Posted by Leon Haller on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 02:47 | #

Starkey - a sniveling leftist, lets himself get ‘instructed’ by some even worse traitors and an African.

What the fuck is wrong with your country?

I am amazed at how weak you people are. Really. How dare any European ever lecture a proud white American! Sure we have our share of race traitors and nigger-grovelers, but often they are Jews. What is it with this Owen Jones? How does someone like this get produced? That’s what’s most interesting.

“Our children”.

Your children are NOT my children, bitch! Go home to Africa!

“What chu mean by feez groups, David?”

Ah, yes, the “organic” nation being lectured to by a genetic alien ...

I am more convinced than I was a week ago of the absolute necessity of White Zion.

To an British WNs: Get out while you can! Move to Oz, counteract the waves of Asians inundating it.

Your country is unsalvageable.

Posted by Leon Haller on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 03:14 | #

Submitted this to the Daily Mail talking about Starkey controversy (we’ll see if it gets posted):

Enoch Powell was right about everything. And no this was not simply about culture, or even black culture (as though the culture and the race can really be separated!). This was about a black race war being declared against traditional Britain - a WHITE, EUROPEAN nation, not some Third World, African toilet bowl. Whiggers merely joined in the terror.

The British people need to understand that they have been invaded, colonized and conquered by Third World savages, imposed upon them by treasonous and cowardly leaders of all main political parties. Powell was the greatest British leader of the 20th century, who tried to save Britain from this fate infinitely worse than Nazi conquest. But you idiot liberals and commoners did not listen - and now look at the deleterious and hopeless state of your country.

Only a second Glorious Revolution will save England. The alien peoples must all be deported. The racial traitors who imposed foreign colonization must be tried, convicted, and hung.

——————————————

If any WNs here actually want to do something besides bellyache to each other (which is what I think the real purpose of most WN sites is - to provide a comfort zone for the dispossessed, as opposed to actually getting something done in the real world, like the EDL tries to do, for example), I invite you to copy and paste what I wrote above, and submit it widely across the news and blogsphere (but attach your own name, as it is important that there be a show of strength).

WNs need to stop talking to each other, and start organizing in the real world. Frankly, we have all the theory we need. Debating Christianity and conservatism, Heidegger and Houellebecq is all very interesting, but finally irrelevant. We know what we want for now: stop immigration, deport illegals, crackdown on black criminality, end multiculturalism and affirmative action. Once accomplished, we will formulate new goals.

Posted by Jimmy Marr on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 04:16 | #

The Chavs have indeed become Black, and the media gladly pronounce it, but I’ll be a nigger aviator before the day arrives when their upper-middle class counterparts admit to having, long ago, become Jewish.

Posted by Wandrin on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 06:43 | #

A little crack here, a little crack there.

Posted by Lurker on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 07:08 | #

Leon - there is still the disconnect between what is shown and what happened. Every MSM source in the UK is spinning 24/7, anything to paint the looters as white as possible. Im sure there is unease amongst the populous but anywhere the average punter looks they are assailed by the white looter narrative.

But yes, that even people posting anonymously wont speak their minds makes one believe they either never had one or brainwashing has worked wonders.

Posted by Lurker on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 07:24 | #

GW - that thread is Toby Young not Harnden. Ive spent enough time commenting there tonight.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 10:12 | #

Yep, Toby Young.  Corrected that.  Thanks, Lurker - the penalty of posting late, again.

Good point, Jimmy.

Posted by Lurker (Mark II) on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 11:04 | #

Enoch Powell was a ‘culturist’, not a believer in phenotypical differences between subspecies based on separate ancestral evolution.

He once said that he would have found an influx of Germans to Britain on the 1960s scale as objectionable as one of negroes, thereby demonstrating that ultimately he was just another ‘we’ve got to train them up to our ways… it’s the numbers, not the principle’ types.

He did flirt with compensated repatriation (it was in the Tory manifesto at the 1970 general election) but did not go on pushing it after it became unthinkable in elite circles that Congoids could be bribed to go back to their newly ‘liberated’ homelands.

Then Powell dived into Ulster politics, and the last 15-20 years of his public life can be seen as one gigantic attempt to avoid dealing with the can of worms he had opened—by becoming yet another politician obsessing over the trivial and marginal ‘Irish question’.

Face it, Enoch bottled out. The great, forgotten Tory voices in the wilderness, Cyril Osborne and Norman Pannell, were worth ten of that snob, who was embarrassed by the dockers and meat porters who rose in his defence in 1968. Instead of storming the Conservative Party and turning it into a genuine property-owning democracy’s movement, throwing out the Edward Boyles and Iain McLeods, Enoch sulked, then reinvented himself as a Norn Irishman.

He wasn’t even a social conservative himself. He backed the abolition of hanging and corporal punishment and was an early adopter of sympathy for sodomites.

As for Starkey, Young and Co, is there any evidence that they are more than your standard blank-slate environmentalist? ‘Let’s TEACH them, or BRIBE them, or LOCK THEM DOWN until they learn to behave like us.’ Yeah, right. I’ve got a great brick wall for you to spend the rest of your miserable, duplicitous, double-talking lives beating your pinheads against—rent’s very reasonable.

There are two solutions and two only to to the problem of the unassimilable aliens who have been sicked on to this nation since 1948: extermination or deportation. Being a humane, reasonable sort of chap, I much prefer the second.

Like Bernie Grant MP. who back in the day was all for sponsoring his fellow Caribbean elders and anyone else who fancied the challenge of change to go ‘home’, That, after all, was the bill of goods the British were sold when the trickle began: these happy-go-lucky, colourful, friendly souls are just here for a few years to learn, better themselves , save some cash before they return to become the elite of the former colonies.

As it turned out, they preferred to leech off the new socialist welfare state while letting their self-appointed ‘community leaders’ whine about prejudice and how they deserved a bigger share of the society they had played no part in creating.

If only half went, it would be a help. The rest would realise more clearly that they are here on sufferance.

Posted by Stephen on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 12:04 | #

There can be no doubt that despite the medias attempt to zoom there cameras in on the few white rioters. The overwhelming majority of rioters were “minorities” with whigerfied white chavs only making up a small minority of the rioters.

Posted by Graham_Lister on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 13:20 | #

@Lurker (Mark II)

Powell was using his experiences of India to good use - no-one would honestly argue that within the old India there existed different ‘sub-species’ yet when partition came it resulted in upto 1 million deaths as the politics of it involved an explosive socio-cultural communal/group cleavage that coalesced around and was expressed in religious terms. Overly heterogeneous societies are potentially far more likely to ‘enjoy’ such events/animosities.

Any inferiority/superiority element is actually secondary. Even if it was ‘little green men’ with 200 IQs taking over the UK I would not be happy. Why? - because any group that was the previous dominant majority in a society is likely to suffer negatively if it is displaced by any other group (that maintains its own strong group identity). That’s basic political sociology 101.

As for black behavioural phenotypes one must be careful;

(1) Its about adaptiveness - if such phenotypes exist then it was because they were the optimal ones in the environments in which they were selected for.

(2) there are no ‘iron laws’ with regard to human behavior - one should avoid sounding like some demented Marxian determinist. Rather as any fule kno we are discussing tendencies and propensities, so actually it’s a board-brushed sociological/statistical insight.

(3) many Euro’s can act very badly given the right, or rather wrong, circumstances - it is stupid to say no white youths were in the recent riots or indeed that European history is nothing other than sweetness and light. We can behave quite badly all by ourselves.

Part of what is wrong with the UK is our rancid corruption (at all levels of society - and there are many different forms of corruption, not just financial) and an atomised, deeply fragmented population in which the dominant ethos of popular culture/values is one of bovine consumerism and nothing else. In western Europe the UK is by far the most culturally degraded society. So culture and the collective values of a society do matter.

And aside from European/Christian ‘Zionists’ is there a more pitiful sight than a so-called ‘wigger’?

Posted by Helvena on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 16:34 | #

The media goes to great lengths to convince us that whites and blacks are now the same, hence the great focus on the few whites (we really don’t know how white they were) participating.  Tottenham was a black event.  Our treacherous media doesn’t report on black violence around the world because they want to keep us in the dark (pardon the pun).  Here are blacks rioting in China after an illegal jumped to his death tying to escape the law.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owpltcMJzHk&feature=related

Posted by Mr Voight on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 16:36 | #

Refreshingly, Mr Starkey seems to be sticking to his guns in the aftermath.

Posted by Lurker on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 17:26 | #

Starkey may be another blank slater underneath it all but turning a super tanker round takes time. Even switiching course a few degrees may help in the long run.

Posted by anon7 on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 20:29 | #

The Yoof’s Prayer

Our father, who art in prison,
my mum knows not his name,
Thy Riots come, read it in the Sun,
in Birmingham, as it is in London.
Give us this day our Welfare bread & forgive us our looting,
As we’re happy to loot those who defend stuff against us.
Lead us not into employment but deliver us free housing,
for thine is the Tellies, the Burberry & the Bacardi,
forever and ever.
Respek.

Posted by Leon Haller on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 21:50 | #

Lurker (Mark II),

Excellent comment. You have educated me. When I claimed to be a ‘Powellite’ on this site I was referring to Powell’s race-and-culture-realism, his defense of private property and free markets, his opposition to the EU and euro, his anti-communism, his Christian traditionalism, and his obvious acknowledgment and embodiment of Western High Culture. That to me is real conservatism.

I certainly support comprehensive, uncompensated repatriation (I do think the aliens should be allowed to take bank accounts and personal possessions, and to sell their businesses and properties - though arguably there should be compensation to the indigenous for all the crime and disproportionate welfare dependency caused by or characteristic of the alien colonists), and agree that different races cannot be assimilated to each other (as ethnic groups can: a white German baby, adopted by an English family, will grow up to be as English as anyone; a nonwhite baby, never). 

I am a uber-proponent of capital (and corporal) punishment, and did not know Powell was against it. That is a black mark. I wonder, though, if what he said re the Germans was not tactical and off-the-cuff, trying to soften his image in order that he not be rendered completely politically irrelevant. Even at the time, I thought his efforts on Ireland were largely a waste (though not being British or Irish, or knowing or caring much about the Irish Question, I did not attend to him closely on this).

Unfortunately, the question now is what are you (and all white peoples everywhere) going to do about it - the “it” being that we have lost our countries? Face facts: Britain is now hopeless as a home for the British people. You can reside there, obviously, but not as traditionally British. The governing political and social ideologies, not to mention increasing numbers of your fellow citizens, are not your own.

The problem is not just the enormous numbers of alien settler-colonialists, who will now wage violent insurrection (possibly with foreign (Muslim) military aid) if attempts are made to repatriate them. It is also that vast numbers of whites themselves are either endemic race traitors, or wigger-‘chavs’ (this latter phenomenon seems to be more common in Europe, esp Britain, than in the US). I’m not sure which of these three phenomena is more dismaying (that question is worth a good, long discussion). 

Foreign colonizers, race traitors, wiggers : how can the last British patriots fight these enemies, when it seems as though they outnumber you?

It is not a counsel of despair to state baldly that you can’t, at least not when the majority of the indigenous, who are neither race traitors nor wiggers, cannot bring themselves ethically to face what needs to be done. Take a nice ‘Middle British’, Tory-voting matron. She may be a true patriot, and not a race traitor; she may fear wiggers and want them disciplined; she may wish ‘coloured’ immigration had never been introduced; she may dislike the presence of her neighborhood mosque. But is she willing to accept, either ethically or personally, the massive destruction, not seen since WW2, and violence, probably not seen since the civil war, if then (I doubt it, btw), that will attend doing what must be done to reverse what she dislikes?

Am I stating the obvious (because I have done so on many occasions, and it usually goes unremarked)? The only possibility for the recovery of Britain (and perhaps all of Western Europe) is CIVIL WAR. Providing a strong, anti-liberal theoretical foundation, doing more racial science, etc is all worthless in the face of the numbers of settler-colonizers that keep piling up (mostly through immigration, perhaps also through excessive fertility). The problem of white survival is rapidly passing from a philosophical to a military one.

And even if the indigenous majority could be persuaded that the ethics of nationalism supersedes the ethics of anti-racism (certainly a lost cause thus far - consider again my failed efforts on the police blog), that same majority may not agree to the destructive costs of ‘saving Britain’. They may well prefer to maintain a ‘stiff upper lip’, and quiescently accept passive national euthanasia. If the past is any guide, that is certainly what they will do.

Hence White Zion. The bringing together of racially patriotic whites from across the globe into one sovereign territory that we can potentially control. It will be our only hope, both for ordinary whites to live civilized, white lives after about 2030-40, as well as for our race to avoid extinction via miscegenation or extermination.

Posted by Leon Haller on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 21:52 | #

“The Yoof’s Prayer” - classic!

Posted by Graham_Lister on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 22:14 | #

On London - it is very much like a foreign ‘city-state’. I believe the UN recently declared it officially the most linguistically and ethnically diverse city in the world. Interestingly as one moves in a northerly direction away from London ‘diversity’ declines to point were places like Aberdeen are almost completely lacking in ‘diversity’.

Aberdeen is, in an austere way, a beautiful city that I know well and in my time there the only Africans I encountered could be counted on the fingers of one hand (they were all, bizarrely enough, theology students). A fair number of Japanese and South Koreans enrolled at the excellent engineering department of the University but none of them caused any trouble and all seemed to go home once their studies had been completed. Scotland is still 97-98% European and the NE of Scotland is a beautiful part of the world. Life has taken me away from Aberdeen but I hope it’s not crawling with Africans and Pakistanis. I doubt it is.

Posted by Graham_Lister on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 22:53 | #

I do not have much regard for Churchill (I rather think David Irving is right on this subject) but…

We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and if, which I do not for a moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the new world, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.

...is still within living memory. I doubt the British tribes are finished just yet.

Posted by Selous Scout on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 23:00 | #

Only Leon here gets to the heart of the matter.

I paraphrase:

The survival of White people in White countries will eventually depend on the willingness of said people to defend themselves with force and violence, and to drive off or kill The Other in massive numbers.

That’s it.

I’ve been saying this for several years at least.

Posted by Jimmy Marr on Sun, 14 Aug 2011 23:17 | #

Selous,

Some things are best left unsaid, except by Leon.

Anon7,

I really like that poem you wrote. Art is tantamount to Leon’s suggestion.

Posted by Trainspotter on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 00:15 | #

Apologies for the length, but I got carried away. 

Leon Haller: “The problem of white survival is rapidly passing from a philosophical to a military one.”

Well put.  Indeed, it is already a military problem, in the sense that it is impossible to imagine our current system and form of government taking the steps necessary to cleanse our lands.  As a practical matter, things have progressed well beyond that.  I believe that Powell understood as much back then, that if things weren’t nipped in the bud very quickly, it would be too late.  Too late, that is, for a peaceful electoral solution.  Not too late for other approaches. 

While not advocating anything, if we could skip into direct cleansing of our lands (the “military” solution), that would have obvious benefits.  But without the necessary philosophical foundation, it’s simply not going to happen.  There has to be a significant segment (it won’t require a majority, or even close) of the white population that becomes convinced that force is both moral and necessary in order to restore their ancestral homelands.  Right now, we aren’t there yet. We don’t even have a proper sense of ourselves, of what we are, much less a firm conviction that it is proper to use force in order to secure our existence.  Until that changes, our fortunes will not improve, at least not outwardly. 

In fact, the anti-white philosophical revolution is still making progress in some areas, though atrophying in others.  For example, the highest ranking military officers are now incredibly politically correct, often shockingly so.  (I don’t mention that to imply that the “military” solution must necessarily come from a formal, currently constituted military force).  I doubt they are even faking it anymore.  Our enemies have long feared a rogue military, and this fear has been evident for generations - see Dr. Strangelove as discussed by Yggdrasil.  They have acted upon their fears and turned the military into pathetic, docile and subservient dogs.  Goodbye old paint, and tradition and honor while you’re at it. 

Point is that the philosophical foundational work cannot be skipped.  There is no way around it. I’d love to be proven wrong on that, but I won’t be.  Our enemies worked on spreading their ideas in the first half of the twentieth century, and by the latter half they had altered the worldview of a significant portion of the white population.  They then were able to reap the benefits.  Of course, we have to do our job with far fewer resources, and we will not be allowed to march through the institutions.  But we have emerging technologies to work with, a cause that is just, and a little thing called truth on our side.  In any event, we’re not gods capable of producing manna from heaven, so we must work with what is available. 

As an example that I’ve written about quite a bit, I’ve personally observed the spread of libertarian ideas in our society, and while not nearly as suppressed as white nationalism, they accomplished much of it online or using other means that are available to us.  There was no massive march through the institutions, etc., so there is more than one way to skin a cat. Point is that ideas can in fact spread with fairly minimal money and institutional support. You need some, but not as much as most would think. 

I think one problem with white nationalists is that they have never really experienced the successful spreading of an idea with only limited means.  As a former libertarian, I have experienced this.  I understand how it is done, and as esoteric as some of our conversations are, I’m telling you that we’re doing it right here, right now.  The usual suspects can snicker all they like, but this is one way that it works - and it does work.     

As to White Zion, I’m interested in learning more.  Once you guys get a site up, I’ll check it out.  It’s good to have out of the box thinking, and on a related note I must admit that I’ve become more sympathetic to the Northwest idea as time has gone on (I realize your WZ concept is very different).  But at the end of the day, unless whites regain a worldview in which they are willing to fight for their survival, I don’t expect much to come of anything. 

Yet I have optimism on this point: I believe regaining a sense of ourselves is in fact going to happen.  In fact, I believe it to be happening as we speak, though like other ideas that do not meet system approval, much of the progress is unseen, and will only manifest itself later - and then very quickly (the Ron Paul phenom was the result of decades of foundational work, in which most libertarians were viewed as weirdos, something from Mars, or a Larouchie).  White nationalism is in fact coming along, though this won’t be obvious for some time.  I’ve said it again and again: the ideas are progressing, and other than obvious system suppression, the biggest thing holding us back is the tolerance of kooks and liars - but even they can only slow, not stop the progress. 

Of course, none of this changes the fact that a peaceful solution, within the bounds of the present system rules, is now impossible. But then again, it has been so for decades, it’s just that most of us hadn’t realized it yet (enemy ideas snuck up on us too, spreading over the course of decades, but with their full evil only apparent fairly recently, except to the far sighted few).   

So, in a sense, the Rubicon has already been crossed.  On one level at least, does it really matter whether the non-white percentage in one of our lands is ten percent, as opposed to twenty or thirty?  Well before they reached ten percent, it became damn near impossible for our present system to eject them peacefully.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting that we shouldn’t try to stem the incoming tide as much as we can.  We should, and it may be possible to do that to a limited extent with the present system and mainstream parties.  But at the end of the day, it will still take force to remove the alien colonizers.  Slowing the tide only gives us some extra breathing space (and not much of that), it does not solve the fundamental problem. 

The tragedy of it all is that the longer it takes for the conflict to come to a head in the form of a civil war in Europe (or elsewhere), the greater the suffering and loss of life will be - on both sides.  The faster our ideas spread, on the other hand, the less costly the ultimate conflict. 

The conflict could take many forms, but I now believe it to be inevitable.  At the risk of sounding overly dramatic, it is out of this crucible that a new world will be born, assuming that we win, and I firmly believe that we will. 

For now it is the battle of the mind, not the sword.  For everything a season.

Posted by Jimmy Marr on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 00:39 | #

Trainspotter,

I agree that we need a philosophy, but I think many of us behave as if success will come to us when we refine a message capable of reaching masses of receptive Whites. It’s my experience that those masses do not currently exist. I have come to believe that increased violence (military and otherwise) is necessary to make them receptive.

Sure. We lack a consistent message, and substantial media power to circulate it, but we also lack a target audience. They are not ready yet. Its still to easy for them to maintain themselves in a state of comfortable denial. They need to be the recipients of increased violence, starvation and increased systemic injustice.

Military action can work for us, but not until larger numbers of people embrace WN philosophy. WN philosophy can work for us, but not until the people are starved and bloodied by the system.

“Change must come through the barrel of gun”. Theirs. Not, ours.

Posted by Chechar on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 03:19 | #

Trainspotter,

As often you are spot on. Your comment deserves an entry.

Jimmy Marr,

WN philosophy can work for us, but not until the people are starved and…

Perhaps the time will arrive sooner than expected.

Posted by Selous Scout on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 03:39 | #

Some things are best left unsaid, except by Leon.

Some things need to be said in plain terms, without the sluggish, murky intellectualising of the self-appointed court philosophers.

I do notice, however, on this site and others, that some are beginning to snap out of it and recognise the inevitability of some sort of civil conlict.

This is not going to end peacefully.

Slowly, surely, the realisation dawns.

Posted by Trainspotter on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 06:31 | #

SS"This is not going to end peacefully.  Slowly, surely, the realisation dawns.”

I suspect that most commenters on this and similar boards have understood for a fair number of years that things are not going to end peacefully.  What seems to be changing is that more and more people are realizing that there is a good chance of this happening, not in some distant and murky future, but in the relatively near term.  What’s near term?  I’d say within a couple of decades, well within the lifetimes of most people reading this.  Could be considerably sooner.  We’ve gone from “Not in my lifetime” to, “Well, maybe…” 

As the immortal Bush the Second spaketh, “This sucker could go down.”

To Jimmy: I hear you, but I look at it somewhat differently.  The ideas are spreading now, and they will spread even faster in the coming years.  The flashpoint will occur when the ideas have spread to a critical mass and then the catalyst occurs, when idea meets event.  Not to hammer the libertarian analogy too hard, but when the spread of libertarian ideas met the financial crisis and assorted bailouts, Ron Paul and soon after the Tea Party appeared.  This would have seemed spontaneous to many, but it wasn’t.  It was the result of decades of libertarian geeks laboring long in the vinyard. 

Now, don’t get me wrong.  Ron Paul, the Tea Party and politically correct libertarianism are not ultimately going anywhere.  They may just fade out, or they may become a form of controlled opposition.  The reason for this is that, while they style themselves as revolutionaries, they are in fact politically correct and buy into key premises of the system.  So they can’t truly challenge that system in a fundamental way, displacing and replacing it.  Instead, they are pretty much just low tax libertines.  As a general rule, they are not opposed to the miscegenation, cultural destruction and racial displacement that is the real story of our age.  Their attitude?  If you don’t like it, change the channel!  Great answer.  That’ll solve the problem. Let’s just change the channel…it is to laugh. 

Because they fundamentally buy into the liberal worldview, simply resenting the fact that they have to pay taxes to support it, they aren’t in fact revolutionaries, just sort of greedy system hacks.  So they won’t attempt to replace the system, and to the extent that they operate within it, they will always be outnumbered by the scores of millions of people who rely upon and support government handouts.  They are a dead end, because their understanding of the world is flawed and limited.  Pierce definitely had their number, and I say that as a former libertarian. He was the first person I read who truly did. 

But we can still learn a lot about how the ideas were spread on very low budgets and with limited institutional support.  Off of the top of my head, one of the few things that they have which is beyond our means is a think tank like Cato.  But really, would their progress have been stopped without such an entitity?  No way.  Clearly, most of their progress has been made with no institutional support whatsoever, just grass roots operating on shoe strings, and a lot of pecking on keyboards by guys living in their mom’s basement. That we can do at present, and more will be possible in time. 

In any event, eventually critical mass meets catalyst.  Itz coming! (funny how people used to say that all the time ten years ago when the world was just coasting along in capitalist comfort, but now that things are quickening and system legitimacy craters, I never hear it anymore)

Posted by Lurker (Mark II) on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 09:56 | #

White Zion? Give me a break. Of all the daft fantasies…

So I have to run away from the only country I’ve ever known, because about one-tenth of its population is now a shallowly rooted, largely unintelligent coloured minority? To some unspecified destination, to rub shoulders with a bunch of assorted continentals? The way Enoch scarpered from Wolverhampton to the Six Counties!

Grow a pair, Mr Haller. (Your name does not suggest much of an attachment to old England, btw.) All white defeatists are very welcome to hit the exit. But don’t expect to be let back in after a few years when your Utopian colony goes the way of all such projects.

I may be uprooted by death, but nothing else will shift me.

Posted by Anon123 on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 11:54 | #

Interesting comments Trainspotter. It may be that it’s progressed more than many realize. I meet 100s of everyday people and I subtly probe their attitudes. What they’re lacking is an internal and external articulation. That’s all that’s missing. The whites are basically an inner directed turmoil kind of beast. Eventually it’s going to give.. If they want to stick around it’ll have to give. Are they bright enough to know. The establishment appears to be banking on the stupidity of whites. Time will tell.

Posted by Svigor on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 12:08 | #

Lurker, you being deliberately obtuse?  The Jews already in Israel didn’t have to move anywhere.  They would’ve sounded just as obtuse saying “WHAT?  You expect me to pick up and move to Madagascar” as you do.

White Zionism is the thin edge of the wedge.  Zionism is a good thing to most Whites to the right of…well, you pick a name.  Whites are total suckers for arguments like this.  “White Zionism” makes that argument with it’s name.  Stop being obtuse.  Unless you’re a Jew - then your objection makes perfect sense.

Posted by Leon Haller on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 13:06 | #

White Zion? Give me a break. Of all the daft fantasies…

I may be uprooted by death, but nothing else will shift me. (Lurker MII)

——————————

Lurker (Mark II),

I enjoyed your earlier comment, but this disappoints. You obviously did not understand what I clearly wrote (proved by your having made not the slightest attempt to refute it).

I admire your resoluteness, however futile it will prove to be.

I’m an American with only a slight bit of English blood, as I’ve said many times, btw.

I repeat from above:

The problem is not just the enormous numbers of alien settler-colonialists, who will now wage violent insurrection (possibly with foreign (Muslim) military aid) if attempts are made to repatriate them. It is also that vast numbers of whites themselves are either endemic race traitors, or wigger-’chavs’ (this latter phenomenon seems to be more common in Europe, esp Britain, than in the US). I’m not sure which of these three phenomena is more dismaying (that question is worth a good, long discussion).

And even if the indigenous majority could be persuaded that the ethics of nationalism supersedes the ethics of anti-racism (certainly a lost cause thus far - consider again my failed efforts on the police blog), that same majority may not agree to the destructive costs of ‘saving Britain’. They may well prefer to maintain a ‘stiff upper lip’, and quiescently accept passive national euthanasia. If the past is any guide, that is certainly what they will do.

———————————————————-

You might try telling me how you plan to Take Back Britain. Perhaps you have insights for WNs in other countries. But why don’t you begin by addressing what I bolded immediately above?

Posted by CS on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 13:47 | #

Leon,

If the white retards in South Africa didn’t have the sense to create their own all white nation before ending Apartheid and still haven’t got the sense to push for it now, what chance do a bunch of white liberal faggots in England have? We need to separate from these white liberal idiots just as much as we need to separate from non-whites.

Posted by Leon Haller on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 13:59 | #

I agree that we need a philosophy, but I think many of us behave as if success will come to us when we refine a message capable of reaching masses of receptive Whites. It’s my experience that those masses do not currently exist. I have come to believe that increased violence (military and otherwise) is necessary to make them receptive.

“Change must come through the barrel of gun”. Theirs. Not, ours. (Jimmy Marr)

—————————————————————————————————

Yes, I agree with this 100%, and have stated such in my own words many times, including on this very thread.

Let me be clear about something, because somehow I think I’m being misinterpreted or misrepresented as some kind of advocate, as opposed to neutralanalyst, of racial warfare.

1. I condemned the Anders Breivik massacre, and said so here and elsewhere. I thought the killing of the youths was evil, and explained why (they only held misguided and treasonous opinions; they had not had the power to impose any treason, and thus had not done anything legally (ie, post-Norwegian patriotic restoration) culpable from a Christian perspective - unlike the black terrorists of Britain last week, as many as possible of whom ought to have been shot by SAS and/or police snipers). I also thought it was strategically stupid. Breivik would have made his point much better had he vandalized a mosque, especially when it was empty so that no sympathy would attach to any “innocent worshippers” who might otherwise have gotten harmed. The physical structure of a mosque in white, Christian Norway is outrage enough, and attacking it gets the right message across.

2. Absolutely, the masses of whites are not receptive. They are BRAINWASHED. That’s the whole point. They need deprogramming, as with any other weak minds under the grip of some evil cultishness.

Of course, some whites are intelligent, and really don’t understand the horrors going on around them (intelligence gets focused on different things: a brilliant filmmaker or engineer or fashion designer may really just not have considered the facts of race or politics as we have). That’s where good quality arguments matter. My point, though, is that this is a race against time. We develop better and better arguments (much better, and MUCH better disseminated, even than what was on offer as recently as the 80s, I distinctly remember), but the alien colonizers keep pouring into our lands.

We need to be operating on all rhetorical levels, from first philosophy to visceral, gut level messaging.

3. When I discuss the coming reality of racial violence, I am speaking analytically, not normatively. If whites in Europe (America is lost, and separation, not reconquest, is the only realistic hope) intend to restore their fatherlands, they must face the fact that they will almost certainly not do so absent bloodshed. I do not say that they should initiate such violence (certainly they should not, as that would reduce white morale), merely that they will not recover their homelands without it. The aliens will start it once they are asked to leave, and see that the indigenous are serious (as we just saw, they are already pathologically violent, and this when the livin’ is grand, and they receive only benefits, while being required to do nothing in return). The indigenous must make sure they have the physical firepower to finish it.

4. I certainly do not advocate any type of racial violence in America (except legit self-defense against nonwhite criminals). I would like to see Europe become white again, but America is ethically different. We had every right to keep out nonwhite migrants - and should have - and we should of course deport all illegal aliens. But we are a New World; we always had substantial nonwhite populations (Indians, black slaves); and I’m not sure how a Christian could tell a LEGAL immigrant to get out, when, even though whites did found, settle and build America, we ourselves originated elsewhere.

Of course, if a race war should ever be launched against whites in America, then all bets would be off. But until that day, whites demanding legal nonwhite immigrants get out is tough to square with any Christian ethic, as I understand the faith. 

5. That I think American racial cleansing would be unchristian in no way should be taken to mean that I think that there is anything immoral about WN, or a racial politics for whites. All minorities play race politics to their advantage, and whites’ disadvantage, and we should not hesitate to band together to defend our own racial interests. Indeed, I wish we’d start doing so immediately.

6. Lastly, I am an apostle for White Zion, let’s not forget. That is the very opposite of violence. WZ is simply doing to some country what minorities are doing to us: demographic colonization, followed by electioneering to achieve WN political dominance. Not only is this course morally unimpeachable, I also believe it is more likely to succeed than other options, esp wrt the New World Anglosphere (though so racially and morally degraded is Britain I have to make the same recommendation there).

Posted by Leon Haller on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 14:24 | #

CS,

You grasp my brutally realistic argument.

I don’t particularly like the idea of WZ. I wish the white nations had not allowed themselves to be colonized. I wish we had maintained racial and national pride. Even with these mistakes, I wish most whites were awakened and ready to politically reconquer our countries, and reimpose our cultures, legislative preferences and values, including, for Europeans, repatriation.

But you are correct, even if it hurts to admit: most whites are racial losers. For decades I thought whites would gradually awaken to the horrors of what they’d done to themselves, and yes, there is glacial movement in that direction. But, like picking up girls (unless your name is Dicaprio), it’s all “a numbers game”. For every white we laboriously persuade of basic racial truth, 7, 10, 100(?) nonwhite immigrants pour in, everywhere. The pace of awakening is just way too slow viz the pace of colonization (are you paying attention, GW?). And by the time a majority of our people in any given area are awake, they will be physically incapable of effectuating their recrudesced desire for racial apartheid. So it’ll still be “stiff upper lip”, “protect my portfolio”, “carry on”, the end.

I absolutely agree about separation from the libtards, too. “The strength of the wolf is the strength of the pack.” A WN state could be very powerful, even if not heavily populated. As long as we are racially united, and morale is high (as it would be for the first few generations), we could stand up to far larger enemies. We need to consider Israel in that regard. Yes, they suck off the US and overseas Jewish community. But I think they would be viable, at least for quite a while, even absent outside aid. As a real ethnonation, they are willing to make such sacrifices as are necessary for survival. I think a WN state would be similar.

There is a lot to discuss re this WZ concept. A site specifically devoted to it is certainly needed. I need to figure out my schedule, talk to some experts in site construction, and pursue this further.

To others:

Stop saying this is cowardly! How do others propose saving the white race? The enemy of white preservation is not just the alien. It is also this widespread genetic defect in the psyches of legions of whites that makes us so susceptible to PC indoctrination. That scares me much more than ‘wilding’ Africans. The numbers of WNs will rise as objective conditions continue to deteriorate. But I think the ultimate “growth potential” of WN, no matter how awful things get, may be below 50% of the race, worldwide (maybe way below).

Posted by Wandrin on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 14:42 | #

This White Zion nonsense is disguised demoralization.

The Jewnazis mean to exterminate us. They’ll follow.

If the Jewnazis win, if they manage to destroy our nations, our families, our civilization, the most important thing isn’t to survive the most important thing is to take them down with us, is to make sure they have nothing left to gloat over, that everything they value and cherish is torn down and destroyed in the wreckage just like they’ve done to us.

If you think we are going to lose then work for mutual assured destruction, not running away.

Posted by Chechar on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 17:14 | #

It looks like a comment with many links gets stuck in the filter. I’ll repost without the links:

“What’s near term?  I’d say within a couple of decades” - Trainspotter

Trains,

Several economists are saying that the dollar will crash very soon (cf the link in my previous post). If these economists are right, the US will enter a convergence of catastrophes sooner than expected, which means that there will be no time for metapolitical structures as planned by WN intellectuals.

Posted by CS on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:33 | #

Leon,

You pointed out something I already knew but will repeat for the benefit of others. By the time enough white people pull their heads out of their asses, they will be outnumbered by non-whites and they will not be able to vote themselves out of their predicament.

Look at California. Whites are a minority there or soon will be. What percent of the white population shares our views there? One, two, three percent? The average white person does not give a shit what the government does or what is happening to their country as long as they can buy food at the supermarket, beer at the beer store and watch football on TV.

We need to be the voting majority somewhere so we’re the ones handing out rewards and punishment (at least at the local level). Any white liberal in our ethnostate gets treated the same way our guys do whose identity is made public. They are fired and harassed until they get the message to physically leave. Let them live in Detroit if they think non-whites are so great. Otherwise we’ll continue to be a despised minority even as black savages riot all over Europe and America.

Posted by CS on Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:39 | #

Wandrin,

Yes it would not surprise me at all if the Jews intend and try to literally physically exterminate every single white person on the planet at some time in the future. Which is all the more reason not to be in countries that they control.

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 16 Aug 2011 00:38 | #

Dasein,

Interesting.  10%?  Not so much.

How does the theory account for the historical incapacity of FN, VB and others to hold the breakthrough levels of support they have hit in the past?  The situation seems to be more dynamic than this research indicates, with the spread of ideas not necessarily translating to political support.  The octaves rise and fall regardless of the increasing volume of the sound.

Posted by Chechar on Tue, 16 Aug 2011 03:16 | #

Dasein,

Thanks for these two VNN links: I copied and pasted Linder’s POV on Breivik to my blog.

On the other hand, I’m skeptic of Scientology. If you know Spanish I’d add a link to my little book debunking it.

Posted by Wandrin on Tue, 16 Aug 2011 03:40 | #

Funny you mention this, because I just saw it the other day for what seemed to me like the first time in a while.

Interesting read.

.

How does the theory account for the historical incapacity of FN, VB and others to hold the breakthrough levels of support they have hit in the past?

In the real world the other side is pushing from the opposite direction.

It’s a battle of fanatics vs fanatics with the bulk of the population as the prize. The enemy seized the high ground, media and education, in a stealth Pearl Harbour attack before the main battle started and that gave them an overwhelming advantage in terms of fanatic production.

Posted by Lew on Tue, 16 Aug 2011 04:31 | #

Chechar:

“If these economists are right, the US will enter a convergence of catastrophes sooner than expected, which means that there will be no time for metapolitical structures as planned by WN intellectuals.”

Exactly. This is one reason I continue to believe Harold Covington’s ideas merit it close attention. Covington seems to be unique in that as a novelist he clearly understands the importance of art, literature, inspiration and metapolitics as key elements of the struggle; however; at the same time he is also calling for coordinated Nationalist action IRL right now, as opposed to action at a hypothetical time in the future after a cultural shift in our favor brought about through metapolitics has taken place.

Posted by Wandrin on Fri, 19 Aug 2011 05:17 | #

Whatever the precise best model or percentages, though, I find it interesting that change could become inevitable once a certain barrier is crossed.  My belief is that things are proceeding, however slowly now, towards inevitable large-scale change in the dominant ideology.

I think this is true. The dominant idealogy always has to ostensibly be for the common good. When it becomes impossible to lie about that any more and people lose faith in their current leadership then people will look for alternatives.

If these economists are right, the US will enter a convergence of catastrophes sooner than expected, which means that there will be no time for metapolitical structures as planned by WN intellectuals.

The convergence of catastophres means everything will be speeded up - including spreading the foundational ideas neccessary to survive the catastrophe as best as possible.