help you succeed!” So what, overall, can we expect when the Met’s report is in, the Home Office committee has investigated, the media vented, the mayor of London bloviated, the cabinet sat, and the Home Secretary stood up in the House to present “the answer”? Here are my predictions. 1. The young black male is not going to be excused this time. He has delivered himself of a direct and violent challenge to the social order - an insult which is authentically black and belongs to him, and has no provenance outside of the narrow and low space between his ears. He has made a world of violence and chaos for himself, in which his male dominance strategies can be liberally exercised. That is the sum total of his civilisational worth, and it is not going to be easy for any thoughtful government minister to continue to delude himself that but for a bit more educational expenditure, better role models, more mentoring, sport facilities and youth clubs, and fathers at home, there walks a white boy. There doesn’t. The truth of black sociobiology is knocking loudly on the door. It might not be opened this time round. But opening it is the only option in the longer run. 2. The race industry’s funding will be cut, its leadership changed, its role redefined. It will die by neglect, being officially done away with, probably, by the end of the next parliament. As it happens, today Civitas released a press release on its review of smooth Trevor Philips’ Equality and Human Rights Commission. The review is titled Small Corroding Words, but the events in London and up and down the country will likely prove much more corrosive for Philips (and John Wadham, the legal persecutor of the BNP). That said, the review is extremely timely, seemingly damning, and certain to be well read in Conservative Party circles. 3. The educational Establishment and the Marxian left generally will cop the official blame for its shameless failure to confront gang culture, and for having turned the police into social workers horrified by the possibility of being called racists. How much this will translate into real change, I’m not certain. But it marks the end of Marx in educational thinking. Furthermore ... 4. That way the black “community” will be spared the most searching questions, at least today. It will, however, be required to question its commitment to the social order in much the same way that Moslems have been required post-7/7 to “reject extremism” and become that mythical thing, a “moderate Moslem”. Black politicians - all four of them - will learn the required new, reassuring words, and the media will afford them much opportunity to repeat them. Nothing, of course, will change as a result. 5. The Labour Party will be forced to recognise the horribly non-Marxist drift in respect to the old blame culture, and shift itself towards the new centre. This is probably the major, long-term political effect of what we are seeing. Again, I don’t know how far it will go. But it is very positive - if it happens. 6. Griffin’s BNP will continue to offer the white working-class what it has offered them in the past, entirely missing the sea-change in attitude to the black population that now obtains, as a result of these latest events. Eventually, nationalism will find a way to rid itself of its dog in the manger, and then we might see what a political crow-bar wedged into the new fissure can achieve. Comments:2
Posted by John on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 03:13 | # It’s getting much worse and spreading to other cities. Pakistanis and Indians have now joined the blacks in the looting. 3
Posted by Thunder on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 03:15 | # As much as I hate to see a place I love burn I must say I agree. Some progress may come of all this mayhem. Imagine the many minor incidents in which whites have been victimized. Attitudes will be altered and with growing economic pain piled on things will change. I mean how stupid can the average person be? 4
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 03:48 | #
What does this portend for the prediction that political racial nationalism will be for the foreseeable future effectively legally proscribed in the UK? Perhaps this is cause for Britain’s foremost legal scholar and most luminous intellect, Barnesy, to reconsider his thesis.
But what else is Griffo supposed to do with political racial nationalism effectively legally proscribed in Britain? Should Griffo resign his position as chairman of the BNP and appoint Barnesy his successor so that the ‘strategy’ of “cultural nationalism” can be pursued? 5
Posted by Lew on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 04:11 | # American Jewish media has the ethnic dimension under an airtight blackout. National Public Radio aired a story this afternoon that described the situation using the standard euphemisms (impoverished youths, etc.). When race did explicitly come up in the story, it was in this context: They played an interview with a young British woman crying and shrieking that her store looted by a “White man with blond hair.” Even with hundreds of Blacks on the rampage, they still managed to find a way to disparage Whites. “Anyone who works for the EHRC or has diversity in there job title should be hanged for treason. “ The rope needs to be strung for the media first. 6
Posted by Peter1 on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 04:38 | # There’s a photo accompanying mainstream news accounts of the riots (saw it at Guardian and Spiegel) of a lone young White man carrying a small can, wearing a kerchief, and walking past a burning car. The can could be a beverage, and the kerchief could be for making breathing easier, and I find that likely if he is indeed ethnically British, but the intended message to the average reader seemed to be that he was a White Briton carrying some type of fuel and shielding his identity. That coupled with the lack of any mention of race in the articles would leave a naive reader to think young White Britons are rioting across London and the UK. 7
Posted by Lurker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 05:44 | # Quite so Peter1, I was trying to make that point on the other riot thread. 8
Posted by MWKEE on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 06:16 | # For whatever it is worth, the “youth” attacks and mobs here in the US have been called out for being done by blacks. The press seems to be losing their control and the lid is off… 9
Posted by Bill on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 07:39 | # Inspector Gadget’s view at the sharp end. It’s worse than is being reported. http://inspectorgadget.wordpress.com/ He tells it as it is as much as he dare, the media have control of the narrative and the language, both must be wrested from them. The elephant is back. (Did it ever go away?) Is this Peckham’s Spring? 10
Posted by Peter1 on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 08:03 | # Lurker, Yes, lots of good news links in the other thread since I last checked. I notice GW also homed in on the prominent usage of the ostensible White looter. If he is indeed an ethnic British looter, he’s the proverbial exception that proves the rule. While I don’t underestimate the power of media magnification and political correctness to obscure that demographic truth, this torrent of life-or-death events must be forcing a lot of independent thinking among erstwhile credulous ethnic Brits. Does this constitute “rubbing their noses in multiculturalism?” 11
Posted by Bill on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 08:28 | # I have just finished surveying the wall to wall comment of the print media’s coverage of London’s Spring. It’s far too early to gauge the ramifications and how they will play out in what we’re discussing (and have been discussing here for years.) These gangs of ‘youths’ are only doing what they have been employed to do, why is everyone so surprised about that. Just think of the capital a rational nationalist movement could gain from this. I’m reading about similar incidents happening in America, only they have a name for it, ‘flash mobs or gangs.’ Is there any connection do you think? Any sign of this phenomena being orchestrated at a different level? When I see graphically depicted a burning building on the brink of collapse, I think what better image to portray an England it its death throes. The caption in my mind reads, The Triumph of liberalism! 12
Posted by Anon101 on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 08:36 | # GW, 13
Posted by Anon111 on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 08:58 | # Personally speaking, I’d would rather die in a gutter with a nigger’s knife in my heart than strip nude for them. 14
Posted by Hesper on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 09:04 | # I foresee that I shan’t be well-liked if I indulge in nothing but criticisms but this needs to be said: what the hell is a white Briton? Are there, legitimately, naturally, black Britons? Yellow Britons? Brown Hindoo Britons? Purple Britons? The vague and readily corruptible colour-spectrum designations arose in America, and as such all Americanisms ought to be discarded. Now I understand the utility of using them, even and especially, alas, in AD 2011 Great Britain, but in prefixing ‘white’ to the indigenous English, Scotch, etc one really strips them of some legitimacy to exclusively inhabiting their country and brandishing the name of Englishman, Scotsman, man of Yorkshire, and the like, without the least competition. You see, if you’re merely a white Briton, then (so runs the traitorous or credulous mind, and indeed also Jewish cunning), it implies ‘Britons’ of other colours exist does it not? That they have some shadow of claim, of native possession and history, to the British identity, when in truth they have none whatsoever. That white Britons are only associating in the popular thought with Britain foremost, ahead of those of other races, because of an irrelevant and prejudiced past, but being British is actually a matter of degree: whites may be a little more British, but Britain has ‘contributors’ of all shades and tones (bollocks). These tumultuous beasts are negroes and Hindoostani creatures (tribeless religions like Moslemism are not significant to the question; ‘Pakistanis’ are merely Moslem Indians, same with the east Bengalese) I learn from perceiving the pictures; contrary to fraudulent reports and meticulously manufactured deceitful photos in the press. I would advise, an an Australian, to use the Judeo-liberal fallacious shibboleths against them: my title to my own bloody country is diminished and degraded by being branded a ‘non-Indigenous’ Australian. Well then, aren’t these repulsive children of a lesser god non-Indigenous Britons? Aren’t they trampling upon and crowding out the British aborigines (the word simply means ‘original inhabitant’ in Latin, which the British nationalities are indisputably)? Where is the UN to uphold the rights of indigenous British tribes and their unique cultures? I’ve pondered the significance of names, of titles, and shibboleths (aptly a Hebrew word: buzzword, and agitprop term are others conveying the like idea) and discovered their efficacy in asserting exclusive identity, and weeding out covert aliens - the Jews above all. They - the Jews - hide behind ‘whiteness’ in America, and a sort of faint claim to long-standing inhabitation of Europe. By laying emphasis on the local, the regional, Jewish pretensions become the more flagrantly spurious and indeed laughable. British Jew is something credible to the common man’s sense (although we experienced or penetrating men of racist reactionary turn know its fallacy). English Jew, or Scottish Jew, or Welsh Jew is much more incredible and jarring to the ears. But Cornish Jew? Kentish Jew? Wiltshire Jew, or Jew of Lincoln or Shrewsbury? Risible in the extreme! I’m not pretending to be the author of the regionalist proposal, but I think if the European countries revert to provincial loyalties, which are unalterable and well-established, then form national or continental confederacies of alliance, patriots will enjoy more success than vainly striving to overcome the Enlightenment, postWorld Wars bureaucratic states at Westminster, the Quirinal or wherever state Judaeo-American collaborators are quartered. 15
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 09:11 | # Anon101, I agree white flight will be near enough completed by a continuation of this behaviour. That is a good point that I missed. On your other, highly defeatist point, it will take a nationalist government to evict the foreigners. Different proposition entirely. 16
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 09:14 | # Hesper, A white Briton is a foreigner. A Jew is a white Briton. The English, however, are the unmixed descendants of those non-immigrants and non-Jews present in, or wholly related to those present in, our ancestral land on 22nd June 1948, before the Windrush entered British waters. 17
Posted by Hesper on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 09:18 | # Final remark, (sorry fellas, I’ve been running at the mouth today): Please Christ can we stop reproducing the terrible, patently ludicrous lie that this is Multi-culturalism? 18
Posted by Norman Lowell on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 09:48 | # It was Blair and his rodent-ridden cabinet and party: It was Blair and his Rodent cabinet that outlawed firearms - thus disarming Britons. This whole betrayal of the White Race is the work of the rodents. And the rodents are nearly there - they have bankrupted America and Europe - flooded us with millions of aliens. But 2012 is with us - as is the Final Fight to the Finish. And then, we will go after the rodents and their lackeys, the Traitors. 2012: Anno Zero! Norman Lowell 19
Posted by Bill on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:25 | # I had not read GW’s opening comment (above) when I posted my previous comments, but I don’t think I would have changed anything. The elites won’t meaningfully change anything either, too much blood and treasure has gone into the destroy Britain project to turn back now. Millions have been invited in and glad-handed through Britain’s open door by our politicians and elites, and we here all know why, or think we do. The architects knew exactly what would happen. A few years ago, I read (on the Kunstler blog) of a commenter’s account of a laboratory experiment of which he had been involved during his college years. He graphically described what happened when an aggressive specie of black rat was introduced into a homogeneous harmonious society of white rats. I will not burden your mind with the details, for the commenter himself said, that what he saw as a student, has played on his mind well into his mature years. Such were the results of the experiment. So let us be under no illusion as to what has been going on these past few days, whether organised or no, make very little difference, for what is happening has been thought out well in advance. History shows us these things fizzle out. Enquiries are held, initiatives implemented and much faux hand wringing takes place. We’ve been here before, it’s just like the ‘80’s they say. But things are not the same as in the ‘80’s, not by a long way. Millions of third worlders consisting of a hundred different communities have since been welcomed into Britain. The face of Britain has changed, Britain is no more. The BBC for years, have been gleefully telling us the face of Britain is changing, so we cannot say we weren’t warned. So what has happened? The British (myself included) simply stood (like inquisitive cattle) and watched it all pass by. This story is pure science fiction, you couldn’t make it up, neither will future historians. PS. The ultimate humiliation! poor woman. What was the policeman thinking off? Why didn’t he cover her embarrassment? Perhaps there is a valid explanation somewhere - I hope there is. 20
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:27 | # CC,
He’s running a family business. He will follow the money. It is, btw, perfectly possibly to argue for ethnic nationalism without ever committing the party to it formally. The law doesn’t ban individuals speaking as individuals, even if those individuals are BNP party officials. There is always a way to say everything that must be said. 21
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:36 | # Another rather likely outcome of these events, combined with the on-going efforts of British Moslems to blow people up and, of course, the new threat from the Judeophile cultural conservative “far right”, is that the surveillance state, which received a bit of a slap in the face with a wet fish when New Labour lost power, will be fully funded again and given the green light to do much more. “You must see, Prime Minister” that we can’t wait for felonies to be committed - we don’t have the prison space. Our only option is to get in first by equipping ourselves with more and better security.” Would you like chips with that? 22
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:47 | # Shades of a book I read 35 years or so ago: http://books.google.com/books/about/Wild_Jack.html?id=Lqq34I-PGogC 23
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:50 | # the new threat from the Judeophile cultural conservative “far right” (GW) Oh, cmon - I would hardly call cultural conservatives, even the pro-Israel ones, a threat on par with the foreign conquerors marauding across England. First things first, please. 24
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:59 | # Please, Leon, don’t model irony-failure for an Englishman. We are already quite bigotted enough against our American brothers on that score! (You can take that with irony, too.) Seriously, though, do you really think that the security services aren’t taking a much closer look, post-Breivik, at “far right” dissidents and dissident opinion? 25
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 11:02 | # The young black male is not going to be excused this time. He has delivered himself of a direct and violent challenge to the social order - an insult which is authentically black and belongs to him, and has no provenance outside of the narrow and low space between his ears. He has made a world of violence and chaos for himself, in which his male dominance strategies can be liberally exercised. That is the sum total of his civilisational worth, and it is not going to be easy for any thoughtful government minister to continue to delude himself that but for a bit more educational expenditure, better role models, more mentoring, sport facilities and youth clubs, and fathers at home, there walks a white boy. There doesn’t. The truth of black sociobiology is knocking loudly on the door. It might not be opened this time round. But opening it is the only option in the longer run. (GW) Brilliantly expressed, but rather optimistic, no? Will Britons see things this way? And at this very late date, can the fatuity of liberals ever be underestimated?
But it marks the end of Marx in educational thinking (GW) How nice, but really? And a larger question: if London reaches a tipping point soon where it becomes overwhelmingly nonwhite very quickly, how would you feel - in terms of sentiment - about seeing it airbombed, or even nuked, in the event of a second civil war? Personally, I’d have no personal or moral objection, but I’m not British, either. 26
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 11:07 | # Seriously, though, do you really think that the security services aren’t taking a much closer look, post-Breivik, at “far right” dissidents and dissident opinion? (GW) Oh, I’m sure you’re correct on that point. Did I misunderstand you? I thought you were the one considering the Judeophile “far right” a new threat (ie, to nationalist aspirations), not the security services. Apologies. BTW, are the security services totally populated by leftists? I might have thought that kind of work would disproportionately attract right-of-center types. 27
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 11:11 | # And what the hell are these pictures? Is the ape stealing whitey’s clothes? Really? Why? Humiliation? Why not fight back, if there is only one?! And, are any Brits banding together to fight the savages? And what is the government saying? 28
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 11:12 | # Leon, We will have the Conservative Party in government until 2019 at last. It has not been able thus far to express its natural politics because it is in coalition with the LibDems, and because it has been wholly focussed on the debt issue. Social programmes and their associated quangos and government-teat suckers are slated to be cut for the purpose of debt-reduction, and not for ideological reasons. The ideology has to catch up. What I am saying is, it will do so now. The social dispensation, which was positioned by Blair on a neo-Marxist centre, is being re-ideologised in the light of the bankruptcy of Marxian thinking. The centre will now move quite quickly rightward. I think this is inevitable. Also, it is important to remember that, while the events themselves might only be transitory and their memory quickly forgotten, politics is a world of struggle in which events like these have huge and lasting significance (viz-a-vis Brixton, Scarman, and “institutional racism”). This violence will have far-reaching consequences in British politics. By way of an illustration of what I mean, a commenter at the police blog that Bill linked to says this:
The pendulum has to swing again. 29
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 11:13 | # Leon, As for the clothes thief, he is expressing race-hatred, primarily, and he is not alone. Another negro took the image on his phone camera and uploaded it to Twitter. Obviously, this was not an isolated event. 30
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 11:44 | # Another pretty typical and, for the neo-Marxist Establishment, dangerous sentiment from a commenter at Inspector Gadget:
Meanwhile, the first tender shoots of conflict between the current neo-Marxist prescription and the reality of the security situation appear among Conservative leaders. The Home Secretary Theresa May was interviewed by Sky TV this morning about issuing water canons to the Met, and averred:
But her boss David Cameron is already having to acknowledge reality:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14459008 So no water canons. But is it to be soft, cuddly community policing or is it much more robust action? Note the negro in uniform prominently displayed behind Cameron, btw. Repulsively outree engineering. 31
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 11:56 | # When I did the Henley Regatta decades ago, I met some pretty tough Brits - and these were not skins or football hooligans, either. Surely some of the latter are fighting back? Are there no reports of angry whites counter-attacking? BTW, this is an eerie real life facsimile of a trailer I just saw recently for a new, repulsive Brit movie called Attack The Block , about space aliens in inner city London. I was shocked at how multiracial the cast was, though that probably does reflect social reality. The diversitycrats who imposed these savages on Britain must, postwar/restoration, be exterminated. One reason I’m about to start studying Catholic theology formally is to do the hard intellectual work of providing moral justifications for such trials and executions (at least within my own faith tradition). Make no mistake: Old Christendom would have roasted these savages on stakes. Honestly, the empirical track record of Christian v secular civilization wrt racial survival does not favor the godless. Correlation does not equal causation, but still ... 32
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 12:06 | # Leon, You can divide the faith thing three ways: those who cleave to exoteric religious belief systems; those who have wandered away into secular belief systems; those who do not believe. My solution is to decrease the numbers who believe, because they are dangerous, and increase the numbers who don’t. Any problem with that? 33
Posted by Foundation on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 12:14 | # .. and while this was going on we had our very first Englisc Folkmoot in Wiltshire - which was a great success - the numbers being greater than the BNP’s annual ‘Red, White and Blue’. Next year we will convene a English National Assembly (witenagemot) and declare self-determination for the Englisc Nation. Similar Folkmoots are being held next year in Northern Germany, Holland and Denmark. We feel this the best way forward for ethnonationalists, a process which decouples Nation and State in one non-political act. International law assures rights to individual Nations (Peoples) when attempts are being made (politically or economically) to bring about conditions which could lead to genocide. Six decades of mass immigration is evidence enough for a case to be made. You’ll be pleased to hear ‘cultural enrichment’ is no defence in such cases. 34
Posted by john on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 12:24 | # What’s with the belief thing? Churches might yet prove to be useful places. 35
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 12:34 | # John, Faith is a genetically-founded trait. It afflicts about three-quarters of northern Europeans by my (very rough) estimation. I strongly suspect that the impact of faith’s expansion during the first millenia of Christianity has been negative in many respects, and produced much fanaticism and darkness which greatly held back our true civilisational talent. The present neo-Marxist, anti-racist fanaticism is merely the latest manifestation of the trait. A world without it would be a blessing, and would also allow true religious contemplation to emerge from its esoteric source. 36
Posted by Chav Hunter General on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 12:37 | # Did you notice the white-trash chav scum making common purpose with the nigs in the looting sprees? As one wag who used to post here might put it, all the lower class English are interested in is: Football Not the material from which an ethnic resurgence can be built upon. 37
Posted by john on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 12:53 | # Guessedworker, I agree with you. I mentioned Tony Wright’s book before:http://beyond-belief.org.uk/ 38
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 12:54 | # I note that the Daily Mail has decided to remove the photo of the naked white woman: More fear of the English. 39
Posted by Bill on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 13:03 | # Just caught up with this thread, it’s been an eventful morning. This is my last say before lunch. It has been abundantly clear (to me) since 7/7 that no mainstream politician will deviate from the chosen path. If 50+ murdered innocent victims (+many more injured) didn’t cut it - then nothing would. The pace of corralling whites in preparation for the box car journey has not let up for one moment. Remember how all stripes of politicians, police, military, even royals, fell over themselves to prostrate themselves before the other? Fawning elite behaviour toward the other is routinely displayed in front of the whole nation on our TV screen, while all the time, kicking their own people in the nuts. I dunno, What’s at play here, when a whole population, nay, civilisation, is committing suicide while watching Corrie? 40
Posted by Guest Lurker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 13:04 | #
Really? You would think something like this would have occurred after the L.A. riots in the 90s, but it didn’t. Instead, white victims of black violence publicly forgave the perpetrators on television, and white strippers stripped for free in a fundraising effort to rebuild L.A. My point is, never underestimate the cowardice and whorishness of white people. 41
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 13:19 | # The LA riots were in 1992, right at the beginning of the neo-Marxist dispensation. It has had 19 years to exhaust itself. It is exhausted in Britain. No politician has been able to claim to a white audience that “diversity in our strength” since 7/7. Things change, and there will be change coming out of this event. 42
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 13:33 | # I agree with Guest Lurker. The white race has reached its evolutionary bottleneck. Only a few of us will survive - except we won’t, because of the physical force/coercion problem I keep mentioning, but no one here ever responds to (too depressing, I guess). In other words, most whites are evolutionarily maladapted to this juncture in their history. Those of us who aren’t will be too few to survive the coming (already here?) physical assaults - unless we have relocated and formed White Zion. There is great internal coherence to my seemingly disparate positions. Anyway, England I have learned in less than 1 hour, is totally defunct. Disbelieve me? Check out my little war for White England : Nearly everyone is against me (and therefore MR)! England is dead. White Zion looks more promising by the minute. 43
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 13:37 | # My solution is to decrease the numbers who believe, because they are dangerous, and increase the numbers who don’t. Any problem with that? (GW)
Make no mistake: Old Christendom would have roasted these savages on stakes. Honestly, the empirical track record of Christian v secular civilization wrt racial survival does not favor the godless. Correlation does not equal causation, but still .... and my question: there are English tough guys, footballers, skinheads, etc. Do none of them fight back? No reports of such? 44
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 13:45 | # The losers at inspectorgadget WILL NOT ADMIT the obvious racial aspect. It’s all “these are hooligans of every race ... go hang with the BNP ... I have many black friends ...” I was just educated. England is utterly dead racially. You are 100 times more PC than white Americans. I felt like I was in a Huffingtonpost chatroom. You people lecture us Americans?! Are you kidding? See the responses to me. Sounds like the Democrat party. England is gone. Dream on. 45
Posted by Rusty on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 13:46 | # Whites in America capitulated completely to the anti-white demands of blacks and Jews in the 1960’s and 1970’s, despite being obvious victims and losers. They’re still a bunch of groveling, sniveling nitwits, despite knowing what they now know. Evidently it takes a lot more than this to get to whites’ boiling point. Keep preparing for the worst because it’s yet to come. 46
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 14:16 | # England is dead. Long live White Zion! America is bad, too, but we’ve had blacks from the beginning. So they are American, even if undesirable. But Britain? How could a people get so indoctrinated so quickly, and tolerate such a foul presence? 47
Posted by Revolution Harry on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 14:22 | #
And your evidence for this is?
Surely you are referring to the dark ages? The Catholic church is a long way from true Christianity as found in the teachings of Jesus in the Bible. What was it that released us from the dark ages?
No it isn’t.
Apart from a misunderstanding of what Christianity essentially is, I’d be really keen to learn more about this ‘true religious contemplation’ and its ‘esoteric source’.
Isn’t it strange that the very forces behind this new Tower of Babel that is being built also want to ‘decrease the numbers’ of Christians. Why on earth are they dangerous? How do you plan to do this? I can’t work out if you’re just misinformed or something else more troublesome. 48
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 14:49 | # Excellent post from PM at the ridiculous inspectorgadget site:
A true story: my mother, who is in herearly sixties, was working as a receptionsist in a local doctors surgery. A group of youg boy–probably about 12 years old, were causing a commotion outside, so my mother went out to tell them to go away. One of the group of boys, who was Eastern European, approached my mother with a large piece of wood and threatened to kill her, before theey all ran away. Obviously the police were called, and at first they were sympathetic. Then they asked what the boys looked like, and my mother told them they were Eastern European. Straight away their tone and attitude changed towards her–had she said anything to them that they could have found insulting? They basically interrogated her as a racist. As if a 60 yr old woman is going to pick a fight with a gang of foreign kids. Now my mother understands what I have been telling her for years: the British police are scum, avoid them at all costs. They would happily smash the face of an elderly white British woman into a fuking wall if they thought it would gain them some love from a minority, or the chance of a promotion. When you live in Britain in areas that have lots of minorities, you will regularly see how the police cower and cringe before them, call them ‘mate’ and pretend not to see petty crimes going on around them. They are desperate to be liked by blacks and Asians, who can as you imagine, rightly despise them for their servility and obsequiesness around them. The intense, exaggerated respect for non-whites is matched by an utter contempt for those that they can get away with openly despising–native white Brits. When around British people they will swagger and strut, with their ridiculous bat-belt swinging around, talk to their partner and ignore people, and just generally let it be known that they are there to enforce politically motivated speech and thought codes, not to actually prevent or solve real crimes. They are a political police force now, no different really from the Gestapo.They have correspondingly lost any respect from the law abiding British public, who will quite openly cheer a criminal gunman such as Raoul Moat who threaten to shoot them. So they have lost the support of the law abiding British, and are still despised by the minorities they have courted. A policeman’s lot is not a happy one Leon, but as you can see from they comments you received above, it is a richly deserved one. My advice to all white British people is to avoid dealing with them at all costs. As my mother found out, it could well lead to your own persecution on heresy charges. This is particularly true of people with children, as the police are very trigger-happy when it comes to trying to get British children taken from their parents having been called out to family homes following a crime report. Nothing a British copper loves more than the sound of a white child being torn from his parents, knowing that they were the cause. Can you imagine how many Asian children are taken into care in this way every year? Of course you already know, it just never happens. Got to respect foreign cultures in the police, blood, innit. I hope their precious minorities in London, Birmingham, Bristol and Nottingham batter the fuck out of them. 49
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 14:54 | # And my reply: PM – Outstanding post, friend. I truly ‘feel’ for you, if you’ll pardon the negroidal expression. I’m deeply troubled that things have gotten so bad, but I sensed something wrong here at this blog. Obvious intellectual inferiors berating me instead of the niggers wrecking their country. I know a number of American cops; behind closed doors, at least my acquaintances are solid race realists. they would laugh at these pusillanimous arse-kissers. You have put your finger on a great evil – the conjoining of hard minority racism with soft-Marxist ‘therapeutic’ liberalism. These whites here are so indoctrinated (while ridiculously thinking themselves “open-minded”) I can well imagine them taking out their basic frustrations, borne of such intense racial ‘doublethink’, on innocent whites – the true, lawful British people. A lot of cops by nature are bullies; when allied to PC brainwashing and cowardice before aggressive Africans, how natural to save their manhood by bossing around the good people. Have you read the late Samuel Francis on “anarcho-tyranny”? Apparently, it is even worse in Britain than in the US. I’m really sorry. I can tell you are the real patriot. These people here have no love for the land; just concern for covering their own hides, mixed with some slight residual desire for civic peace. If they were patriots, they would call out the army to exterminate the hooligans en masse, no prisoners, maximum blood in the gutters. England needs a second revolution. It’s coming anyway. But will it end gloriously? 50
Posted by London's Burning on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 15:05 | # No way Blair was a marxist. 51
Posted by London's Burning on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 15:23 | # In fact the main impetus fot maintaining Britain’s current overwhelming and massive immigration (which the Tories seem utterly impotent in controlling despite their posturing and tough words), comes from the ‘free market’ right and big business. 52
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 15:37 | # Very funny from London’s Burning, despite total horseshiite re Thatcher, who saved Britain, literally. A very great lady. It pains me to see such ingratitude. You are right re Big Business traitors loving immigration (how many letters has the WSJ not published from me on immigration??!), but wrong re the Left, at least in the US. It is still mainly the left that wants its next proletariat imported and dark-skinned, though greedy BB and loony libertarians chime in, too. 53
Posted by Graham_Lister on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 15:41 | # All of the political class - Blair as well as Cameron are LIBERALS - axiomatically liberal. A modern liberal of this sort is an odd mix of ‘free-market’ globalist, neo-liberalism (on economics) and quasi-Marxist PC (on cultural values). All that differs in the present political spectrum is the precise ‘mixture’ of those Janus-faced positions that a political figure takes up. But on the all the key issues there exists broad ideological unity within our political elites and media elites (high intra-group coordination). As with the deep economic problems facing the global economy and with many other serious issues the globalist model is, in my view, in real trouble. It may seem structurally strong but might actually be quite brittle in reality. As for London - well perhaps it’s time for a still 98% Euro Scotland to become an independent nation and for anyone with Scottish links to apply for a passport ASAP I think. 54
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 15:48 | # Harry,
If you are a faithist, as seems to be the case, it will be difficult to explain to you the likelihood that major attributes of Mind present in the human family over extremely long time-scales are selected. Faith is one such, and, indeed, evolutionary psychology is interested in faith. Its fitness gain can be demonstrated. Its action can be explained. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology_of_religion Sorry to question the notions you have about the divine. Yahweh isn’t there. Nor is Lucifer or whatever. You are not going to heaven or to hell. “Being good” has nothing whatever to do with the very particular kind of knowing of which Man, actually, is capable.
The Bible, as a knowledge source, is massively fragmented. Christianity is merely Judaism for non-Jews. Like Judaism, it never had an esoteric core. It does not teach consciousness.
I’m afraid it all too clearly is.
Harry, this is something I happen to understand a little, but cannot communicate at all. And that is because of its nature and because of the incompleteness of shared human understanding, not because of any disinterest on my part. You are on your own. You must try to understand yourself.
I have mentioned to you before the difficulty I have in grasping the possibility that, seemingly, none of the very intelligent people gathered around the globalist effort have any more understanding of consciousness and being than the average bible-thumping rapturekind. But it seems to be the case.
Faith is unstable and factually wrong. It is the root of all modern societal madness. It leads to pursuits of the impossible, and causes vast difficulty for all.
By making it unsexy, frankly. But think about that. Don’t just dismiss it.
I understand some things you do not, that is all. 55
Posted by Graham_Lister on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 15:56 | # Thatcher and Reagan were right-wing LIBERAL SCUM. Hayek, their favourite ‘intellectual’ was a FUCKING LIBERAL. Haller you supercilious fuckwit, please can you not see a liberal even when they self-describe as a ‘conservative’. I’m sick of dumb-ass American ‘Republicans’ that think Reagan was in any serious or substantive way a ‘non-liberal’. The empirical strongly suggests otherwise (largest amnesty illegal immigrants in US history - how very fucking ‘conservative’). I feel as if I’m hitting my head against a brick wall at times. Mind you I hear that one of the ever egregious Jamie Oliver’s ‘restaurants’ was been smashed up - that almost makes the activity of the mob worthwhile! 56
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 16:15 | # I suspect I know far more about Reagan than you do, Graham. I was alive, teenager and later adult, and strongly supportive of his presidency at the time. There is nothing you’ve just said that I am unfamiliar with. But a question: what is a “conservative” in your view? 57
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 16:21 | # BTW, that idiot inspectorgadget site deleted all my comments, and worse, put a block on my ability to comment under any other address. Worthless cowards. Here I was cheering on the true English. I’m starting not to like the British very much. The older generation that I knew growing up, yes. Very good quality people. But today’s? All socialists and secularists, even if not also horribly PC. You should have seen the responses to me. Only really three supportive, and I think PM comments here, sometimes. And on a police site!! 58
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 16:33 | # London’s Burning,
The universal politics is neoliberalism + neo-Marxism. That is why a Labour government cleaves to economic policies damaging to their working-class consituency, and why a Tory-led government cleaves to extreme egalitarian policies utterly reviled by their middle-class constituency. The arrival of neoliberalism, which began not in 1979 with the first Thatcher government but in 1945 with the hegemonisation of American political and industrial power, was always accompanied by a Marxist drift (which itself began in 1944). Adorno took up his post in David Rockerfeller’s Radio Project, and Marcuse and other Frankfurt Jews (less Horkheimer, who didn’t like America, and Benjamin who died in France on the journey out) got down to work in the American university system, and the long job of “culturalising” not the theory but the teaching and application of Marxism was seriously begun. Quite independently in Britain, the Historians Group of the Communist Party was formed in 1946 and introduced critical theory to the radical left. But it wasn’t until 1970, when the Birmingham School was fitted for a neo-Marxist purpose, that the production line of radical left opinion really got under way. What was achieved was a double revolution, economic and social, each possessed of a quite different but reconcilable politics - the reconciliation being the flooding the European living spaces with Third Worlders. This was the New Labour project and the Third Way project, and the globalist project. 59
Posted by CS on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 17:06 | # Leon, I would say at this point only 5% at most of the white British public are of any value to us. Even after this latest chimpout I’ll predict that there will be even more black ass kissing and more condemnatoin of sane white Brit race realists. One bit of good news is that this event takes the spotlight off Brevik and actually validates some things he said. Furthermore, this event will push even more white people to our side and way of seeing things. So are goal should be to get this 5% somewhere where they won’t be outvoted by the other 95%. So let’s get the White Zion website done. I don’t know anything about website design and my writing sucks even if I did. When that is done, we’ll promote the website on certain forums and boards. 60
Posted by Helvena on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 17:21 | # “I’m starting not to like the British very much.” then go to Israel where you belong. The Jews really seem to be cozying up to the Caucasians to get rid of the big bad Muslim threat, this after they’ve worked so hard to let the third world in. And now low and behold we have the darkie Muslims rioting and Blacks attacking Whites in the States. How very timely for them. They couldn’t get their war with Iran started that would kill whites (plan A), so now plan B start race wars. This little rant was brought on by my reading Michael O’Meara’s article over at Counter-Culture Publishing 61
Posted by London's Burning on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 17:35 | # ‘London’s Burning’ sncerely apologies for all the scatological references and fart jokes that punctuate his postings, I apologise especially to people of finer sensibilities, like GW, of whom ‘industrial langauge’ is definitely not on and perhaps even disgusting rather than humurous. 62
Posted by Bill on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 17:41 | # Ruraltown latest. 4.30 PM Tuesday 9th August 2011. Inspector Gadget wants immunity from prosecution for police on riot duty. He throws down the gauntlet.
IG ‘s Ruraltown force has been pulled out of the London job, he’s got a little local matter sort out. My Guess it’s Brum. (Birmingham) http://inspectorgadget.wordpress.com/2011/08/09/the-next-48-hours/#comments 63
Posted by PM on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 18:06 | # Leon— sadly when I was writing I was so furious that it was littered with typos at the start, which did detract somwhat from my post, but I stand by the substance. The fact that I am virtually tea-total and have given up on the broadsheets for being so dumbed-down, yet can be written off by these policemen as a ‘Sun-reading lager-lout’ tells you all you need to know about the powers of detection and latent hostility to those they perceive as white-working class—‘you are working class scum, it doesn’t matter what you think or what we do to your family, fuck off.’ These are the same people who will take their shoes off before raiding the house of suspected Muslim terrorists for fear of causing cultural offence. You notice that none of them bothered to even try explaining away the way they treated my mother, Leon. Obviously they think that bullying an elderly British woman who has just been threatened is perfectly acceptable, indeed in their eyes the person who threatened her was the real victim and the fact that she was threatened by a foreigner is seen as damning evidence of some racism on her part. I think you are right that they are bullies who choose to vent their anger on acceptable targets rather than the criminals they fear. I don’t know how you can stand to read that blog, Bill. What do you get from it? It is as depressing as reading the riot-related comments on the Independent or the Guardian, you get an overwhelming sense that no amount of violent race-reality being thrust violently into their faces will ever make the slightest impression—indeed, the police on that blog are more vitriolic in their condemnation of Leon and myself than they are of the rioters. And these are the people who see black dysfunction and aggression on a daily basis! The reason I find it depressing is that, like Leon, I really do wonder if there can be any hope for us when people can ignore such clear and obvious warning signs—heck, these aren’t even warning signs any more…this is the real thing itself, the thing those signs were warning about. People in London were being dragged from their cars and knocked off motorbikes for Gods sake, just like in Wisconsin. White men being stripped naked. And the reaction of the police? Damn you for noticing! These riots have nothing to do with race according to those brain-dead policemen…yet the riots spread to Birmingham, Bristol and Nottingham. These are the main cities with large black populations. How can this NOT be about race? 64
Posted by CS on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 18:26 | # PM, One thing you have to realize is that cops have to publicly spout the PC line otherwise they’ll be fired. 65
Posted by Rusty on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 18:35 | # GW, “My solution is to decrease the numbers who believe, because they are dangerous, and increase the numbers who don’t. “ The Soviets tried that and it worked wonders. The population is still suffering from the after effects. Besides, your prescription is exactly what the West is suffering from now: lack of belief. The old system, flawed as it was, was better than this multicultism/globocapitalism gobbledygook which has been adopted en masse in its stead. Every person must have a belief system because he must make countless decisions every day based on countless assumptions and guesses. Most people simply must have an organized belief system. They must own and belong to something, just as as they must have love and interaction with other people, else they will shrivel up and die, usually harming several other lives as they go. Instead of destroying belief, the better path is to change it to better reflect the truth. 66
Posted by Lee John Barnes on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 18:44 | # For fucks sake, wake up you thick twats. Here is the truth. You wont like it. If you deny it, you are delusional. http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/2011/08/griffin-and-nationalist-idiot-squad.html
One of the problems with Nationalists is their selective memory. They forget what they dont want to remember. For instance - every activist British Nationalist who has ever been on a nationalist demonstration, a march or a protest will know that when we do we are opposed by groups of Far left UAF, SWP, AFA thugs who are usually 99.9 % WHITE. The same thing happens during the student riots that happen every few months - the rioters are always 99.9 % WHITE. The rioter Charlie Gilmour who attacked the Cenotaph and prince charles car during the student riots wasnt black - he was WHITE. More than that, he was the son of a rich poet and the step son of David Gilmour of Pink Floyd who has a fortun of 400 millions pounds from his record sales over the years. The riots in London and aross the country werent black riots, they were multi-racial and multi-cultural riots. Look a this footage here ;
The riots all over Britain were the epitome of multi-racialism - they were formed from feral youth of all races who have become a ammoral predators on our society. Britain at the moment is also experiencing a crime wave from Eastern Europeans - and they are all WHITE. The people filmed in all the rioting footage are not just black - they are white, asian and even orthodox Jews as shown on this video here ;
The BNP is peddling a load of bollocks about these being solely ‘black’ riots. They arent. By saying they are black riots griffin is ensuring that Nationalists, and the Nationalist discourse, are discredited even before the post mortem of the riots has begun. He is doing the liberals work for them. Not only is he talking crap, he is talking crap that a five year old could tear apart. Thats not leadership, thats ineptitude of the highest order. What we need is nationalists to tell the truth, not peddle racist bullshit that only the liberals will benefit from. The liberals want the riots to be peddled by ignorant morons as race riots, as then they can tear the arguments apart , destroy and de-rail the debate and ensure, retain their integrity so as even more liberalism will be imposed as a result. It is time for nationalists to wake up and stop seeing what they want to see and face facts. We need to tell the truth, so that when the debate starts we can win it and esnure the liberals are discredited and removed from power over our people, society and country - not be left looking like thick twats because we have been told and believed bullshit peddled by the moron Nick Griffin. These riots are the products of white liberals imposing political correctness on our society.
The people who have created this problem are not black crack addicts in Tottenham or 14 year white mkids in hoodies in Barking - they are rich white liberals who imposed multi-culturalism, political correctness and mass immigration on our country. The rioters are the symptom. The white liberals are the cause of the problem. If we tell the truth, we can expose and finally destroy the integrity of our primary enemy - the white, multi-culturalism supporting, politically correct, mass immigration controlling white liberal elite. If we lie, we look like fools and the liberals will win again. Griffin is yet again doing the liberals job for them and discrediting nationalism. Its time Nationalists stopped acting like reactionary retards and peddling lies that cane be torn apart in moments. Who is more stupid, the fool or the followers of the fool. Nick Griffin is a lying crook. You believe anything he says, or regard it as of any value to nationalism, then you are a bigger fool than he is. 67
Posted by Waes Hael on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 19:13 | # Although it has manifested into UK wide rioting, it started out as race riots. Indeed, many of the new cities which are rioting are sparked off by ethnic minorities. This is just the latest riot which have been common place in London, where more than 50% of the UK’s black communities live. Although black culture and biology brought the riots about the government have definately had a strong role in nurturing this behaviour in its attitute towards mass immigration and left-wing ideology. 68
Posted by Waes Hael on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 19:14 | # Sorry, I meant to link a post on the riots, which is: 69
Posted by CS on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 19:16 | # Lee John Barnes, White people are the problem. Too many of them are fucking idiots. We need to separate from white liberal retards just as much as we need to separate from blacks. 70
Posted by Rusty on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 19:19 | # JLB, I don’t understand what you are talking about. Even the blacks themselves in America and GB claim that they riot because they do not have the same opportunities as whites. You’re saying that’s not the case at all, that every racial group is rioting equally. 72
Posted by Lurker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 19:42 | # LJB - At night the overwhealming impression is of black rioters. During the day however the MSM have shown edited highlights, straining mightily to frame whites as complicit as blacks with whatever footage they can scrape together, its all a bit too obvious. Just as they show concerned non-whites in positive roles. Aftermath: This on youtube. Volunteer cleanup crew - organised via Facebook/Twitter. If the rioters are multicultultural then what about the cleaners? Looks like there might be one or two non-whites in the mix, that girl at about 0:11 for example. If the BBC cover this I’ll bet money she will be front & centre. Would that then prove the cleanup crew was multicultural too? Btw Those orthodox jews, they are shown running away from the police, they arent shown doing anything are they? And if they are, so what? Thats good, they have shown themselves as enemies of the majority, nice of them to serve themselves up on a plate like that. Thanks for that orthodox guys! Lets see the nice right liberal or anti-jihadi types explain that one away. 73
Posted by PM on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 20:06 | # Blacks provided the critical mass. The presence of a few white faces does not prove anything, and in any case the whites who remain in inner London are white in name only. They talk, move, act and think like blacks. They are entirely in the thrall of black-gangsta culture. If the whites you see rioting had grown up in York, do you think they would have actually instigated riots there? I doubt it. If a group of 3000 or so London blacks had grown up in York, do you think there’d be riots there now? I think there would. There are plenty of very depressed white towns, like Hull or Sunderland, yet there is no rioting there. As I said before, why is it that it has spawned riots in cities such as Birmingham and Bristol if there is no racial aspect? 74
Posted by Graham_Lister on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 20:31 | # Off topic but just reading up on Rick Perry (the Texas governor), Tea Party favourite, and ‘religious’ nut-job. Perry amongst over things supports the teaching of intelligent design being taught in schools as an alternative to evolution. No doubt for many of our American friends he will be greeted as a wonderful ‘conservative’, like good old Ronnie R., so much so that certain people might start playing the ‘jizz biscuits’ game and drinking the kool-aid with regard to Perry. But I’m sure no-one that reads MR could be quite that much of a dupe or dullard, yes? On second thoughts… 75
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 20:35 | # Rusty,
No, they tried to crush Christian belief and expand belief in Marxism-Leninism.
No, the West is suffering from a heavy burden of mis-belief (or faith), and has been suffering from this since the imposition of Christian belief advantaged the faith gene.
Very true.
No, making adaptive life choices does not require belief. It requires an inner connection with one’s genetic interests.
That’s simply not true. Belief (or faith) does not maintain the capacity to have an inner life or a rewarding life experience. This I know - not a question of belief. The function of belief (or faith) is to advance the making of adaptive life choices. This is what exoteric religion is for.
I want to relegate the exoteric as it is today and allow the esoteric, which is what it always was, to re-fill its space. (This is how religions are made, incidentally - those that are not imposed by violence, I mean. But, speaking as a spiritual outlander, one can only invite. One can never do this work oneself.) 76
Posted by Lee John Barnes on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 20:59 | # Anyone watching the sky news footage of the Salford Riots or are you all busy trying to ignore the whites in riots in London to try and reinfroce your bullshit ’ they are all blacks’ thesis ? 90 % white in Salford riots. Kinda fucks your thesis up dont it - numbnuts. 77
Posted by Graham_Lister on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:02 | # Seems apposite - Anarchy in the UK Perhaps it is my inner antinomian at work but I have always had a soft spot for anarchists. At least they are not sheeple. 78
Posted by Graham_Lister on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:10 | # @LBJ Much of British youth are feral - of whatever background, but some elements are more prone to this type of behaviour than others. But people of any background can act badly. It’s about tendencies and propensities as any fule kno. But having said that if the white youths involved in this were doing it to a ‘Neo-Nazi’ techo soundtrack would you be happy? After all is that not what you described as ‘white culture’? 79
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:19 | # Lee, What on earth has got into you? We know there are white gangs - look at the murder of 11 year old Rhys Jones in Croxteth a couple of years ago. If there are English (not just “white” actually) rioters in Salford tonight, that does not make the rioters in South, North, East and West London or Toxteth or St Pauls English (or “white”). Cut the numbskull language, too, please. 80
Posted by London's Burning on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:25 | # But Lee, the riots WERE started and instigated by blacks. 81
Posted by Rusty on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:35 | # GW,
I don’t understand you here at all. No one acts purposefully except on a belief in the ultimate rightness or wrongness of their actions. People with the “faith gene” as you put it, prefer to use a pre-packaged, pre-approved system to help them along. It’s easier, more acceptable, and the vast majority of people crave acceptance with all their being. This is not new at all, at least from my limited understanding of ancient peoples.
You state this as a fact but cannot really know this. I know several hundred people personally who would strongly disagree with you. They attribute their happiness to proper belief and action, and their unhappiness to their (personal or collective) unbelief. They are very firm and consistent in this.
This is your belief in what it is for, what you think it should be for. Perhaps I’m afflicted by a bad case of relativity today, GW, sorry. Or relativism. Whatever. Perhaps it would help me if you could give a bit more insight about the difference between an esoteric belief system and a secular system, and how you can be on your own esoteric spiritual journey without believing anything at all, even that that journey will be beneficial. 82
Posted by Rusty on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:39 | # the difference between an exoteric belief system and a secular system 83
Posted by Lurker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:42 | # Just watching idiot boy Cameron speaking outside No 10 on the BBC. Carefully placed black policeman in the background. Laughable. 84
Posted by Graham_Lister on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:48 | # @Rusty Are you by any chance an American Christian? Sorry to break it you but 99% of American Christians have as much theological and philosophical knowledge as one could find on the back of cereal box. Yes it is possible to be a sophisticated, well-educated theist but it is very much a minority phenomenon - so please don’t offer up the banalities of the typical mega-church as worthy of consideration by serious people. 85
Posted by Graham_Lister on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:50 | # @Lurker Yes I also noticed that pathetic piece of PC PR. 86
Posted by Rusty on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:52 | # Graham, are you by any chance a universal dickhead? 87
Posted by Graham_Lister on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:56 | # Touchy touchy aren’t you Rusty? - don’t blame me for telling the truth. 88
Posted by PM on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:59 | # Is that something like a universal God-head? Be careful when you play jizz biscuits, Graham. Even if you win, you’ll still be a wanker surrounded by wankers. 89
Posted by Rusty on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:01 | # Graham, you poor fish, what are you on about?
Did I hold up modern American Christianity as a model of anything? Was I even talking about it? No. Be still and pay attention. 91
Posted by Rusty on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:03 | # What the hell happened to this board while I was away? 92
Posted by Graham_Lister on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:07 | # @PM Well as I am neither an ex-Public schoolboy, nor a member of a US college fraternity, nor a Republican I therefore have no direct experience of ‘jizz biscuits’ and I doubt I ever will, but as they say we all have our crosses to bear. 93
Posted by Graham_Lister on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:27 | # @Rusty Sorry if I misunderstood where you are coming from but we get so many Americans that are typical Christian ‘grunts’ on here that it becomes extremely tiresome. IQ tests - I did one once as part of an undergraduate class and didn’t really take it all that seriously, think I got 127 or 129 - I can’t recall which now. I don’t think much of psychology as a ‘science’ but I doubt any serious psychologist has an IQ in the 70s. Economists and libertarians yes quite possibly… Personally I find the maths questions on some IQ tests very dumb - you know the ‘what comes next in this sequence ones’. An almost infinite set of possible answers exist dependent upon the mathematical function one wishes to invoke, but that wouldn’t fly as an answer, even if it is true. 94
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:56 | # Lurker on the clean-up effort: Looks like there might be one or two non-whites in the mix, that girl at about 0:11 for example. If the BBC cover this I’ll bet money she will be front & centre. Would that then prove the cleanup crew was multicultural too? Yep, at least on ITV News: 95
Posted by London's Burning on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 23:40 | # One thing I think might happen is that these riots sound the death knell for the British Labour Party. 96
Posted by Lew on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 23:54 | # What the hell is going in that twitter pic? The nigger appears to be alone and has no weapon. Why the hell is the guy cowering and just handing over his clothes? 97
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 23:58 | # Rusty,
The true arbiter of good and bad is evolutionary adaptiveness. Moral systems always serve evolutionary ends. They may come to do so imperfectly, as circumstance makes crooked the way that was straight, but it is no matter. The rule is true. To confuse the picture further, the higher mammals have the possibility of making maladaptive as well as adaptive choices, without which freedom natural selection would not tend, in its effects, to increased fitness to environment (ie, there would be no organism more complex than a basic dividing cell).
That is indeed what I am saying. But the incidence of the (expressed) faith gene is not something fixed for all time in us. Its evolutionary value hinges on the adaptiveness of the life choices it eventually produces. What we, as racial Europeans, can say today is that there is relatively little adaptiveness in the faith products of our age. We can all agree that Christianity as liberalism, liberalism itself, and its neo-Marxist extremes are producers of much maladaptive choice. But if we look at the area that Christianity is “successful” in - the birth rate of the plastic sing-song evangelicals - we might also surmise that the selection of much more of that is not the greatest thing that could possible happen to the European race. Looking at the situation in a detached manner, can we really say that faith is “in credit” at this moment in our race’s history? I’d say no. So would you, I think, and so would Leon. The difference between us is that I have a rough idea of how to make it function and a very rough idea of how to reduce our reliance upon it.
Who is talking about happiness? I am talking about the getting of meaning - a very specific activity, btw, that has nothing to do with regular worship or belief in a personal god.
Well, if you set aside belief and think about what I am trying to allude to here you might arrive at a more charitable view of it.
An esoteric system generally concerns itself with one or both of the great philosophical pursuits (transcendence/union and self-perfectionment). Faith is not a requirement for either. A secular system is just a non-religious faith product, like fascism and its reborn hero or Marxism-Leninism and Homo sovieticus. I do not want to enter into an extensive discussion of spirituality, Rusty, beyond perhaps just noting that I am a materialist and all that exists on the kind of journey I am interested in is real, indeed the real, and all that exists on the other journey is illusory. But beautiful and alluring for all that, of course. 98
Posted by Istvan on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 00:01 | # This, too, shall pass. If the British government had any intention of righting the wrongs of the last 60 years the military would be called out (and brought home from useless wars started by the US) and used to gather up and remove the problem. Won’t happen. UK is done. 100
Posted by CS on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 00:11 | # Lew, For all we know the picture taker is a nigger with more niggers standing behind him. 101
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 00:24 | # Gentlemen, I appreciate why a certain existential contempt for our black brothers might surface at times like these. But I would be very grateful if you would maintain a strict observation of the linguistic proprieties of English law. The n-word is out. Negro is possible. Thanks. 102
Posted by Revolution Harry on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 00:28 | # Guessedworker, really, you’re arrogance is breathtaking and not even warranted. You link to a hypothesis based on another hypothesis, which is evolution. In other words you have no evidence whatsoever for your assertions. You see you’re welcome to your particular ‘spiritual’ understanding, such as it is, but that’s all it is, you’re understanding or ‘notion’. Please don’t try and pretend that you are somehow superior to the rest of us or worse still have access to knowledge us mere mortals do not. It doesn’t matter whether you think Lucifer is there or not what matters is that those in power appear to think so and revere him accordingly. Do the research. Those behind the globalist, New World Order’ project are generational occultists. The evidence isn’t hard to find. Christianity is Judaism for non-Jews. What utter garbage. You quite obviously don’t understand Christianity.
That’s debatable, it depends what you mean by consciousness. Actually that’s the sort of New Age psychobabble that the likes of David Icke and the rest of the ‘coming consciousness shift’ crowd spout. As for the Bible being ‘massively fragmented’ you’re evidence is? You say you understand a little and then make grandiose and definitive claims. A little more humility might be warranted. Could you elaborate on what you mean by the ‘incompleteness of shared human understanding’?
If you have difficulty understanding the belief systems and occult nature of the ‘globalists’ then perhaps you should investigate the matter in more detail. Trust me, all this talk of neo-liberalism and neo-Marxism is laughable. If that’s you’re level of understanding then it’s no wonder the ‘globalists’ get away with what they do. Don’t mistake blind faith with the deeper faith that comes with knowing. True Christians are neither the problem or even a problem. Religion, as in organised religion, is problematic, but there are truths to be discerned. It is the manipulation of belief that is the problem, indeed the problem is the manipulators and not the manipulated. My advice would be to concentrate on them.
As I said, breathtaking arrogance. You really don’t understand anywhere near as much as you think you do. Understanding the dynamics of what is in play in the world it seems to me that you are part of the problem rather than the solution. In fact so much so that is why I wondered if you were something else more troublesome. 103
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 01:01 | # Harry,
But it’s quite clear. Paul took a Jewish cult and shaped it for the gentile. It retains the self-flagellating notion of said gentile’s original sin, and of his service to the Jewish god.
It’s not debatable if you know what I mean by consciousness. And mechanicity.
Please try to find some psychological depth, otherwise there is no point in pursuing this discussion.
Leaving aside the narrative and the aesthetic and religious elements, sacred texts are vessels for communicating certain ideas. Only scattered fragments of such ideas exist in the gospels.
Yes, Man A cannot simply tell Man B what “certain ideas” might be. Even if Man A says outright that these ideas are substantially about, let’s say, transcending the ascription of selfhood and affirming the wholeness of being, Man B would not know exactly what he is driving at. He has to have some knowledge already of the knowledge he does not have!
It isn’t a matter of understanding this sad and desperate dross. It’s a matter of crediting that intelligent people would actually “believe” in it. And there is a problem here for the literal-minded who do function at this level of intellectual non-seriousness. How would they know they are being had?
As you will. 104
Posted by Selous Scout on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 04:32 | # England is burning and you eggheads are debating religion. Typical MR. I would laugh, if I could. 105
Posted by Robert Reis on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 04:37 | # Leon, 106
Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 07:44 | #
It matters not, because on average they will produce more children and that is the fitness benefit that will sustain them. Not a vast knowledge of theology or philosophy. Which, of course, makes this statement untrue.
107
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 08:06 | # Desmond, You must try to think more flexibly. You are stuck on quantity rather than quality. But fitness is, first, a qualitative issue, and only becomes quantitative in so much as quantity itself is a quality when quality is present. My point is that the faith gene, in reproducing itself, is not functioning to produce fitness. The mere numbers of reproduced faith genes is not “adaptiveness”. Fecundity allied to negative consequences is not adaptive. 108
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 08:18 | # Selous, You also appear to have missed the point. From my side we are debating evolutionary fitness, not religion, and the worth of Christianity as a strategy for white survival. 109
Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 08:49 | #
Fundamentally false. Fitness is that which produces a reproductive differential, nothing more. It is incidentally inherently qualitative because it is best suited to its environment otherwise it would not provide a reproductive differential. 110
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:23 | # Desmond, Fitness is not a neutral concept. It is fit-ness. If a European woman reproduces with an African the resultant genotype will exhibit countless reproductive differentials. But these will overwhelmingly be negatives from the perspective of European fitness. Mere number proves nothing. For heaven’s sake, you are arguing that African sexualisation, because it produces numbers, is superior to European encephalisation. 111
Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:35 | # Robert Reis, Thank you. We all do what we can. I was really shocked/educated, though. These posters were anonymous! Many were saying at least non-liberal things. I disagree with CS that these persons had to “watch their backs”; I think they were genuine in their utter unwillingness to contemplate the racial aspect of the crisis - while negroids are burning England in front of their faces!!!! WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH WHITE PEOPLE??!! Anyway, white American cops would not anonymously respond to WN with such sincere, monolithic rejection. I know white cops; many are racists (that more aren’t is what’s shocking). England is dead- not because of Islamic terrorism or negroidal savagery, but because the white population is basically insane (and infertile, or at least dysgenic). GW and his clansmen will be welcome in White Zion, of course. We’ll be waiting for y’all ... 112
Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:38 | # PM, I thought your post was really eloquent in its heartfeltness. It makes me sad (though we Yankees have our own, similar problems). Seeing Britain colonized and the indigenous bullied is somehow worse than the horrors of America. After all, you’re the Old Country. There is no excuse for what has happened. The traitors must swing for this, however distant in the future. 113
Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:55 | # From the perspective of Euro-fitness, what we want is both quality and quantity. Duh. Desmond’s point (I’ve made it as well, ad infinitum) is that Christianity, both officially and as a byproduct of adherence to its belief system, encourages fecundity. Your secular society does not encourage white fertility (or at least, it has not produced much of it anywhere). Now perhaps GW prefers a greater racial authoritarianism (I do), in which eugenic fecundity would be legislatively encouraged. But GW does not control the government, and the possibility of racial authoritarianism is remote. Indeed, I guess the core issue in this debate is: which is more likely, racial fascism attaining power, thus allowing for eugenic and natalist legislation, or larger numbers of whites recovering their ancestral faith, and producing larger white families because of it? At this time, I think the latter. It is already happening among both white American evangelicals (most are not opposed to race mixing, but that is because of their brand of Christian ideology, not because of inner feelings of universalism, for the most part; I’ve had considerable experience of this), as well as French Catholics. The Americans are subconsciously practicing demographic competitiveness (as some bitchy minority scholars have noted); but the French Catholics are doing so consciously and overtly, in an open attempt to compensate for Muslim fecundity and immigration. 114
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 10:36 | # Leon, You do not know what “my secular society” is, or whether it is even secular. You just make something up inside your own head to fill the void, and then use that to defend your religiosity. But it is possible to have a European society which is not defined by faith, that is neither Christian faithist nor liberal faithist nor any other faith model. Further, I do not accept that breeding large numbers of easily coo-pted and deluded religious people is a fit development for Europe. I strongly suspect it is the opposite, and has, down the centuries, led us into much pain and loss. I strongly suspect that the faith which naturally arose among Europeans was properly calibrated to our nature, but was violently replaced by a system which rewarded irrational belief. Certainly, we are where we are, and the majority of Europeans today are faithists, religious or secular. But I do believe we must get away from the grave problems which accompany that, which means reducing faith’s influence in society, which means selecting out the genetic component. 115
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:43 | # An act of self-interested kindness: http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixel-eight/6024429000/ This is what white altruism ought to look like. 116
Posted by Rusty on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:38 | # GW, By the terms faith and belief, I mean them in the broadest sense, to encompass all beliefs and assumptions one has, regardless of the their fitness for organized religion. In your case, I am saying that you rely upon millions of beliefs and assumptions all the time. Everyone does because the amount we can really know is tiny and what we do not know is infinite. Belief fills that void and allows us to function. This is why I say that “non-belief” is impossible: everyone must believe in something; everyone collects his innumerable beliefs into a worldview.
So, even if you could have a logical society, it would be small. Worse, it would still be subject to the same capricious cosmic forces as everyone else. Greek tradegy show this: even through the best efforts of the best people to remain noble and reasonable, events shape themselves into no-win situations. For all your work, what have you gained? In my readings of Greco-Roman, Norse, and middle Eastern history and mythology, I have noticed that the human personality has not changed one bit. People love, lust, become enthused and discouraged, make mistakes, and believe in the same way in every age, only their circumstances change. They have always been drawn to the good as well as the base, rightness as well as wrongness. You propose a society which has never existed, as far as I can tell, nor ever could. 117
Posted by "Feral Rat" on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:27 | # All of us here, hope and pray fervently, to whichever deity you worship, that a black/paki race war erupts in the UK. 118
Posted by "Feral Rat" on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:35 | # I feel that this ‘the’ big moment for British nationalism, the Waterloo moment, the epochal turning point on which empires are founded or destroyed. 119
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:24 | # Rusty,
Not far away from what I mean. But I make a distinction between source (genotype/phenotype), operation (ascription of value through the associated nexus of emotions), and the ideational and behavioural end products. That way one should be disinclined to fall into the identification of cause and effect which makes rational thinking a stranger in this territory.
Rusty, the three perceptual systems of the mind, which exist solely to provide the organism with data on the external environment, do not generate a sea of petty beliefs. They generate thought-models, value ascriptions, and sensations. Of the latter, for instance, do you recall seeing the video I posted on Grim’s recent thread. It featured a small goat on a vertical rock-face. The goat was carefully negotiating each of several leaps to safety. These weren’t leaps of faith. They were calculations. It is what the motor system of the mammalian mind does, among other things. In such a mental landscape it is inappropriate to accord faith (source, operation, or product?) too much sway. OK, it claims everything for itself. But if you do not agree the claim, you see immediately that there is nothing there! A belief which is not believed is not something lost. You only need to look at the objective value of the Cargo Cult or the African tribal religions based, to be frank, not on faith, hope or charity but on revenge to see that.
Me for one.
We do not need to “remain noble and reasonable”. That is an unreal expectation. Once again. No, we must find what is true of us: our European Nature. There is no moral measure but that which leads toward truth to self.
Are you, in writing of human history in this way, not really writing about the struggle to achieve a freedom that has never inhabited ordinary understanding? Are you not writing about the history of illusions and of human failing? You assert the centrality of faith (?) on the basis that human freedom is beyond understanding or that human endeavours must fail. That is simply nonsense. We are Europeans. We are the most creative race on this earth. We are not limited by such dictates. I am not sure that we are limited by anything very much, actually. 120
Posted by Rusty on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:30 | # GW,
How will we know this quality when we find it? Few agree on even the most rudimentary definitions. “Truth to self” addresses the individual, what about the community?
What do you mean by “ordinary”?
Yes. What else do we have? I am merely thinking that because no one in recorded history or even in ancient legend has not done it, then it’s probably not doable. Because, too, the great thinkers whom I respect most have asserted that your society is unachievable, I admit I am biased against it. I have presented reasons why I think it is logically impossible, all of which are based the totality of our understanding of ourselves to this point, or at least how I perceive these history lessons. You nevertheless tell me I am not seeing something, something higher which we should aspire to. OK. What?
I don’t think it is beyond understanding. On the contrary, I think we understand ourselves fairly well by now.
Sounds very exciting, Sir. Put me down as a charter member and I’ll purchase the hardback as soon as it comes out. Do you have a prototype of these new supermen and their super society? What writers’ ideas come closest to your own in relation to your goals? 121
Posted by Rusty on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:42 | # Not trying to be obtuse here, but I also have trouble classifying some beliefs as petty, others not. All seem connected to me, like the successive moments between daytime and nighttime. Seemingly insignificant beliefs or assumptions color obviously significant ones and they modify each other continuously. 122
Posted by Guest Lurker on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:54 | #
Except by our propensity to mindlessly believe the most pernicious maladaptive abstractions, as well as our moral and intellectual conceit, perhaps? 123
Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:27 | # An act of self-interested kindness: http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixel-eight/6024429000/ This is what white altruism ought to look like. (GW) ——————————————————————————————- Yes. Any my less uplifting response on flickr:
Britain can be saved - but only after, I fear, a civil war of extermination of aliens, criminals and leftists which will make Cromwell look very soft and obliging. ————————————————————————————————-
Copy and paste what I just wrote and spread it on every British site possible. TALKING AMONG OURSELVES IS NOT WHAT’S NEEDED RIGHT NOW. 124
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 21:18 | # Rusty,
The maximal expression is all that can be asked. What one is talking about with this is the maximum possible movement away from what is temporalised and culturalised, away from the acquired, away from that which does not belong (ie, human personality). This movement is always towards what is true. It is necessarily slight. But it is my contention that this movement is the only genuine teleology available to Man. All the rest is only in personality, and therefore is illusion, is self-deception, is untrue. I am saying here that nationalism alone can be the politics of such a truth. So, to answer your question, Rusty, you know what is truly yours, don’t you?
No, it addresses the community. Addressing the individual involves a rather different and more extreme, more specific and, in the true sense, spiritual approach. I’ve said many times that I’m not interested in that, and I don’t talk about it.
That history we have - the history of illusions and failure - is mirrored by a history of genius and creativity, and vast potential which Christianity, with its focus on salvation from the gentilian Original Sin, looks blankly past.
We might do if Christianity had an inner core. But it does not. It makes belief and morals the way to its (already false) salvation. It does not teach consciousness (which, of course, is also to teach mechanicity).
Martin Heidegger. 125
Posted by "Feral Rat" on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:51 | # Whatever happened to William Hague? - he of the deformed head and Notting Hill Carnival (baseball cap, shorts, trainers and whistle around his neck) Please perform a little ‘magickal’ ceremony of you own tonight.The moon is tending to full and try to nudge the chthnoic powers to set paki against black - and damn multi-culti and Neather as a result.Do your own thing chaos style, and help feed the current, way may be on to something big, chaps. 126
Posted by Lurker on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:38 | # Whats a simple PC friendly message we can promote? That only ethnically homogenous groups succeeded in protecting their turf. That mostly ethnically homogenous groups cleaned up afterwards. The only real multiethnic activity on display was the rioting/looting and that was still predominantly black. 127
Posted by Rusty on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:42 | # GW, do you plan on bringing all your thoughts together in hardcopy? Or is someone else working on something? How different from Heiddeger? 128
Posted by Wandrin on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:03 | #
129
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:22 | # Rusty,
I would not presume. I would like to think that someone with a better understanding than I might pick up something I am saying and find it good and true. But it is much more likely that I will not be listened to.
I’m having a long, slow discussion with my adversary and friend in NZ, Rod Cameron. There are aspects of what I am saying that are relevant to the ontological portion of his thesis, albeit within his own terms, of course. Rod wants to make an Idealist of me, but I can’t get from idea to ideal because I cannot fit human presence, which is my absolute truth, I guess, into Hegelian dialectic in any way that is as meaningful as presence itself. It’s like trying to put the universe into a cardboard box. Wandrin, You are right - the already dismissive feeling of subcons for negroes will blossom into a very dark bloom. 130
Posted by Waes Hael on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:41 | # New evidence sheds light on how the left are hijacking riots and protests across the UK for their own agenda. http://waeshael.wordpress.com/2011/08/11/the-left-advocates-riots/ 131
Posted by Bill on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:04 | # And now the inquest. Just one more take among thousands. The best yet Barbarians With BlackBerrys Behind the British riots by Justin Raimondo Anti War Com 10 August 2010.
Read all http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/08/09/barbarians-with-blackberrys/ 132
Posted by Robert Reis on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 19:45 | # http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/2011/08/day-ebt-cards-run-out-glimpse-of-chaos.html 133
Posted by White RB on Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:07 | # The old queen has some interesting thoughts but clearly wants to downplay the racial angle. Their articles lack of a comment section shows the weakness of their arguments. 134
Posted by Lurker on Fri, 12 Aug 2011 01:44 | # Im sure the hard left would love to hi-jack the riots but thats just a leftist fantasy. They would love to direct the mob towards banks etc. Not happened. 135
Posted by Foundation on Fri, 12 Aug 2011 15:23 | # From The Westminister Journal: Last night on Clarence Road in North London – at the epicentre of recent rioting – a group of Socialist Worker Party protesters gathered. Soon they were chanting about how the police were agents of a capitalist state incapable of providing jobs and money to this poor part of London. They were generally engaged in rabble rousing. The hooded youths around them were peaceful at first and chatting with the police - enjoying tins of beer and having a smoke. The police were relaxed and chatting with the youths and with a mass of assembled journalists. There was no sign of violence. Then the Socialist Worker Party protesters started getting louder and nastier. Some of them started swearing at the police and invoking the name of Mark Duggan (the man who is the centre of an IPCC investigation and was killed last week). They called the police racist. One woman amongst them was so agitated she was literally spitting at the police as she chanted – her face full of hate. The youths present began to walk away and then returned in masks. Things were soon turning ugly. Within ten minutes of the mention of Duggan’s name by the Socialist Worker Party activists, one of the youths – whipped up into a frenzy by the Socialist Worker Party protesters – had grabbed an expensive-looking TV camera from one of the gathered journalists and smashed it into smithereens on the street floor. The youths started to look menacing. They brandished sticks. They too began to shout. They joined in with the Socialist Worker Party chants and taunted the police. The mood had turned toxic. The police started issuing public order warnings across a loudspeaker. Still the Socialist Worker Party protesters swore and chanted – urging the youths on. Only when the scene actually turned violent did the Socialist Worker Party members disperse – their banners and SWP paraphernalia bagged up for another place or another day. Their policy seems to be to start a fight between others – in this case the youths and the police – then run off and hide. If this was not incitement to violence then what was it? The Socialist Worker Party should be billed by the police for what they kicked off. They poured petrol on the flames of the violence last night. As one local person mentioned to the BBC yesterday night, “the Socialist Worker Party hijacked what was – until they intervened – a peaceful event.” There is plenty of footage of the Socialist Worker Party protesters which was collected by the journalists present. They should all hand this to the police today. The Socialist Workers’ Party, Britain’s biggest “Trotskyist” group, has a small following of cranks and dropouts. Their actions last night are symptomatic of a party so far out on the fringes that it has become a national joke. Yet the Socialist Worker Party is surprisingly relevant, at least in London, in less than a month’s time. Why? The English Defence League plans to march through Tower Hamlets in East London (an area with a large Asian, mostly Muslim, population) on the 3rd of September. The campaign to build the “No Place for Hate” demonstration (a “celebration of diversity” planned for the day of the EDL’s march), led by Unite Against Fascism (which is controlled by the Socialist Worker Party) is underway. How can a group of self-proclaimed anti fascists be led and organised by a group involved in blatantly inciting violence? Could it be that the anti fascists seek to portray the EDL as violent and racist by egging them on so the headlines that get associated with the EDL are ones associated with violence? Are the EDL fascists at all? If the EDL are not fascists – which they claim not to be (in spite of some oiks raising their arms in Nazi salutes at EDL past marches) – why are the anti fascists called anti fascists? A more pertinent question may be – has someone let all the lunatics out of the asylum? I have written in the past about how I see the EDL as an utterly pointless grouping. My views have not changed. I have written about how they are better off disbanding and shutting up shop. The broad-brush, anti-Islamist views of the EDL are views which will only cause conflict when what is needed in Britain today is constant surveillance of, and investigation into, the crazies (the extremist Islamists who genuinely seek world domination) – which is happening anyway – alongside an embracing of the peaceful Muslims (which even includes some Islamists) in Britain who have made a real effort to integrate and are not simply in Britain to use, abuse and splinter. The EDL’s broad stroke is dangerous when what is needed is exactly the multi-faceted, intelligent approach being adopted by the British authorities. Now I tell the police to follow up last night’s events with a robust prosecution of those Socialist Worker Party inciters on the streets of London last night. Hit them where it hurts – bill them for what they caused in terms of injuries and damage. Chase up their online comrades who are also engaged in incitement – particularly on Twitter – during these volatile days and nights. Crack down on this small, irrelevant rabble who deserve prosecution and deserve to be billed; if necessary, so they are forced to disband too. Unions should look at their SWP ties. If Unions are going to continue further into this century they really need to look at the apparatchiks they employ and run down and expel the SWP members so as to gain some kind of genuine worker political representation. Boris Johnson has almost cleaned them out of the London Administration but needs to finish the job of erasing them after Livingstone let them in. (Yes, some of them were celebrating alongside extremist Islamists inside Livingstone’s office on the eleventh of September 2001.) The march planned for the 3rd of September should be banned. Let’s face it – both sides are as bad as each other and neither side is representative of the British people either as a whole or in terms of any kind of critical mass. These days are too volatile for a march of this kind in the heart of London which is suffering enough. The SWP campaign is attempting to invoke the spirit of Cable Street in its publicity. Let it be known that the winners that day would have laughed their heads off at the tadpole Socialist Worker Party of today – a party whose growth is not only stunted by clinging to passé ideas; a party whose functionaries and followers are as extreme and unwanted as Oswald Mosley’s Blackshirts were back in 1936. Dominic Wightman, August 9, 2011 136
Posted by Revolution Harry on Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:35 | # Guessedworker, First let me say I’m not quite what you refer to as a ‘faithist’. My burgeoning interest in Christianity is as a result of looking at it again with fresh eyes. One of the things that stood out for me as I looked more closely at the globalist agenda, was the multi-directional attack on Christianity and particularly the Bible and Jesus himself. That left me with no choice but to investigate it for myself. I’m glad I did and I intend to continue to study it, in my own time. I’ve looked at a variety of religions or belief systems over the years and nothing has impacted on me so much as Christianity. There is more to it than I think you give it credit for.
Now we’re getting somewhere. That’s one element of what is generally referred to as ‘Paulianity’ and it’s been effectively debunked many times. I’d be interested in what you consider remains of the ‘Jewish cult’ in the Christianity as expressed in the New Testament words and teachings of Jesus. It’s not debatable if you know what I mean by consciousness. And mechanicity [sic]. Actually, I was being generous. It isn’t debatable. True Christianity most certainly does foster consciousness. As for mechanical thinking that again betrays a misunderstanding of Christianity. It’s seems to me that you haven’t studied it in any great detail and yet see fit to make sweeping statements regarding it. Wouldn’t a little more humility not go amiss? I suppose we also need to know what you mean by consciousness. My understanding is that consciousness is really another way of saying awareness and in particular, self awareness. This isn’t some new ability we are evolving. It’s an inherent capability that those who rule over us work very hard to suppress, using a variety of techniques. Keeping us immersed in a solely five sense material world is the intention. Whilst increasing the consciousness (self awareness) of humanity could be considered to be generally a good thing, it is no simple solution in itself. Certainly not until we all realise the extent to which those who rule over us attempt to manipulate what and how we think.
Please, spare me the superior tones. First let’s see your definition or understanding of ‘consciousness’. Then we’ll see how closely it fits in with the ‘coming consciousness shift’ as promoted in the New Age and 2012 movements, as well as certain elements of the ‘truth movement’. You’re suggesting that consciousness evolves and so are they. I’d like to compare the two ideas that’s all.
Right, as I suspected, there’s more to your ‘religious’ beliefs than you are letting on. Can you indicate which ‘sacred texts’ do contain the full range of ‘ideas’ you say are missing in the Gospels. Also can you give me some indication as to which ideas are missing.
In your example I think its safe to assume that you are Man A and I’m Man B and you’re the one with the knowledge that I don’t have. Priceless. What you also seem to be saying is that you can’t adequately define the ‘incompleteness of shared human understanding’ beyond some vague notion about ‘transcending the ascription of selfhood and affirming the wholeness of being’. In less flowery language, I assume this another of your digs at individuality. It’s really quite simple. We may be utterly unique (and accountable) individuals but that doesn’t mean we don’t also have group or collective interests.
I really need to know the extent of your research in this area that allows you to come to such a conclusion. Do you really think you know everything? I should actually be more specific. Do you actually think you are conscious and aware of everything? As human beings it is likely that our senses are far more limited than we already know they are. I certainly can’t rule out there being dimensions of which our senses cannot perceive. I remain open minded on whether Lucifer or Satan are real entities, or some sort of negative energy, or whatever. I simply don’t know. That the ruling ‘elites’ have occult beliefs isn’t really a revelation. That these occult beliefs are widespread and traceable through the likes of pagan Rome, Egypt and Babylon (the source of the Jewish cabbala and Talmud for example) is also very well established. Neither is that the secret society networks are one of the control methods they use. It wouldn’t matter if the highest secret of the innermost cabal of these networks was that Lucifer and Satan were made up characters, intended to deceive. The effectiveness of the system would still be the same, as would its role in what we face.
What other conclusion could I reach given the evidence? My suggestion is to restrict your spiritual aims to religious tolerance, within certain, non-violent, parameters. I then noted in another comment you said the following.
Christianity spread like wild fire in it’s early history. That spread included Britain. This wasn’t a welcome development for the ruling powers for a variety of reasons, which is why Christians were actively persecuted during this period. Rome then changed tack and essentially paganised Christianity and went about imposing it as the new state religion. This was the Christianity that was eventually forced upon Britain. I’m sure you’re aware of the history of the dark ages and all that it contained. This cannot be blamed on Christianity. Centuries later when something much closer to Biblical Christianity was attempted with the Reformation, it’s proponents were burnt at the stake, by the Catholic church, for their troubles. Are you saying that the belief systems of the Druids or the worship of Woden were rational, whereas belief in Jesus Christ is not. 137
Posted by CS on Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:19 | # Revolution Harry, I have found this article and website to be particularly interesting… WHITES & JEWS 140
Posted by Revolution Harry on Sat, 13 Aug 2011 00:38 | # CS, you’re right, it is interesting. It’s close to my perspective but obviously it places all the blame on Jews which I suspect is to fall into the carefully prepared trap. That said, I’ll give it some consideration and get back to you in a day or two. Thanks, Harry. 141
Posted by CS on Sat, 13 Aug 2011 00:53 | # Revolution Harry, Your article is basically correct. There is a movement to create a One World government and it is Satanic in origin. The Bible predicted this by the way. 142
Posted by Revolution Harry on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 23:10 | # Thanks fro reading it CS. It could only ever be a broad overview but I did try and cover as many angles as possible in order to give things a different perspective.
From my understanding of the Bible and general history pertaining to that period, is that the ‘race of Cain’ was pre-flood. Babylon, for example, was said to be founded by Cush, the grandson of Noah. I don’t completely dismiss the idea that there is a bloodline that is inherently more inclined to evil. Particularly when you consider the importance placed on it by royalty and aristocracy. The author then suggests that Issac, of the ‘white’ race, had twins that again divided into good and evil. This seems to fly in the face of his earlier assertions regarding the ‘whites’. That’s not to say his whole essay is completely false. His descriptions of the tribal nature of the region around print day Israel may contain some truth. The trouble is that it is extremely difficult to prove one way or the other. The author then betrays his anti-Jewish bias with a serious of curious assertions. For example, according to him, it was the Edomite Jews, who encouraged Rome to persecute Christians and it was them who helped organise ‘catholic’ Christianity. The only evidence he seems to provide is that Popes still wear Jewish skull caps. The problem with this is that skull caps are not Jewish in origin and are in fact pagan. The Roman church is absolutely not ‘Jewish’ in any sense whatsoever and is in fact pagan and occult. It is this paganism and occultism that is the tie that binds and that crosses all racial boundaries. As I say in my article, I don’t dispute that there are a significant number of those who say they are Jews that are involved. Neither would I dispute that, statistically, they are likely to be over represented in relation to other ethnic and religious groups. That said the majority involved are ‘white’ ethnically and occult religiously. This agenda is not for the furtherance of a narrow Jewish objective and the majority of Jews are just as much pawns in the game as the rest of us. Cheers, Harry. PS Sad to see that GW didn’t see me as psychologically deep enough to respond to. Ho hum. 143
Posted by CS on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 01:22 | # Harry, - The Chinese are considered neutral players. They are not white. - The race of Cain was pre-flood. The flood was local not worldwide. It was probably in the Tarim Basin in Western China. It is interesting to note that there are caucasian mummies to be found in that area. BTW, at the time of the flood, Noah and his family were the only pure race Adamites. That’s why God caused the flood, to kill all the mongrels. - The twins. Essau despised his heritage and race mixed. The Bible doesn’t say that all Adamites are good as Essau wasn’t. God hated Essau because he was fated to be a race mixer. - From what I’ve read, many Popes actually were Jews. Let’s look at the Catholic Church today. They are big time promoters of Third World immigration. That is in direct contradiction of the Bbile whose message is separation and no race mixing. Yes the Catholic Church is pagan. The Jews created just like the Jews create and lead movements to thwart their enemies i.e. controlled opposition. - Many Jews are just pawns and as ignorant of what is going on as the average white person. 144
Posted by Svigor on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 13:26 | # It is, btw, perfectly possibly to argue for ethnic nationalism without ever committing the party to it formally. The law doesn’t ban individuals speaking as individuals, even if those individuals are BNP party officials. There is always a way to say everything that must be said. People defeated by speech laws want to be defeated. “My fellow Englishmen, it is intolerable that in the name of tolerance we are forbidden from stating that blacks have lower IQs than Whites and that genetics are the primary explanation, that Jews are a hostile group, that Mohameteans groom underage White girls and plot our destruction, that it is not immigration but invasion; [et cetera] why is free expression outlawed?” 145
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 17:27 | # Harry,
Christianity retained the God of Abraham, prophetism, the chosenness of the Jews, the Original Sin of the gentiles, a gentile “salvation” according to selfless behavioural rules, and, of course, the Old and New Testaments. None of these are organic products of the European Mind. It is also, with Islam, a constructed (rather than organically arising) system. It has the aforementioned building blocks. The spreading of such a constructed religion is accomplished through the demand for irrational belief, generally at the point of a sword. Such demands are always answered sincerely first by the most suggestible and those given to following authority. The dysgenic nature of a full-scale European religious conversion resides precisely in the favouring of such characteristics. Now, while Islam was fitted in its infancy with its Sufic core, and therefore with the potential for the outer ring to be watered from the centre, Christianity was never so lucky. There is nothing in it free of the command to believe. About as good as it gets, to my mind, is the Thomist acceptance of Aristotelianism and, to some extent, Neoplatonism (fragments of which I find quite intriguing, btw, especially Iamblichus’s theurgy). Thomism, of course, is a European refinement.
Consciousness is a state you never normally experience, Harry. Mechanicity is. And it’s not “mechanical thinking”. It is habituation. It is immersion. It’s our condition, and it has negative consequences beside the tendency to be actuated. It is, as you know, common in the West for intelligent and questioning people to model in thought what these things mean, and write long philosophical tomes on them. The Western canon might even be regarded as an attempt to make up for the existential vacuum at the centre of Christianity. Even better, the Western canon might be an attempt to replace the void left by the cutting down of our true belief system two thousand years ago. I would like that. But, regardless, thought is not the same thing as experience. That is the difference between the pure action of the philosophical mind and the stuff I think about.
I am neither humble nor arrogant. Sometimes I am too truthful.
Well, that’s a start. What “self” is unaware?
No, that has nothing to do with what I’m interested in. The loss of connectedness which we suffer is very human, and has been with us at all times in the past. But it did not present a problem to existence. We lived “adaptively” enough in Salterian terms till at least the 1950s. Nonetheless, we have been caught up now in a complex accretion of negative influences, some recent and obvious to any WN, some not at all obvious and long-standing. In my view, it is far too established to change of its own accord and for the better - an expected process in WN thought which I have critiqued as Isostacism.
Harry, there is nothing I can say to someone capable of writing that paragraph.
The point is that such dross is for very limited, literalistic, superstitious-minded people - the kind who are attracted to horror movies, for instance. If that is our ruling elites, then we are in the situation of the airline passenger who glimpses through the open door of the cockpit as the flight attendant goes through with the coffee, and sees a couple of chimpanzees in uniform where the pilots should be.
Beneath the simple call of faith in the heart there is a (possibly common) tendency to regard being intellectually as ground, if we think about such things at all. That is the limit of any religious tendency in my own self, and one I have had to think past. Of faith I know absolutely nothing, and neither does anyone in my blood-line, as far as the surviving family seem to know (it’s a large family). On the NT, it is interesting to read it from, let’s say, an existential perspective. It gives clues, but they are few and partial. But this is getting into an area which it is not profitable to discuss in this way, and I have never done so.
Think about that question “What self is unaware?” before you put a value to anything I may say.
It is not a question of defining anything. The intellectual faculty of the mind functions by association. No two men have the same experiences or the same neuronal associations with them. We do not perceive anything as another does. The more one ventures into elusive and difficult areas of thought, the less likely it is that understanding will be readily shared. As a case in point:
In common with nearly every radical nationalist who thinks about politics and philosophy, I have criticised as fake the liberal notion of the unfettered will. Added to that I have tried to explain the uniformity of human personality. These two are the substance of my complaints about the “individual”. But if you have read my scribblings at all what have you taken from them? You are evidently talking now about something completely different, and only you know what it is.
It spread through colonisation, not because the pagan tribes thought it was a good idea. It always pays to ask “who owns the right to write the history.” It is the victor. We do well to question the Christian victor’s account. For what do you know, actually, of the organic belief system of the British people. It has gone. It has been burnt out of the racial memory, and in its place we have the Jewish god and not a rumour of a shadow of a living tradition at the core. 146
Posted by J Richards on Tue, 16 Aug 2011 02:25 | # Jewsmedia coverage of the London riots and the Jewdicial system in action As they say, a picture’s worth a thousand words… 147
Posted by Croydon on Wed, 17 Aug 2011 11:37 | # Or a video JR : http://uk.news.yahoo.com/scooter-rider-attacked-london-rioters-085938566.html 148
Posted by Revolution Harry on Wed, 17 Aug 2011 23:27 | # CS, I’m actually sympathetic to the idea that there is a bloodline that is inherently evil and I’m open to the idea that it may be traceable to the distant past. Even, possibly, to Cain. You’re correct when you say the reason behind the flood was to destroy that race but whether they survived the flood or not is hotly debated. Whether we could ever say for sure is doubtful in my opinion. This quote seems to sum things up.
The Jews were said to be descendants of Jacob. My point is that there are undoubtedly those of the bloodline of Cain operating within Jewry but similarly there are those of the same bloodline that can be found within European white peoples. In my humble opinion it is these people that are behind all that ails us and their aims cannot be described as Jewish. It seems to me that to be fixated on all things Jewish is to miss the bigger picture. Many Popes were Jews? Really? Which ones exactly and how did they further the cause of just Jews? As you say, the Catholic church is pagan, which is why they are more than happy to contradict the Bible. It wouldn’t be the first time, not by a long way. 149
Posted by Revolution Harry on Fri, 19 Aug 2011 23:48 | #
Christianity is universal. When the Jewish nation rejected the Messiah, the Gospel was spread to all nations. All who believe in the name of Jesus are now said to be the spiritual descendants of Abraham (Galatians 3:16, 29; Romans 4:16; 9:3-8). As Paul stated, the olive tree represents Israel. The branches (Jews) were broken off because of unbelief and the wild olive shoots (Gentiles) were grafted in to share in the nourishment of the tree. The natural branches could be grafted back into the tree if they accept Christ. The new covenant replaced the old covenant. If there is a Biblical chosen people, it’s Christians. In case you hadn’t noticed religious Jews utterly reject Jesus and Christianity and the Talmudists positively loathe them. The Jewish laws were nailed to the cross. What exactly is the ‘organic product of the European mind’? Druidism? Paganism? Stonehenge sun worship? Whilst I was watching some of the live transmissions of the recent Glastonbury festival a short piece about the origins of the festival was played. In it the co-founder, with Michael Eavis, explained how he was convinced that there was a lye line running through Worthy farm linking it to Stonhenge. Using dowsers he claimed to have found it and sited the *pyramid* stage there. A pyramid with an illuminated capstone. The capstone representing the eye of Horus the reborn sun god who in turn is just a veiled Lucifer. Of course the main event this year was U2 whose front man Bono who is listed as one of Alice A. Bailey’s ‘New Group of World Servers’, part of her ‘World Goodwill’ group. This group is an offshoot of Bailey’s Lucis Trust (formerly the Lucifer Publishing Company) and is recognised ‘by the United Nations as a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO), and is represented during regular briefing sessions for NGOs at the United Nations’. The Lucis Trust has consultative status (roster level) with the United Nations Economic and Social Council. Perhaps that’s why Bono is so fond of making the occult ‘Eye of Horus’ sign. The other headline act Beyoncé, as well as her boyfriend, last year’s headline act Jay Z, is equally keen on occult, luciferian, symbology. I could go on connecting the dots all day but the point I’m making is that Christianity as represented today has little resemblance to what spread like wildfire in the early days of the Church. It was the counterfeit Roman version that was spread by the sword. No more so than here in England. Consider these quotes. TERTULLIAN (155-222 A.D.) wrote: “The extremities of Spain, the various parts of Gaul, the regions of Britain which have never been penetrated by Roman arms have received the religion of Christ.” (Tertullian Def. Fidei, page 179) EUSEBIUS (260-340 A.D.), the great Church historian wrote: “The Apostles passed beyond the ocean to the Isles called the Britannic Isles.” (De Demonstratione Evangelii) POLYDORE VIRGIL (1470-1555 A.D.), a learned Italian historian records: “Britain partly through Joseph of Arimathea… was of all kingdoms the first that received the Gospel.” ARCHBISHOP USSHER (1581-1656 A.D.) states that: “The mother church of the British Isles is the Church in Insula Avalonia called by the Saxons Glaston.” Rome created the hierarchical, authoritarian structure, you mention. It just does not exist in true Christianity which is why it was immediately so popular. All were equal under God including Popes, Kings and Prime Ministers. The Vatican still runs things to this day and our Queen is subservient to the Papacy. The pagan, occult beliefs that you seem to cherish have never gone away. They have remained within the ruling classes of Europe and still do to this day. Here’s your real authoritarian system. The Papacy has always ruled in conjunction with royalty and aristocracy. True Christianity is one of the forces that has held it in check which is why it is such a target today. As an aside the Archbishop of Canterbury, of the Anglican, *Christian*, church ‘has been inducted as a druid in a centuries-old Celtic ceremony’. Along with its head, the Queen.
Islam almost certainly is ‘constructed’ and evidence suggests it might well have been done so by the same occult forces that reside in the Vatican. And yes, I agree, it was spread by the sword. I came to this view after some study just as I came to my views on Christianity after looking into it much more deeply than I ever had before. I certainly didn’t have any sort of predisposition to validate Christianity when I did so. I just dealt with the facts as they revealed themselves.
The esotericism that is provided by Sufism in Islam, Gnosticism in Christianity and Kabbalism in Judaism is really just the old occultism that the elite within those religions secretly practise. The Mysteries are occultism. The ‘elites’ guard their ‘secrets’ carefully. If you really think there’s ‘nothing free of the command to believe’ in Christianity then you haven’t got anywhere near understanding it properly. Interestingly, you deride Christianity then cite Thomism, the work of the Catholic Thomas Aquinas. Considering the pagan nature of Rome are you surprised that he ‘consulted Greek, Roman, Jewish, and Muslim philosophers’?
We appear to have a different idea of what constitutes ‘consciousness’. If consciousness is not normally experienced then what is it? To me consciousness is awareness. This was the essence of what Gurdjieff taught. Wakefulness, awareness and avoidance of slipping into robotic, mechanical, thinking and action. I’d also add resistance to the attempted programming and manipulation of the human mind by vested interests. Being aware that this is even happening is the first step.
Again, I’m afraid I can’t agree that there is an ‘existential vacuum at the centre of Christianity’. You just don’t fully understand it, that’s all. Christianity has been under attack and misrepresented since Calvary. What exactly is our ‘true belief system’? Worship of the sacred oak?
Humility is a virtue, especially in these deceptive times.
The robot, mechanical, mind is largely unaware. The conscious, awake, witness is the antidote.
We are under psychological assault by the vested interests mentioned earlier. Merely making people aware of this fact reaps major benefits. It’s rather like a subliminal element in a drawing. You can stare at for ages and still never see it and yet as soon as it is pointed out to you it is always the first thing you see when viewing the drawing again. The question is how do you make them aware. By talking of genetic differences and the Jews or being altogether more subtle and dare I say, truthful.
There’s really not much I can say to someone who dismisses such possibilities.
However ‘limited, literalistic and superstitious-minded’ you dismiss them as, they are running the world and are close to succeeding in manipulating humanity into world government and more. Whatever they are they are not ‘chimpanzees’. The history of occultism is well recorded. I’m surprised you seem to know so little about it. What confuses me slightly though is your apparent reverence for the spiritual beliefs of ‘European man’ prior to Christianity and your disdain for the occultism of pagan Rome, Egypt and Babylon. I looked at the belief system of the Druids and what did I find? Druids were Sun worshippers according to the limited accounts which have survived. Their name means ‘Knowing the Oak Tree’ and the oak was a Druidic symbol of the sun. Druids, stonehenge, Rome, Egypt, Babylon, it’s all sun worship. Nothing’s changed. 150
Posted by Revolution Harry on Fri, 19 Aug 2011 23:50 | #
The tragedy of this is that many Christians are also nationalistically minded and your approach only serves to alienate them and thus dilute any concerted resistance. How sad and unnecessary.
Answered above.
Yet you seek to undermine Christianity. Surely the correct approach is to realise that you have a different perception on these matters and leave it at that.
The unfettered will has its roots in the Satanic doctrine, as espoused by Crowley, of ‘do what thou wilt’.
The uniformity of human personality? Forgive me but are you saying that your personality is always the same as mine or Trevor Phillips or the Dalai Lama’s? Uniformity: 1. Always the same, as in character or degree; unvarying.
There is an assault on the individual, the aim being the creation of the ‘planetary citizen’ in the ‘global village’ This is the basis of the collectivism that is expressed in the elite doctrine of the third way or communitarianism. On a spiritual level this manifests itself in the prevailing meme that can be seen throughout the New Age and what is referred to as the 2012, movements, as well as by many in the, so called, anti-New World Order truth movement. That is that we are all one, or one consciousness and we are about to enter into a great spiritual transformation, via cataclysm and conflict, where this ‘truth’ will become apparent. It is, of course, one great big ‘psy-ops’. The cataclysm and conflict will be the work of the ruling ‘elite’. This is why I advise caution in your ‘complaints about the individual’.
I’ve already dealt with the introduction of Christianity into Britain but yes, it does pay to ask ‘who owns the right to write the history’. The victor was Rome and they persecuted largely true ‘heretical’ Christians. A situation that continued throughout the ‘inquisition’. We do know some of the belief system of the British people prior to Rome’s implementation of her system. See above. All that mattered was subservience to Rome and her Babylonian paganism. That was true of both true Christians and the druid remnant wiped out in Anglesey. Jewish god? As I said, in case you hadn’t noticed, the vast majority of religious Jews totally reject the God of the New Testament. Conversely God Himself destroyed the second temple. All this does is betray your fixation on the Jews being the sole cause of ‘the agenda’. All I’ll say is that it’s been designed that way and you appear to have fallen into the trap. The agenda isn’t solely pursued by Jews nor is it ultimately for solely Jewish benefits. 151
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 20 Aug 2011 00:33 | # Harry, I will read your posts, but an attempt to do so just now brought me up sharp against the same literalistic, faithist mind that was posting before. Such minds cannot distinguish between what they want to believe and what is really there. For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_of_Arimathea#Development_of_legends Psychologically, you investigate power elitism from a more fruitful standpoint than you do religious faith. Why? 152
Posted by Revolution Harry on Mon, 22 Aug 2011 23:11 | # GW, your link is to a section on Joseph of Arimathea that deals with legends that have developed around his name. Just because his *possible* role in bringing Christianity into Britain has developed into legends surrounding King Arthur isn’t cause to dismiss the idea altogether. Besides, the person who quoted Joseph of Arimathea only said he was partly responsible. I only included his quote to give some idea of the variety of sources that indicate that Christianity came to and flourished in, Britain very soon after the death of Jesus Christ and was not introduced, as you claim, at the point of a sword and against the will of the people. I could have used others. Indeed further down on the page you linked to are other quotes that appear to confirm this fact. Whether or not Joseph of Arimathea played a role in this is largely irrelevant to this issue. Please don’t assume I haven’t investigated this subject to any less of a degree than that of the ‘power elitism’ as you put it. I’m fully aware that both subjects are awash with deception but that said there are certain truths that can be easily discerned. Perhaps the most important thing to you can do is to disassociate true Biblical Christianity with the Roman catholic system, or indeed with much of the thoroughly infiltrated and undermined present day Protestant church. 153
Posted by CS on Tue, 23 Aug 2011 03:30 | # Harry, The flood was probably only local, probably limited to the Tarim basin in western China. What has been found in Western China? Blonde and red headed mummies. The purpose of the flood was to eliminate all the race mxing Adamites. Noah and his family were spared because they were “perfect in their generations” meaning they were racially pure. The people we call “Jews” today are racial mongrels. God hated Essau because he was destined to be a race mixer. My understanding is that there was a large “Jewish” population in Rome when the Catholic Church was formed and the Jews were the ones who set it up. I read about it some more yesterday but I’m not sure the exact link for it. Here is a link from a google search. The article I read yesterday indicated Simon Magus created the Catholic Church, so does this one. I recommend you read this as well. 154
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 23 Aug 2011 10:39 | # An atheist/druidist vs a Protestant bigot. I’m not sure whether this back and forth is humorous or unpleasant. Perhaps a bit of both. The West’s modern racial problems have many origins, but traditional Christianity (Catholic, Protestant or Orthodox) is not one of them (it might be interesting to devote a post or whole series to this task of enumerating all the forces which have brought us low, from WW2 to modern transportation to the Jews). Monocausal explanations of very complex historical and sociological phenomena are rarely satisfactory. I count three forces as the primary agents (there are many secondary ones) behind the white man’s fall: 1. A genetic defect (in the collective white race) predisposing a relatively enormous number of our people (as compared with nonwhite groups) to indifference towards tribal units and their survival; 2. Jewish power (based on wealth, media control, and intellectual influence) aggressively used to promote cosmopolitan morality, and concomitantly to discredit nationalism morally; 3. A general decline in piety, and in belief in the meaningfulness of things beyond the self. I would say that the decline of public Christianity has been more harmful than helpful for white survival. I would argue further that the ultimate key to white survival is to be found in a renaissance of historic Christianity (not the contemporary, PC-polluted variety, which is more enemy than friend), but one theologically updated, so to speak, to allow for white/Western preservation. This is not all that complicated. 155
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 23 Aug 2011 13:58 | # Leon, Druidist? Ah, you’ve been reading my many writings on this important subject: 156
Posted by John on Tue, 23 Aug 2011 15:00 | # Revolution Harry: “I only included his quote to give some idea of the variety of sources that indicate that Christianity came to and flourished in, Britain very soon after the death of Jesus Christ and was not introduced, as you claim, at the point of a sword and against the will of the people.” I don’t know about the British Isles, but the Scandinavians don’t seem to have done so bad in the 10 centuries after Christ until King Olaf made a deal with the devil and force-converted them to Christianity, with an ethnically exclusive religion that didn’t concern itself with the state of the souls of racial aliens. I’m glad they didn’t have an altruistic faith and therefore didn’t go to foreign lands spreading the “good news” about Odin and his son Thor or do anything other than kick ass and take stuff. We might have had a brown Scandinavia much earlier if they had. 157
Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 24 Aug 2011 01:18 | # A witty grab bag from what seems like a distant past. For one thing, your attitude was more like a conservative than a WN. How much has changed in a half-dozen years. What will the next half-dozen bring? Very nice this bit, too: I work the other way round. In our time the exploited class is the majority whose wants and views are ignored, whose protests are made illegitimate, even illegal. By contrast, these slack-brained, sad creatures among the Stones exploit our goodwill and call it freedom, yeah. They are free-riders of a kind. They do not contribute (I don’t mean economically, though that is probably also true. I mean in terms of utility to their people). Even so, I am their keeper in so much as they are of my people and share our genetic interests, whether they understand that or not. They wouldn’t, of course. Social liberalism teaches only self-indulgence, and has no use for kinship. (GW) The modern liberal feels himself emancipated from any ‘people’. He is a citizen of the world - a repulsive phrase, if ever one was uttered. 158
Posted by Revolution Harry on Fri, 26 Aug 2011 15:07 | # CS, The truth is that even though there are around 500 flood myths from a wide variety of different cultures, we can’t really know for sure. There is plenty of evidence suggesting a global flood though. Tis quote makes a valid point.
There are Christians who believe in a global flood who also acknowledge that there were survivors. Or at least that the ‘Nephilim’ or fallen angels, the were cause of the flood, were still in existence after it. That said [url=http://www.rationalchristianity.net/nephilim.html Regardless the idea that the ‘race mixing Adamites’ became the Jews is not to be found in any information source I’ve ever come across. Indeed most contend that modern man is descended from the sons of Noah. As regards Issac and Esau the consensus seems to agree with the following.
This can be concisely summed up as:
Then we come to the descendants.
Sadly there appears to be little consensus on the descendancy issue.
The Divine Pageant link largely dealt with the theory that the Anglo Saxon peoples are the lost tribes of Israel. The evidence for this is sketchy at best. For that reason I can’t deny the possibility, nor can I say it’s true. It should be noted that there are many black ‘Israelites’ who also claim to be of the lost tribes. For me all of this ‘bloodline’ or ‘lost tribes’ stuff is speculative at best. In terms of our own salvation, that is the English in my case, or other white European peoples or their descendants around the world, it offers little real value. Our right to exist and to continue our ancient heritage does not rest on whether or not we are one of the lost tribes. Where it does play a part is Biblical prophecy. This is a vast topic and one I’m still trying to get to grips with. I won’t say too much but so far I’ve realised a few important things. Firstly there are three main positions where prophecy is concerned. The first, preterism, claims that prophecy was fulfilled in the distant past. This is the least popular and can be discounted. The second, historicism, states that the fulfilment of biblical prophecy has taken place throughout history and continues to take place today. It was the position held by all the leaders of the Reformation and identified the papacy as anti-Christ. To counteract this a Jesuit priest called Francisco Ribera developed a competing theory called futurism. That stated that much of prophecy is yet to be fulfilled. Specifically the last week (7 years) of Daniel. This version claims that the Antichrist would be a single evil person who would be received by the Jews and would rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. Although historicism was the position of the Protestant church for centuries after the Reformation that has largely changed today where futurism, or variants of it, hold sway. Taking the above into account this quote seems apt.
Personally I think it’s stretching it to suggest that all of Europe’s Jewish population were ‘Samaritans’ but it’s entirely possible that at least some were. We can, though, begin to see why the ruling elites (call Them what you will) were so keen to get the ‘Jews’ into Israel. There’s a significant amount of evidence that shows the Vatican’s role in the creation of Nazi Germany. We’re only too aware of Britain’s role. The Zionists weren’t interested in saving Jews, only in populating Israel. I don’t believe the official story of the holocaust for one second but I do think that ordinary Jews, Samaritans or otherwise, were used mercilessly by those with a very different agenda to that which is commonly understood. Similarly many inhabitants of present day Israel may also be sacrificed to further that occult agenda. We also have to differentiate between the earthly covenant with the Jews and the heavenly covenant with all Christians, or believers in Christ. As I understand it the covenant with the Jews was broken because they rejected the Messiah, forfeiting their covenant role and the covenant promises. This led to the prophesied destruction of the second temple in 70AD. The new Israel is best described as follows.
I was aware of the idea that Simon Magus was involved in the creation of the Roman catholic church. It seems a plausible suggestion for many reasons. I did note though that the article said that Simon was a Samaritan not a Jew. There may have been a number of Jews in Rome but the vast majority rejected Jesus Christ and still do to this day. Further on in the article we read.
One other quote from the article seems to sum up the relationship between the Samaritans and the Jews.
Here we find the common denominator. The occult, pagan, Babylonian religious system. Those who controlled a Rome that was already thoroughly pagan, were looking for a religious system that could unite the Empire. It was the corrupted and paganised, counterfeit version of Christianity that eventually fulfilled that role in the Roman catholic church. This merely reinforces my point, which is that to look at ‘the Jews’, or even some Jews, as the sole cause of our situation today is misguided at best. Similarly to reject Rome as playing not even some part is also misguided. I’d argue that it plays a central role and that the agenda we face is occult at heart and those involved are both Gentile and Jew (or even those who say they are Jews and are not) alike. 159
Posted by Revolution Harry on Fri, 26 Aug 2011 15:32 | # Leon, I certainly wouldn’t classify myself as Protestant or any of the many differing denominations that operate under that general banner. My interest in Christianity is a relatively recent affair and has developed as a result of my research into the true nature of global politics and religion. All I can say is that my statements about the Catholic church are not said lightly. My father’s side of the family are Catholic. I have no axe to grind. The case against the Catholic church is overwhelming. That is historically, scripturally, symbolically and prophetically. The Roman empire merely became the Holy Roman empire. The link in CS’ last comment would be a good place to start. I noticed other relevant articles in the sidebar. Really, the biggest clue of all regarding Rome’s occult nature is the largest Egyptian obelisk in the world, right in the middle of St Peter’s square. Surrounding this phallic symbol of the sun god Ra is a circle symbolising the feminine. Surrounding the circle is a sun dial. Then of course we have the utterly bogus ‘birthday’ of Jesus Christ on December 25th.
I agree with you regarding the decline of public Christianity and the ‘PC-polluted’ nature of much of the current Church but the truth about Catholicism cannot be ignored. 160
Posted by Revolution Harry on Fri, 26 Aug 2011 15:39 | # John, I didn’t know very much at all about King Olaf or his introduction of Christianity into Scandinavia. I couldn’t say I was surprised to find that Olaf was helped in his endeavour by the Catholic Bishop Grimketel, who later canonised him. This canonisation was later confirmed by Pope Alexander III. Considering the general point I’m making I’m afraid this speaks volumes 161
Posted by EthnicRiot on Mon, 24 Oct 2011 13:31 | # So…some of the stats dribble in on the ethnic make up of the rioters. Are they truly reflective of who was involved? (More here PDF, Table (Excel))
An earlier analysis can be seen here: http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31576 162
Posted by 63gstone on Mon, 26 Dec 2011 07:26 | # I watched this happening from the States and couldn’t help but thinking that if this happened where I live in The States it would not have gone that far. These animals would literally been shot attempting to do this shit to innocent people, especially women. And our police, county sherif and State Troopers would have not stopped them citizens from defending other innocent citizens. 163
Posted by obedient4u on Wed, 02 Apr 2014 21:02 | # i’m and old white faggot into some kinky shit.. Post a comment:
Next entry: Signs of life
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by Stephen on Tue, 09 Aug 2011 02:00 | #
Anyone who works for the EHRC or has diversity in there job title should be hanged for treason.