|
|
|
Charles Murray Still Can’t Subtract In his most recent Commentary article “Jewish Genius”, Charles Murray spends pages speculating about why Jews excel, only to end with this:
All well and good but he still can’t discuss at precisely what they excel because he’s afraid he must subtract.
In other words, he’s afraid he’ll have to explain exactly why God hates Scotch Irish Iowans like Murray and myself so much as to “choose” such people for us to live with. Perhaps Charles Murray would do well to drop the pretensions that the story of Moses and Exodus are true and consider the consequences of being not merely “nomadic” but a tribe with multinational urban populations since Babylonian times. If he did while at the same time learning to subtract, he might infer not only how “persecution” of Jews could be much older than many now think, but he might see, much more importantly, how to inhibit their virulence—described so graphically and succinctly by Kevin MacDonald. Certainly the long history of Jewish Diaspora evolution, going back at least to Babylon, has created group organism genetic predispositions—sometimes strong—toward suppression of the immune responses of host nations. The bulk of the Jewish population doesn’t express these predispositions so strongly that they can’t be dealt with. The problem is what might be best thought of as group metabolism expressing virulence. The distinction is critical for practical resolution of the problem. Think of it as a disease organism that has various metabolic pathways—some of which are virulent. These metabolic pathways do depend on symbiotic memes (such as “open borders”) although as Dawkins points out, memetic evolution is driven by psychological appeal which itself (although not admitted by Dawkins) can be rooted in the genetic predispositions of a people. In a situation like this, where it is not practical to exclude the entire strain, the evolutionary medical approach is to vaccinate against virulence itself thereby favoring less virulent. Obviously if memes are critical to the virulent metabolic pathways of the group organism, it may be profitable to try to disrupt those stages of the group metabolism. I’ve alluded to the analogy between Jews and HIV before—a pathogen that has, via horizontal transmission, evolved high virulence to the point that it directly attacks the immune system of the host—and the “amazing coincidence” that the top 2 demographic determinants of the USA (the demographic variables that correlate most strongly with all other demographic variables of interest) are HIV-positive status and recent Jewish immigrants (Russian) respectively. Not to discount the HIV analogy here but there is another, perhaps more pragmatically analogous pathogen—particularly given horizontal transmission between nations that are rooted in soil and hence immobile. There are some diseases that are so mutable that not only antibiotics, but vaccines cannot be effective against them over the long term. Among these are the diseases caused by sexually reproducing pathogens which, by recombining genes, rapidly adapt to any attempt to stop them via vaccines. Memes can be thrown into the mix for human group organisms as well. Paul Ewald’s book, “Plague Time: How Stealth Infections Cause Cancer, Heart Disease, and Other Deadly Ailments”, chapter “The Protean Opponents” describes malaria thus:
Think of technologies that enhance international transportation (starting as far back as the wheel or even horse but clearly advancing to apocalyptic proportions during the 20th century’s advent of air transportation technology), of humans, as analogous to mosquitoes and think of nations as houses whose residents are their human ecologies consisting of coevolved populations of genes and memes. Finally think of genes and memes as to potentially hitch-hiking organisms varying in virulence from benign symbionts to vicious pathogens. The technique of building mosquito-proof houses has proven effective against malarial virulence in developed countries, most dramatically in the Tennessee Valley when dams were constructed providing vast mosquito breeding grounds and an ensuing malaria epidemic. Ewald’s contention is that control of the malaria epidemic caused by the Tennessee Valley Authority’s projects resulted less from the control of these breeding grounds than the control of construction of new housing via standards that made it difficult for mosquitoes to access very sick people and pick up their virulent pathogens for further horizontal transmission-driven virulence evolution. Likewise globalization has produced a vast “population” of intercontinental jets transporting legions from nation to nation. Moreover, far from building “jet-proof nations” globalization has opened up nations to spreading virulence—with barriers to only the most obviously virulent of people. In this respect, Ewald’s focus on “stealth infections” is particularly appropriate. Jews are not obviously virulent. Indeed, as apologists (most recently represented by Charles Murry, Gregory Cochrane, Jason Hardy and Harry Harpending) go to great lengths to point out, there are many Jews that operate as symbionts and indeed many appear to operate as such profoundly beneficial symbionts that these apologists make the implicit (by not referring to the other side of the ledger) case that Jews are a net benefit to their host societies. Within Ewald’s theory of evolutionary medicine, such symbionts are the key to one of the two major means of favoring the evolution of symbiosis over virulence (the other of which has already been presented to as the prevention of horizontal transmission): the vaccination against virulence itself that I referred to previously. An example Ewald discusses is a bacteria whose virulent variants make an investment of 5% of their metabolism to create a protein that digests the lining of the respiratory tract of their hosts. These virulent variants reap enormous benefits from digesting this easily available source of food from their hosts—at the cost of pneumonia in the host—thereby out-competing their benign variants. Vaccination against that specific protein destroys the payoff of that 5% investment creating a 5% handicap favoring the nonvirulent variants in their competition for the ecological niche within the host. Moreover, these nonvirulent variants give the immune system the information it needs to create antibodies to the species as a whole if a virulent mutation starts proliferating. Pneumonia is an obvious disease but the principle holds for more stealthy competitors so long as the stealth virulence can be identified and vaccinated against. So there are two levels at which Jewish virulence may be attacked: 1) prevention of horizontal transmission, and failing that 2) favoring symbionts by neutralizing the payoffs for virulence. Unfortunately, nay disastrously, Jewish virulence as evolved to the point that it now directly attacks any attempt to prevent horizontal transmission. The most profound, and stealthy, virulence expressed by Jews during recent times was the Immigration and Nationality Services Act of 1965 the critical Jewish political support for which Kevin MacDonald describes in Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881-1965: A Historical Review. So we are left with the alternative as a near term measure: favoring symbionts by neutralizing the payoffs for virulence. The recommended approach for this is vaccination, but as Ewald notes, protean opponents—opponents who quickly adapt to new methods of preventing their payoff from virulence—cannot be fought for long using the remedial measure of neutralizing virulence. How, then, are we to resolve this conundrum in the case of the protean Jewish virulence? The answer may be a hybrid strategy that faces the stark fact that any attempt to neutralize the payoff of Jewish virulence is merely a stopgap measure which Jews will rapidly overcome. Therefore, the hiatus of virulence between adaptations must be used to shore up the institutions that prevent horizontal transmission. What form would this hybrid strategy take? The answer cannot be known until the structure of Jewish virulence is better known. There are many theories of the way Jewish virulence achieves its payoff I’m not going to, here, take sides. Whatever the answer, the payoff that must be prevented for long enough to enable the prevention of horizontal transmission—and this period of time cannot be expected to be very long due to the protean nature of Jewish virulence. Comments:2
Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 05:07 | # I emailed Dr Murray to inform him that he had been mentioned in MR dispatches. Perhaps he will favour us with a response. 3
Posted by Larry Levant on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 11:42 | # Auster unburdens himself: “The Nazi genocide of European Jewry was the ultimate crime of history.” 4
Posted by warmongering vectorist on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 14:27 | # http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54908 Interesting that Mr. Shapiro is entering law school rather than ellisting in the US armed forces. Thus, when red state white Americans come back from Iraq - and now, possibly, Iran - either dead or disabled, Shapiro will be earning big bucks as a lawyer. And, possibly as well, enjoying the attentions of white females left “manless” by the costs of war… And why not? To the victor goes the spoils. 5
Posted by Ivy Vectorist on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 14:42 | # correction: “enlisting…” I find the following from the Shapiro article most interesting: “Crippled by a pathological aversion to war, America and Britain…” Is that how one would characterize, particularly America, today? Being “pathologically averse” to war? Let’s see. Bush started a war against Iraq - an illegal act of aggression - for no reason congruent to American interests. This war has cost, and will continue to cost, hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of American lives. Bush and his necon advisors seem to be thirsting for war against Iran - a war which would be far more costly than Iraq. Britain has gone along for the ride. The US in particular is derided worldwide for being too militaristic and aggressive - the Iraq war has been a disaster in every conceivable way, and now some beat the war drums for Iran. And, yet, Shapiro says all of that is not enough, it is indicative of a “pathological aversion to war.” Interesting. Is it perhaps a case of projection - that Mr. Shapiro, shunning the military service that his ideals would seem to suggest he enlist in, is himself the one personally “pathologically averse to war?” Of course, as long as “other folks” fight then let’s be pathologically averse to peace, no? Also of interest is that the West’s march to “suicide” is not discussed in the context of an actual problem - immigration and demographics - but in the “problem” of Iran generating enriched uranium that could possibly be used to make one Hirsohima-type atom bomb (meanwhile Israel is said to have hundreds of nuclear weapons, including hydrogen bombs). Is something “not right” here? 6
Posted by Bud White on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 15:09 | # “At this point, I take sanctuary in my remaining hypothesis, uniquely parsimonious and happily irrefutable. The Jews are God’s chosen people.”—CM Chosen to do what? Save or destroy the world? It appears evident by their actions, they were “chosen” to destroy the world! 7
Posted by ben tillman on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 15:14 | # And, yet, Shapiro says all of that is not enough…. Shapiro is a rabies virus. 8
Posted by Torgrim on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:03 | # “crippled by a pathological aversion to war”..Shapiro Looks like UCLA has been neglectful or should I say, creative in educating Mr. Shapiro in his understanding of history. This Nation has had a war every generation of the 20th Century. Aversion?... more like manipulation toward war. Notice too, how anything dealing with the “Fount” of Civilization, the Middle East, always trumps the people of America; example, demographics and immigration. I wager, that the “immigration problem” will be dealt with at the same time that a “crisis” in the Middle East, (read Iran), takes place and it will NOT be good for America. Torgrim 9
Posted by Andy Wooster on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:11 | # It’s not hard to see why Shapiro is referred to as “The Littlest Chickenhawk” by a fellow WND columnist. The fact that Shapiro failed to respond to this very public calling-out that he received (on the very website where he is published, no less), lends further credence to those who contend that he is a pusillanimous liar. The column “vectorist” linked to is approximately the 11,000th Shaprio column cheerleading for war in the Middle East. 10
Posted by VanSpeyk on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 20:58 | # Svigor, I think those people come to that conclusion because they have been immersed to such a large extent in the whole Holocaust propaganda. As a result of this they think they ‘know’ the victims and identify with them. I’d wager that almost any educated person has seen the short scene that shows a little girl looking outside through a small opening of a train wagon. It’s very difficult to exaggarate the extent to which people are confronted with the whole Holocaust industry (at least here in the Netherlands). Needless to say, this is totally not the case with such events as the Gulags, the Japanse slaughter of Chinese, the Ukrainian famine, etc. People basically never see pictures or video of these events, hear tragic stories, meet survivors, etc. This accounts, in my opinion, for the phenomenon that even people who will reveal they know the Soviet Union killed at least 20 million people will still, nevertheless, always put the ‘the Six Million’ at the top of their list. Because of all the indoctrination they have developed an irrational attachment to it. 11
Posted by wintermute on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 22:20 | # I’d like to know if there’s any way any relatively educated person can make a statement like that without first coming to believe, in one way or another, that jews are the chosen people of g-d. People, atheists and Christians alike, have often incorporated this from propaganda (Dennis Praeger and WND make much of Chosenness, as does Fr. Neuhaus at First Things), reading the Bible, attending Church, or by social reinforcement from living in a society where many or most have bought into the Big Lie. A lovely representative of the Mind of Western Man at the current moment comes from Fr. Neuhaus: http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=2260
“The Second Person of the Holy Trinity, true God and true man, is Jewish flesh” - no-one could have foreseen how nauseasting the nadir of our civilization was going to be . . . this is top/bottom diaglogue from an S&M romance. The Passion, indeed! Some Christians are vaguely aware that their own tangled and confused theology grants them “Chosen people” - or “true Israel” - status, but in their hearts, this can never be reconciled with the fact that “G-d” has granted Chosenness to the Jews first. Any being capable of that much caprice - abandoning a people he had entered into a real estate contract with - could drop Christians into the ontological abyss just as easily, maybe even moreso. Doesn’t Jonanthan Edwards teach us that we are “loathesome spiders” in God’s sight? Isn’t the whole point of Protestantism apotropaic - that is to say, by hating ourselves enough, maybe The God of Israel will ease up a little? That all of this theological filth has become so wildly depraved is not hard to discern, nor is it surprising when one goes back to the source. If one feels one’s “anti-Semitism” waning, a good slog through the jucier bits of the Old Testament will suffice to renew ones flagging spirits. OTOH, it still surprises to the point of terror, that Jews and Christians read the Old Testament - or the Book of Revelations - as works of religious instruction, when they are very obviously words of severe psychological derangement. Even Luther balked at the Book of Revelations (“the spirit of Christ is nowhere in it”). Everyone reads, but no one makes note of, what the Old Testament is: a deal between a partly corporeal but very definitely earthbound spirit, probably a volcano demon of some sort, and a nomadic tribe. It’s a real estate contract: you get the lands from the Nile to the Euphrates, but I must have the foreskins and you must follow some rules . . . and the Jews agree. Do you understand? Foreskins for land.. That is your “culture”. Like the plumber says when he finds the clog of hair in your drain, “Well, there’s your problem!” This is also why Christianity enrages Jews so much . . . at heart, the idea of Christ spouting some cross of Cynic wisdom (welcome povery, defy social convention) and Platonic philosophy ( cultivate the soul during life in anticipation of death) and then claiming to be the Messiah - who would deliver the nations into eternal bondage to the Jews - suggests that the clever desert hagglers have been tricked. Promised dominion of the Earth, they are left holding a bag of warmed over Platonism. As they say on the internet: LOL! Now, the Jews are a very proud people. They’re still mad at Stalin, whom they misjudged a simple Georgian peasant, for seizing the reigns of the revolution and dispatching their most recent messianic pretender, Trotsky, in ignomious circumstances in Mexico. A Slav ran off with their Bolshevist prize, that they had murdered so many for and worse . . . for which they had paid so much! (Jacob Schiff sent Trotsky from Brooklyn with 20 million dollars in gold) Likewise they are angry that their “G-d”, whom they see as a being lesser than or coterminous with themselves (here they may be right), swindled them out of all those foreskins and hard-to-parse commandments. I obeyed 615 mitzvah for this? they ask, surveying the modern world. Their suspicion that “G-d” has cheated them is inflamed by the mere suggestion that he has switched allegiences. Even that betrayer, Saul/Paul, said that gentiles were of no real account (Romans): 17 Got that? How much more will they who belong to it by nature be grafted back. Even as apostates, God still prefers Jews to gentiles; they’re just holier than those dirty goyishe pigs. “they who belong to it by nature”: How much plainer can Paul be than he is here? Christians who argue against Jew worshipping Christian Zionists, or philo-Semites, or Messianic Yahvists, or other Judaisizing branches of their Rube Goldberg “religion” have got it all wrong: Paul could not be more explicit than he is here. If Jews hadn’t screwed up, God never would never even have thought of offering salvation to Gentiles, and he still prefers the Jews over mere ‘consolation prize’ Gentiles, who are intrinsically worthless. Sinners in the hands of an angry god indeed. What would two millenia of the internalization of these ideals do to a people? Sigmund Freud thought that anti-Semitism was based on the unconscious understanding among Gentiles that Jews were responsible for Christianity, and this is surely right to some degree. In my hundreds of online encounters with fanatical Christians, driven to an almost demonic degree of utter falseness, it’s plain to me that fanaticism is often the only defense against apostasy - and Jew hatred. That Jews spawn, with ease, new world-deforming ideologies, like the Holocaust narrative, or Communism, indicate to me that no human being is safe as long as Jews live anywhere but among themselves; this will have to be enforced with the strictest resolve: cultural communications will also have to be cut, given Jewish willingness and capability to direct the minds of the simplest to some variation of the “Heaven is coming to Earth - real soon now!” story, which has brought them their hearts dearest desire, chaos and suffering for the nations, and more profit for themselves. Goethe: “observe this clever race that has internalized the principle that wherever order obtains, there is no profit to be made!”. As to YHVH (let’s stop pretending he is “God”, yes?), his hatred of non-Jews is too lengthy to go into here. Suffice it to say the Bad Book is stuffed with enough quotes of anti-Gentilism that even a European Hate Crimes court would be forced to convict him of incitement to racial animus. Exodus 23: 27 “27 I will send my fear before thee, and will destroy all the people to whom thou shalt come; and I will make all thine enemies turn their backs unto thee.” or worse, Malachi 1: 1 The burden of the word of the LORD to Israel by Mal’achi. “I loved Jacob and hated Esau” - again, could the Bible possibly be any plainer regarding the Gentile Question? That Jabob is Israel is not in question: his name is changed to Israel after he wrestles with the angel, and he is named the father of his nation. That Esau is us, is confirmed by centuries of speculation: http://www.jafi.org.il/education/torani/nehardeah/toldot.html
12
Posted by wintermute on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 22:23 | # Finally, a roundup of YHVH quotes which speak to the persistence of his intent (taken from Oliver’s very insightful essay, “The Spiritual Jew”):
Indignation of YHVH on all nations . . . has delivered them for slaughter . . . their stink shall come out of their carcassess . . . mountains melted with blood . . . blah blah blah . . . land into burning pitch . . . dust made fat with fatness . . . the whole earth destroyed by the fire of jealousy . . . yadda yadda yadda. Share that with the next Christer trying to pass off his wares with a “God is Love” sticker slapped on. What about Esau? Well, God is love to everyone except gentiles. There you have the Christian Question in a nutshell. It just goes on and on - the more you read of the Bible, the worse it becomes. Jesus and the Syro-phonecian woman is a real nadir . . . the purported “son of God” regards non-Jews as dogs and says so, relenting to heal A LITTLE GIRL only when the mother properly abases herself before a Jew. And so on . . . People looking for reasons for the decline of the West in evolutionary folderol are peering throught the wrong end of the telescope - this is a simple spirtual error: you are praying to a god that hates you. Stop cutting the ends off your dicks and that will weaken the demon the Jews worship; stop praying to him and this will weaken him further; begin to riducule the Jews and the contents of their ‘holy books’ and he will buckle. Discarnate entitites are very dependant on the kind of attention they recieve from humans, and demons, bound as they are to carnal desires and carnal goals (real estate and slaves, in this case) are especially vulnerable. Furthermore, what else can YHVH do to inflict his ‘indignation’ upon us? We are already destroyed more or less as it is. Why not return the favor? Since it also demonstrably true that this creaturee is not, and cannot pretend to be, the actual Source and Goal of all existence, why pay him any mind at all, except to identify his worshippers and either ridicule them or talk reason with them? Still not convinced? Here are some more goodies from Genesis. First, God’s blessing on Jacob:
There’s some good Black Magic, worthy of a desert genie who lives in a box and appears (occasionally) as a pillar of fire. It seeps into the mind of the reader and poisions the well of his soul. Unless you are very secure in a non-Abrahamic religion - Vedanta, Hellenism, Taoism, Asatru, Platonism - this stuff is like voodoo and will either kill you dead or kill your impulse to resist. Or maybe you will strive to be like a Jew in every way possible, since the whole point of the accursed Book is to endlessly reiterate how much God and his pigeon-spawned hippie son HATE gentiles. And now, finally, the Christians are beginning to complain: oh, why do people hate themselves? Well, for one thing, they ate from that rotton piece of kosher meat you served them and are now sick: they have the sickness unto death. Maybe more Jesus magic will save them? The Church and European Civilization are like Livia and Augustus in Graves’ I, Claudius: “I will nurse him myself” becomes, later, “don’t eat the figs”. The only remotely clean figure in Christianity is the Virgin Mary, and that is because she is a purely anti-Biblical figure, to whom Jesus said, “What have I to do with thee?” and who was denounced by her in turn: Mary thought her son insane. For people suffering from prolonged exposure to Jewish poisions of one kind or another, here are some remedies I have found helpful, no particular order: Plato: Phaedrus, Symposium, Apology, Republic, Timeaus Boethius: Consolations of Philosophy - can’t be recommended highly enough. “The Book that Saved the Mind of the West”. A dying man considers the fate of his soul at the start of the Christian era. He is aided in his contemplations by a figure suspiciously like Athene. Many references to Apollo and Providence, none to the ‘holy works’ of the Jews, and none at all to Jesus. Splendid. Golden Verses of Pythagoras: http://www.astronomy.pomona.edu/archeo/greece/pythagoras/golden.htm Solon’s Ten Ethical Dicta: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/features/2000/carrier2.html Heraclitus: Fragments, http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GREECE/HERAC.HTM Empedocles: Fragments Parmenides: Fragments, commentary by Peter Kingsley in his books Reality and In the Dark Places of Wisdom Seneca: The Dialogues, esp. On Providence, On Tranquility of Mind, and On Anger Cicero: On the Nature of the Gods Marcus Aurelius: Meditations Epictetus: Discourses, Handbook Plotinus: Enenads Gore Vidal: Julian, a novel regarding Julian the Apostate Orphic Hymns, Hogart translation Anything by Ficino, There is good modern introduction by Thomas Moore, Planets Within Kathleen Raine: Selected poems, critical works on Yeats and Blake Simone Weil: Letter to a Priest, Iliad: Poem of Might The Jungians, as a school: Marie-Louise von Franz is especially good, as is Edward Edinger William Blake: Marriage of Heaven and Hell is a good place to start Jerry Dell Ehrlich: Plato’s Gift to Christianity - especially good for Christians ‘transitioning’ out. Sri Aurobindo: the biography by Satprem is a good starting place The Tao Te Ching, various translations The Bhagavad Gita, various translations Works of Franklin Merril-Wolff: Experience and Philosophy Robert Anton Wilson, Prometheus Rising Pound, Cantos - tough reading. These are just a smattering of the various ‘ways out’. The basic fact is that Abrahamic religions have the same interest in preventing private spiritual contemplation and reversion upon our Causes, for the same reason that Oil Companies dislike solar power. If it helps anyone, Socrates, Heraclitus, and Seneca were all regarded as anima naturalitur christianae, those whose souls were naturally Christian. Seneca even enjoyed sainthood briefly. There are, of course, lots of terrific works on Hinduism that are helpful for Western Man in search of himself. The highest and best redaction of Hinduism is Vedanta, started by a remarkable reformer, Shankara. He’s a bit subtle to start out with, but modern Vedantists, like modern Buddhists, can be very psychologically sophisticated, and I would recommend for anyone to take up one of the mediatative disciplines. They are conductive to spiritual experience more or less the way language is conducive to cognition. Jesus tells you (John 4:22) that “Salvation is of the Jews”. Yet Wintermute says unto you: Jesus is full of shit. You, a natural born gentile, are something more than a wild olive shoot contrary to divine nature, more than a graft, more than an afterthought, more than poor Esau, hated in the womb, more than a loathesome spider in the sight of God. Much more. So much more that that you literally, cannot, now imagine. So: here we come to the crossing of ways: who are you going to believe? Some Jew the whole world has accepted as the sole mediator between God and Man for two millenia or an anonymous internet anti-Semite, who is rude, impatient, and often very careless in copy-editing his posts? We all know where the smart money is. More: The Greeks forgot more about God than the Jews ever knew. For instance, they knew that a genuinely trancendent reality couldn’t take a proper name - something Jews still haven’t figured out. Believing the Passion narrative is not a prerequisite for “salvation”, which at any rate, was widely available to Gentiles before Jews even knew that human beings had souls, or that these souls both precede and follow this life here and now, or how their fate is determined by action - all of which they learned by Hellenization. Neither is any serious spiritual seeker required to take the step, both harmful to others and harmful to self of mistaking Jewish evil and Jewish nonsense - namely the Bible - as being sacred in any degree. It is not a guide to faith and morals - it is a foreskins-for-land deal. Nothing sublime or worthy of imitation there. You have internalized two thousand years of Jewish hate, and now stand on the brink of the abyss: will you cough up the poison or no? Pound, Canto CXIII “The Gods have not returned. They never left us. They have not returned.” 13
Posted by W.LindsayWheeler on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 00:49 | # And wintermute, I should tremble at your Christian hating fanaticism instead? Like Germans had any writing 3000 years ago. Your lucky he didn’t pick any Indo-European race to be the home of the Messiah. Otherwise you would be responsible for killing him. And don’t forget Wintermute, Jesus called us gentiles “Dogs”. But I would rather be a dog any day in the house of God than a rebellious child. Good rants but your seething hatred blinds you to reality. 14
Posted by W.LindsayWheeler on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 00:58 | # You know Wintermute, your screed falls flat when you consider CHRISTIAN VICTORIAN England. This stage of the British Empire was the highest civilization. It combined High Church Anglicanism with Classical Wisdom thus producing a very Virtuous and prosperous country. This very fact in history disproves all your false ranting. It was two Christian armies that beat back Muslim armies. It was Christians that developed Western hospitals and Western medicine and Nurses. The universities and colleges of the Western World grew out of Roman Catholic Seminaries. It was monks who copied pagan literature for us to enjoy. For a lot of my life I ate at soup kitchens served by Christians—-I, in all my travels, have never met an Atheist or a pagan run soup kitchen. And another thing—-Jesus the Jew, died for our sins and we are released from them by HIS Death. We have received mercy. 15
Posted by scrooby on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 02:36 | # The sickness you haters display in these threads will eat you up from within. Why do you feel so challenged by those who are different from you? Because you are weak, intellectually, and physically, and you are threatened. Your hatred for others is only a manifestation of your hatred for yourselves, for your own mother and father, and for your backround. You can thrive and prosper, and stop dwelling on your fears. A fearful man is the most disrespected, hated man. Your fear marks you like cat piss in the corner. YOU BECOME WHAT YOU HATE. Your are all of the worst descriptions of what you despise. But probably, you don’t have the self-reflection, nor the intelligence, to understand the dilemna you are in. 16
Posted by righteousONE on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 02:41 | # YOU WRITE “Stop cutting the ends off your dicks and that will weaken the demon the Jews worship” Dude, I seriously recommend you start taking medication to take your mind off premeditation. You are sick in a fundamental way. You have crossed from spiritual to paranoid and pathological. You need to seek some help somewhere. I don’t write this because I’m concerned about you, I am concerned about others in your vicinity. You are a sick, sick puppy. 17
Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 02:46 | # WLW’s mention of High Church Anglicanism and its role in the business of the British Empire might cause one to infer that England’s National Church possessed the unqualified approbation of Heaven. Brendan Behan’s more prosaic declamation rings far truer: “The cornerstones of the Church of England are the bollocks of Henry the Eighth”. 18
Posted by Lawrence on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 05:12 | # The Church in England started long before Henry VIII. The Church OF England may have officially but the Celtic Church existed several hundred years before coming under the boot of Rome for a thousand years. IT actually kept an amazing amount of it’s pre-Roman culture even during that time. It also sent its own Bishops to the early counsels. The process to extracate from Rome was a process that took several hundred years, most of which occurred quite handily without Henry at all. Henry was an opportunist that took advantage of the prevailing situation. He gets the most press, but his descendants did far more to advance the Church of England than he ever did. 19
Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 07:06 | # The Anglican Church, as the name suggests, was formed of and for English people of whom there were almost none in the Celtic Britain which the Romans subdued and which later became a home for the Celtic Church. That being said, it remains a fact that the fathers of both institutions claimed to share a fatuous belief in the alien Jewish mythology peddled as the mainstay of the Christian package, but they may well have considered it sufficient for their power-seeking purposes that the ‘hoi polloi’ accepted the nonsense whilst they, being somewhat educated, ignored the religion’s impractical and burdensome precepts. 20
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 08:41 | # Quothe self-called “righteousONE”: You need to seek some help somewhere. I don’t write this because I’m concerned about you, I am concerned about others in your vicinity. You are a sick, sick puppy. Ooooo…. wintermute needs “therapy”??? Dr. Freud, you’ve just convinced me to seek an interview for Majority Radio from this menace to public “health”. What say ye, wintermute? Feel free to contact me for details. 22
Posted by Yawnn on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 11:47 | # S.I. wrote: “I’d like to know if there’s any way any relatively educated person can make a statement like that without first coming to believe, in one way or another, that jews are the chosen people of g-d. “ Because the bible says so, and more than a billion idiots believe it. Rationalism and reality have never been strong points of religion. 23
Posted by RIGHTEOUSONE on Thu, 05 Apr 2007 03:24 | # Never did anyone suggest “therapy” for so-called WM. This sick freak believes in genocide, and that a series of LETTERS (yhvh) somehow represents his creator. I might just as well choose any other series of four letters to represent the creator of the universe. Can you readers, those with at least nominal intellects, understand that even by his own believe system that is the same thing as any other written represtentation of his creator? When you write YHVH, wintermute, you violate your own precepts regarding the representation of creation. You are sick. You can only find help through reflection, fasting, solitude, and remorse. Your bitter hatred for others among your race (human) will only condemn you to earthly suffering. I imagine your suffering is already far beyond most humans, because of your bitter, whithered heart. 24
Posted by Daniel J on Thu, 05 Apr 2007 06:39 | # Come on Mute… What is this half-baked “analysis” of Christianity? If you fail to understand the spiritual interpretation of Protestant theology than you fall into the same trap that the Jews did. God has a chosen people, and they are “Jews.” In Romans Paul states: He is not a Jew who is one outwardly.... Yes, I accept Nietzsche’s criticisms that our YHWH (sic) is a God who demands. Label them irrational if you must, but God himself is only living out Nietzsche’s ideal super-man who is powerful enough to make demands without worrying about conceding. Almost your entire (mis)understanding of my religion stems from you attributing to Old Testament passaged meaning devoid of the context the New Testament provides. 25
Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 05 Apr 2007 06:51 | # I dont suppose anyone really knows why this RIGHTEOUSONE bore spouts the arrant nonsense that he does. It may well be that the inane drivel appeals to the sort of weak-minded, mattoidal,(and ,sadly, all too numerous) future inhabitants of old Yahweh’s stratospheric and posthumously putative penthouse. 26
Posted by Tommy G on Thu, 05 Apr 2007 12:32 | # Quite an amusing thread you got going here!
Given the fact we have two seemingly absurd propositions to chose from. 1) God created the universe and all that is comprised in it. or 2) The universe created itself out of nothing. I chose the former rather than the latter. So then, if the God created the universe, we must then choose a belief system (or religion if you will) to acknowledge him. After careful consideration of all the absurd belief systems competing against each other out there, I’ve found the God of Holy Bible (Christianity) to make the most sense. You see, all belief systems—outside of your own—seem absurd to those who don’t subscribe to them. I for one find it incomprehensibly preposterous to believe the universe created itself out of nothing…there had to have been an intelligent creator to make this all come about…but that’s just my opinion. Btw—When Jesus showed up on the seen, didn’t he render Judaism, as it was practised, null and void? Isn’t that the main reason why Jew’s are so hostile towards Christianity? 27
Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 05 Apr 2007 17:10 | # Alex wrote of wintermute’s musings: This is Black Magic, Voodoo, and Lovecraft mixed all into one. When wintermute had already posited: “Let people serve thee, and nations bow down to thee; be Lord over thy brethren, and let thy mother’s sons bow down to thee. Cursed be every one that curseth thee, and blessed be everyone that blesseth thee.” Gen. 27:28, 29. There’s some good Black Magic, worthy of a desert genie who lives in a box and appears (occasionally) as a pillar of fire. The primary problem with paranormal phenomena is not insufficient documentation of its existence, but that there is no good theoretic framework that lets people construct experimental tests. Perhaps wintermute has such a theoretic framework if he is positing a particular test. 28
Posted by Yuezhus on Thu, 05 Apr 2007 18:56 | # Tommy, I think you’ve misapplied Occham’s Razor by assuming that the theory of an intelligent Prime Mover is far simpler than the universe creating itself out of nothing. Even if the everything-from-nothing hypothesis were a viable option, which I find to be too simplistic and not representative of modern scientific thought in that area, how do we explain this Prime Mover’s origins? How do we explain it’s motives, thoughts, physiology, source of power and how it exerts it? All of this is endlessly more complicated than other alternatives which don’t need an hopelessly anthropomorphic, and thus curiously flawed, deity. Even then, the most rational belief one could have about unprovable, unfalsifiable and intangible matters is that of agnosticism. I believe that is what most philosophers of antiquity tended to after they had the chance to practice their craft for long enough. I don’t mean to cause offense, but are you sure you’ve chosen Christianity as your religion because it’s more rational than others? The Old Testament is pretty self explanatory, and even though the New Testament supposedly nullifies a lot of the OT’s doctrine, it is still a less rational, fluid and spiritual religion than others out there, such as Buddhism, Taoism and, indeed, Greek paganism/philosophical movements. WM has correctly pointed out that the similarities between the latter and Christianity are no coincidence. I don’t know if you’re aware, but Christianity was one of the sole, if not the sole, factor(s) in bringing about the Dark Ages in Europe. The Christian-led banishment and destruction of secular knowledge from the Western Empire was a tragedy, rivaled only by the Legalist-led “Burning of books and burying of scholars” in early Qin Dynasty China. Although I disagree with some of WM’s beliefs, i.e. National Socialism and there being no Nazi-led Jew extermination (I do agree it’s unjust to portray one genocide as being infinitely worse than the others of the 20th century, however), Christianity in it’s darkest form draws far more from the Old Testament than the New, as he correctly points out. 29
Posted by Desmond Jones on Thu, 05 Apr 2007 20:58 | # Even if you accept the Christianity/Dark Ages theme, it does not mean that Christianity, to re-iterate a previous comment, was maladaptive from an evolutionary perspective. David Sloan Wilson’s treatise, Darwin’s Cathedral, suggests that Christian women were more fertile than their pagan sisters.
30
Posted by Tommy G on Thu, 05 Apr 2007 21:58 | # “I don’t know if you’re aware, but Christianity was one of the sole, if not the sole, factor(s) in bringing about the Dark Ages in Europe.”—Yuezhus Was it Christianity, or a corrupt Catholic church who created an anti-reason environment which in turn brought about the “Dark Ages?” Also, Yuezhus, I believe we’re acually entering a modern day “Dark Age” situation as evidenced by all the anti-white politically correct protocol, and the oppressive hate speech laws, etc. It’s seems to be getting so bad, a white person can’t even advocate for his or her own survival without being socially ostracized and or legally prosecuted. This time the “Dark Ages” are being brought on by the anti-Christians. 31
Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 05 Apr 2007 22:20 | # From W. D. Hamilton’s “Innate Social Aptitudes of Man”:
32
Posted by Yuezhus on Fri, 06 Apr 2007 14:35 | # Let me clarify my position: I never said that modern Christianity (‘cept Creationism et al.) is antithetical to the progress of science, and indeed this has been true since the late Medieval Period, give or take the odd lapse into irrationality which became rarer as time progressed. However, the main focus of my criticism was the opinion of Christianity - pure Christianity - being inherently more rational than other religions, which I still believe to be false, regardless of how well it encouraged early scientific endeavors. I am aware that as the Middle Ages progressed and gave way to the early modern period, rational thought and inquiry became more common place because of the Church’s role in sponsoring it. However, it has to be asked: was this an indigenous, purely European Christian development, or did it stem from the adaption and fusion of an earlier, pagan borne school of thinking? Obviously, it was indeed the recovery of Greek philosophical texts which spurred these developments. It’s not pleasant imagining what Europe would be like if the texts had never been recovered. The combination of secular Greek philosophy with Christianity helped propagate early science, but I’m uncertain that Christianity was essential for this to happen. A good argument is put forward by some that the notion of an intelligent creator designing the universe with particular rules of construction encouraged mechanistic thinking, but was this really so different from the way the Classical Greek scholars thought? I doubt it. You can’t convince me that the hydraulis and the Antikthyra Mechanism isn’t a result of mechanistic thinking. Hell, even the Chinese peoples managed to invent mechanical things such as blast furnaces, South Pointing Chariots, complex astronomical clocks that made the first use of escapements and the first trebuchets, despite their spiritual world not having an equivalent Intelligent Creator. Despite later Christianity’s symbiosis with non-Christian derived reason and logic, it can’t be denied that before this, early Christianity was instrumental in reversing the progress of Greco-Roman achievement. Despite Christian establishments being overwhelmingly involved in logical, artistic and scientific discoveries before, during and for some time after the Renaissance, and eventually making the culture (Europe) that practiced this religion more rational than other cultures with pagan belief systems, this doesn’t mean that Christianity - pure Christianity - is necessarily the most rational belief system, or more accurately, less irrational belief system. Christianity borrowing pagan modes of thinking doesn’t equal Christianity. Heh, I think I get the White Horse paradox now… 33
Posted by Tommy G on Fri, 06 Apr 2007 15:41 | # Here’s another good article regarding Christianity and Western Civilization:
34
Posted by Rnl on Wed, 11 Apr 2007 06:43 | # Skill at counting is still high in South Korea: Wiesenthal Center denounces ‘Nazi-like depiction of Jews’ 36
Posted by Raju on Thu, 12 Apr 2007 22:29 | # To, I would say, All belief systems are fictions, including Christianity. In order to live a life you don’t have to be a part of a belief system, unless you have other ‘earthly and materialistic’ social intentions. If you say ‘God created universe’, no one can deny it, because they don’t have proof. Similarly if someone says ‘universe’ just happened out of vaccum, you cannot deny that either, because you don’t have proof. 37
Posted by Shev on Sat, 14 Apr 2007 18:39 | # 1) European civilisation is based on Christianity, the Bible. 2) Jesus Christ was/is Jewish, as is the Bible. 3 Therefore European civilisation derives from the Jews. 38
Posted by Torgrim on Mon, 16 Apr 2007 22:28 | # To Shev, Who posted; My response; 39
Posted by Tommy G on Mon, 16 Apr 2007 23:33 | # “If you say ‘God created universe’, no one can deny it, because they don’t have proof. Similarly if someone says ‘universe’ just happened out of vaccum, you cannot deny that either, because you don’t have proof.”—Raju Raju, how can something be created out of nothing? The way I understand it is we as humans are finite beings incapable of understanding the infinite concepts of the universe. Sure, scientists have scratched the surface on how God’s creation works, but they haven’t a clue as to why or how it came into existence. 40
Posted by JB on Tue, 17 Apr 2007 03:09 | # a remark on christianity. As I replied to someone else in another thread who said christianity was crucial to us: /QUOTE you better start preaching ethnocentrism to your fellow christians, if that’s possible. Those who believes all humans have souls equal to every other soul aren’t likely to care about our race look what a ‘raw christian’ couple adopted : [I’ll spare you the pictures, look at the photos and read the ramblings if you want to delve into the depths of insanity] http://rawchristianity.wordpress.com/tag/adoption/
http://www.wacsn.org/HOMECOMINGDAYPHOTOS.asp
When all european peoples were ethnocentric and at the same time christian their religion didn’t lead them to believe miscegenation was alright but when ethnocentrism became Bad lots of christians started believing that since humans were all equal in the eyes of God miscegenation and transracial adoption was approved by the Almighty, just as lots of non-christian europeans became leftists and ethnomasochists at that time. And even many christians in Europe became leftists, l’Abbé Pierre being one of the most famous example. /END QUOTE I’ve heard stories about french bishops going as far in their political correctness as to refuse to baptise the children of Front National members. As far as I know the clergy in western Europe is not opposed to mass immigration, only a few rebel priests are nationalists. In eastern Europe it’s a different story, which is what I was saying above: religion follows more than it leads. 41
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 17 Apr 2007 03:21 | # Neanderthal… yeah the higher cranial capacity is a dead giveaway… 42
Posted by Lurker on Tue, 17 Apr 2007 04:09 | # Please calm yourself Mr Reich, or can I just call you turd, you’re just making a spectacle of yourself. 43
Posted by Tommy G on Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:41 | # James, As I see it, it wasn’t Christianity that foisted egalitarianism upon us… it was egalitarianism that subverted Christianity. As you already know, originally, it was Jewish Leftists who were the promulgators of egalitarianism. 44
Posted by JB on Tue, 17 Apr 2007 18:13 | #
45
Posted by The Jewish Question on Thu, 24 May 2007 22:17 | # I just foujnd this forum, and even though I’m very late I want to add this… Regarding the allegations of wintermute’s alleged “mental illness” as an ad hominem rebuttal to his good post… According to Jews, ALL antisemites are “mentally ill” and “need counseling,” just like Mr. Gibson Accusations of “mental illness” and the need for “mental help” is VERY OFTEN used as slander against antisemites, indeed ANYONE who opposes the Jews. Chock it up to the influence of the supreme mackdaddy of all sicko, infantile, racist, incestuous, European-hating, women-hating, probably closeted, drug addicted Jewish psychologists…why I speak of the venerable Doktor Freud of course (with his Viennese Yiddish-posse not far behind him…because they always liked to carry his books for him). (P.S.—Jews directly and indirectly control American psychology, psychiatry, and hold most of the leading business/marketing positions in the big-pharma companies). Big Jewish-pharma is systematically poisoning Gentiles via their pushing of anti-depressants and all of these mental pills…formulated by Jewish chemists for Jewish dominated big-pharma, recommended by Jewish psychiatrists, and perscribed by Jewish doctors = CHAIN OF PROFIT.)
Post a comment:
Next entry: The Amygdala War: Toxoplasma gondii’s surgical strike against the amygdala
|
|
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) Computer say no by Guessedworker on Thursday, 09 May 2024 15:17. (View) |
Posted by ben tillman on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 04:01 | #
Certainly the long history of Jewish Diaspora evolution, going back at least to Babylon, has created group organism genetic predispositions—sometimes strong—toward suppression of the immune responses of host nations.
Not just suppression. We are witnessing not a suppressed but an inverted immune system.