Gene Wars

Posted by Kubilai on April 06, 2005, 04:46 PM | #

Excellent post and synopsis of the situation over there.  The “armageddon” diatribe by him was thanks to yours truly.  I remember posting about how ethnic interests always eventually lead to confict and the conflict is not necessarily initiated by the majority.  Well, he went nuts, deleted posts, made statements of how WNs were not wanted on his site, and was going to take a tougher stance on this. 

I believe you and GW hit the nail on the head with the “minority interest” take on the situation.  As I mentioned in Matt’s post, GC and Razib strike me as your typical, intelligent, pompous South Asians.  Completely full of themselves though they try to downplay it.  Regardless of what they “want” for their board, their inaccuracies about Whites need to be corrected. 

BTW, someone should tell GC he is as much of an American as those two young deported Turks were Danish.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 06, 2005, 08:19 PM | #

I couldn’t have put it better myself.

Posted by seelow heights on April 06, 2005, 08:25 PM | #

What this gang of Asians should realize is that it is very un-American to go around boasting about your (alleged) high IQ and membership in a cognitive elite. This is an attitude very alien to the traditions of Anglo-America.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 06, 2005, 08:51 PM | #

One thing that has always struck me as a bit odd is how the Asian cognitive elite is supposedly capable of working mircales in white majority nations but somehow helpless in their own nations. Quite bizarre I must say.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 06, 2005, 08:58 PM | #

I’ve never been to the GNXP site. From these posts it appears to be a enclave for south Asians to brag about their ‘exceptional’ cognitive abilities?

Perhaps if they know recent history the word ‘Gujarat’ ought to mean something?

If they are so smart why is their homeland a toilet? Are they still blaming their failures on the British?

Posted by Guessedworker on April 06, 2005, 09:19 PM | #

It is an excellent blog, Geoff, produced and frequented by a sample of the human race very much wider than South Asians.  JW is merely explaining that a substantial quantity of salt is required for you or I to digest some of the output.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 06, 2005, 09:25 PM | #

GW: is the Razib character the head magooloo?

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 06, 2005, 09:25 PM | #

Geoff,

Have a look at this post and thread:

http://www.webmonkey.ws/flillip.php?url=http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/003859.html

What intellectual gymnastics must one perform to justify one’s existence in a country!

I am somewhat sympathic to these chaps I must say. That their families chose to move to the West was a decision they had no control over - for they were either not born yet or too young.

However, what would happen tomorrow if the status quo changed dramatically? It may seem unlikely to us but what if there was a chemical or nuclear attack (carried out by brown Muslims) on a large american city killing (say for the sake of argument) 2 million people followed by a massive change in public opinion wanting all non-native populations out (i.e. all those apart from whites, blacks and native americans)?

They would indeed be caught in quite a quagmire. America would be home no more and their nations of origin would be quite alien to them as well. Not a happy choice to make.

Everytime I read GNXP it is a reminder that there is something deeply troubling about any mention of the tragedy of their situation. Their greatest tragedy is not the tragedy of material deprivations but a tragedy of the soul. The idea that their very existence in a country was the result not of a natural progression of Nationhood in which they fit automatically but because of an act of treachery by the political class. And that must be deeply troubling.

These are questions that are not easily resolved. Which is why for all their shrieking about political correctness, they really love the status quo. Heaven help them if that beloved status quo changed dramatically.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 06, 2005, 09:34 PM | #

It is an excellent blog, Geoff, produced and frequented by a sample of the human race very much wider than South Asians.  JW is merely explaining that a substantial quantity of salt is required for you or I to digest some of the output.

I agree. It is a good blog on issues of science, genetics, racial differences etc.

The fact is though that political questions are inevitably driven by conscious and sub-conscious human bias. As I am white, English and (even now) one of an overwhelming majority in an affluent and orderly society with a long and beautiful tradition rooted in this the history of this nation’s ethny. That certainly informs my perspective on politics, culture and history. It is bias. Nationalism is a prejudice but it is a healthy prejudice.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 06, 2005, 10:07 PM | #

Phil,

Rather, Nationalism is a somewhat harshly politicised reflection of ethnic genetic interest.  I accept the necessity for Nationalism as things stand but fret over it somewhat as a single or leading political principle.  Such a Nationalism shares with all forms of liberalism the pursuit of freedom as the ultimate good.  Invariably, freedom has to be brought at the expense of those beyond the ethny, and obviously there is a long and inglorious history of never minding too much about the consequences of that.

Now, in a truly Conservative polity such in-group/out-group analyses do not arise, because Conservatism would naturally serve to protect and bind the ethny.  Within it is a latent Nationalism that has no need of display. It is quiet.  Just as Conservatism does not encompass the deracination and dispossesion we see in every homeland of European Man today, so it also has no use for a mad Nationalist dash to freedom.

Of course, it is liberalism which creates such Nationalism.  I would prefer to be free of them both.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 06, 2005, 10:29 PM | #

Now, in a truly Conservative polity such in-group/out-group analyses do not arise, because Conservatism would naturally serve to protect and bind the ethny.  Within it is a latent Nationalism that has no need of display. It is quiet.

True and this can be demonstrated empirically:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/lif_ver_pro_of_the_nat

You will note that the US which is practically filled up to the brim with immigrants shows a “patriotic rating” of 78 percent whereas Japan shows a rating of 27 percent.

Knowing the Nationalism of the Japanese, it is easy to see why they such a graph may be misleading. But, perhaps it is not. When one’s nation is not under constant attack, when one’s traditions are not being destroyed from within and when one is not surrounded by a sea of aliens, there is little need for chest thumping and flag waving.

I note that chest thumping and flag waving was far less pronounced in America one hundred and fifty years ago (compared to the America of today) even though Americans were more deeply nationalistic than they are now.

Posted by JW Holliday on April 06, 2005, 11:01 PM | #

I myself am quite favorably disposed towards nationalism, but one must understand what is meant.  I think that the current extreme jingoism of today’s American nationalism is pathetic, and misguided.  Essentially it is “constitutional patriotism” (perhaps a subject for another day?) cooked up by the establishment to distract red state white Americans from their ongoing dispossession and to reconcile them to those signs of displacement that are so obvious that no amount of distraction can suffice.  Wave the flag and hoorah! - while ignoring the endless stream of Mexicans crossing the borders, the fact that specifically white interests are totally ignored by the leaders of both (sic?) political parties, the outsourcing now of even professional jobs, and the mounting national debt, much of which is now in the hands of the Chinese.

I abhor that kind of nationalism, bereft as it is from any connection to the interests of the majority, and disconnected as it is from harsh realities.

I also reject the offensive, disjunctive hyper-nationalism of the German National Socialists, who ignored, for example, the rights and interests of their Slavic neighbors to the East. What I do endorse is the defensive, rational nationalism described by Salter, which is universal in that it respects the rights and national aspirations of other peoples, and restricts competition to the spheres of economics, technology, etc - not physical dispossesion, warfare etc.

Nothing wrong with reasonable nationalism.  A Japan which attempted to conquer Asia, and massacred large numbers of Chinese is a nation exhibiting pathological nationalism.  A Japan that eschews immigration - even one that forcibly repatriates all non-Japanese (except diplomats, etc.) within its borders - is a sane, rational nationalistic Japan, as long as their nationalism stops at their national borders and goes no further.

Posted by Ronald A. Fonda on April 06, 2005, 11:50 PM | #

I believe you will find this website of interest: rafonda.com

It is focused on the evolution of H sapiens sapiens and both mitochondrial and nuclear genetic research is analyzed. I particularly invite your attention to the paper titled PLURAL LINEAGES IN THE HUMAN mtDNA GENOME which REFUTES the afrocentric assertion that all modern human mtDNA is derived from a single, African source. This paper’s conclusion has just been validated by research revealing that macrohaplogroup M is of Asian origin. This absolutely falsifies the absurd contention that all archaic Eurasians were ‘replaced’ by Africans.

RAF

Posted by John S Bolton on April 07, 2005, 12:33 AM | #

It would be good to have an allmerit immigration policy with numbers in the tens, rather than hundreds, of thousands. With a high enough threshold of English language ability on a test of conceptual ability, the majority would be European, and the total would be more than adequate for the needs of science and technology. It is most likely that any racial conflict of the magnitude mentioned above would be started by the minorities, under the instigation of maniacal power seeking officials, just like every race riot of the last few decades in the US. The difference would be that officials must act to sustain and increase widespread rioting into the full scale civil war conditions, and only officials with a passion to establish dictatorship can do that. The majority would be in defensive position the whole time, but the net result is partition, and this would be on terms most unfavorable to the minorities. They depend on net public subsidy, as a group, and are not an asset to an officialdom which had already secured the national emergency and justification for dictatorship that they crave. Thus, the partitions which arose by such a process, could be expected to yield a de minimis territory for the net public subsidy populations, which civil war had caused to separate for defensive reasons. The whole process would be orchestrated by the government, and the evidence for the trend in this direction is the policies which have the society on autopilot towards increasing intercommunal conflict, such as the combination of racial quotas and mass immigration of eligibles. The voting rights act is another such policy, which generates continual increases in interracial suspicion and hostility automatically. If these policies continue a little longer, it will be more correct to say that this is a race war pretending to be a nation, than a republic with community of values.

Posted by Mark Richardson on April 07, 2005, 12:44 AM | #

“Conservatism would naturally serve to protect and bind the ethny. Within it is a latent Nationalism that has no need of display. It is quiet.”

Brilliant! This is exactly true of the Australian nationalism I grew up with. Such nationalism was simply an everyday part of culture and identity, and didn’t need to be aggressively reinforced at all.

In fact, it’s only in recent years that the political class seems to be getting more nervous about promoting nationalistic unity in a multicultural society, and so we get these anthems played constantly on TV ("We are one, but we are many") and constant fretting about defining and maintaining a national identity.

PS Excellent posts Mr Peterson and Mr Holliday.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 01:50 AM | #

Regarding Ronald Fonda’s comment:  1) I wonder to what extent it’s accurate to characterize the out-of-Africa view as influenced by political correctness except possibly in some peripheral way; 2) readers (non-scientific ones) of the linked paper need to understand that what it questions isn’t whether people came from Africa but whether they were primitive or modern when they came (either way, they came); 3) the paper’s mention of a bottleneck (74K years ago) leads one to reflect that white Euros are now going through a bottleneck, in the form of coerced mixture with other races:  the unmixed remnant which will emerge after the coercion will have been overthrown will have passed through (a milder but real) genetic bottleneck; 4) knowing chromosomal molecular biology and so forth isn’t necessary before one can utterly reject one’s own group’s forced replacement by another race or sub-race.  The non-scientific among readers of this paper and others like it must understand that, if they don’t already.  They don’t have to understand any of this technical stuff at all before getting mad as hell at what’s going on.  They only have to understand that they have a race and they damn-well want to keep it.  The fact that races and sub-races (ethnic groups) have genealogies (which all races and sub-races have, of course, and which is discussed in papers like this) no more means it’s OK to extinguish them than the fact that a man has a genealogy (which every man has, of course) means it’s OK to extinguish him.  Neither the man nor the race need learn the molecular biology of the gene before protesting.

Posted by Arcane on April 07, 2005, 01:52 AM | #

The answer is that there are more moderate strains of pro-white activism that, if followed through in an intelligent and sustainable manner, would produce results not to GC’s comfort or liking.

Like what kind of results?

Majority (white) racial mobilization would inevitably lead to racial balkanization - a good thing for white America.

Balkanization? If the “moderates” want balkanization, then what the heck is considered “extreme,” or is there no extremes on the WN right?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 02:05 AM | #

“Like what kind of results?” (—Arcane)

Like restoring the national-origins criteria for legal immigration which were in place from 1924 to 1965 and which worked perfectly, and were only tampered-with for purely political ends.  Jewish pressure groups played a huge roll in that—which is why this is so interesting and welcome.

On Arcane’s balkanization question:  I don’t know what WNs want exactly, but balkanization is better than extinction.  Whites will either balkanize or disappear because race-replacers like GC offer them no third alternative.

Posted by albion on April 07, 2005, 02:22 AM | #

I noticed a comment in the previous thread about TopCoder. I did some web searching and came up with results that are very relevant to the present discussion. 

Here is a list of MIT Eelectrical Engineering and Computer Science students with webpages:

http://www.eecs.mit.edu/students.html

American white gentile males are less than 20%. This is the same at other top universities and other math heavy departments. See:

http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/GradAffairs/gradhomepages.shtml
http://physics.harvard.edu/s/directory/grads

You can go down the list: at the ultra elite universities white American gentile males are thin on the ground. I have seen reports that more than 50% of science and engineering PhDs are from foreign countries. And those who are American are drawn from the Ashkenazim and Asian populations to a lopsided disproportion.

These are real facts. The very real arrogance of the people at GNXP is only a symptom. The cause is that technological innovation in the United States is increasingly dominated by non-whites. When they are white, they are often European immigrants or Jewish (and occasionally female). The faculty is a lagging indicator of this trend but the trend is real and can be seen at the student level.

Posted by albion on April 07, 2005, 02:37 AM | #

“surgical solution” of immigration reform in which the flood of unskilled immigrants would be replaced by skilled immigrants.

I don’t know about you, but for me and mine immigration is issue #1. I’m pretty comfortable with my family and life at present but I can foresee the river of blood that will come if the current immigration regime continues. Aside from immigration I can deal with the status quo.

The question is, do you think there will be broad based support for “further measures” if immigration policy changes?  What “further measures” would you take? My feeling is that the gas in the tank of white nationalism, which is a sort of immune reaction, is immigration. Without immigration there is no galvanizing force. Is that not so?

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 07, 2005, 02:39 AM | #

Albion:

I started college in ‘85 and finished in ‘92. In that time I saw the transformation of both universities I attended into training centers for an alien class to rule my country.

Honestly, I despise them: I despise the greedy and de-nationalized elites that allow this to happen. I despise the arrogant foreigners that wrest a future from my countrymen; the countrymen whose ancestors built the nation. (I include both Whites and blacks descendent from slaves in this picture).

I’m not shy from saying I’ll fight to defend my country (not the gov’t) from this invasion. But I can’t do it alone.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 07, 2005, 02:52 AM | #

Albion:

> Without immigration there is no galvanizing force. Is that not so?

Yes of course. America has a very harsh history of abusive labor practices. The Mexicans now have replaced the blacks as the new slave class.

What White Americans need to ask their politicians and themselves is the question:

How will we be treated as a minority group?

How will we be treated by groups that have been taught to hate us, and blame us for their problems. How will they treat us when they blame us for all the evil and failures of their homelands?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 04:09 AM | #

“Without immigration there is no galvanizing force. Is that not so?” (—Albion)

Well, OBVIOUSLY!  Why else do you think any questioning whatsoever, no matter how polite, no matter how timid, of Bush’s plan to replace whites in this country with Mexican peons, African Somalis, and other Third-World non-whites is repressed so harshly by the feds with lightning-like speed?  (Is people telling the government, “We don’t want our country’s traditionally predominant race replaced with some other race” so terrible?  Of course it isn’t.  There’s nothing whatsoever wrong with it.  It’s absolutely normal.) Any questioning of it whatsoever is instantly, brutally repressed because they’re afraid of whites’ anger over what’s happening going to bolster the WNs, and want therefore to nip in the bud that anger’s every least little manifestation of potentially drawing breath and coming to life.  They know EXACTLY what they’re doing—they know EXACTLY that they’re in the process of replacing the white race against the wishes of the people—they know how momentous a change that is, they know how whites feel about it, and they’re scared of white reaction—so they’re extremely jumpy, trigger-happy.  This is fundamentally why the order was given to kill the Branch Davidians.  No, David “Koresh” hadn’t made any noises about race or immigration, but any show of strength by armed whites who aren’t self-professed liberals cannot be tolerated, because exactly what might happen is whites might extricate themselves from forced race-replacement—among other things being forced down their throats.

Posted by Geoff M. Beck on April 07, 2005, 04:24 AM | #

How to ruin your country. Puke.

Posted by also on April 07, 2005, 05:02 AM | #

she’s pregnant too!

Posted by seelow heights on April 07, 2005, 05:21 AM | #

If these policies continue a little longer, it will be more correct to say that this is a race war pretending to be a nation, than a republic with community of values.  John S Bolton
A one-sided race war with the government and minorities making war against Whites. A “republic with community of values”? That really sounds archaic.
Why else do you think any questioning whatsoever, no matter how polite, no matter
how timid, of Bush’s plan to replace whites
in this country with Mexican peons, African
Somalis, and other Third-World non-whites is
repressed so harshly by the feds with
lightning-like speed? Fred Scooby
The most effective form of repression is,of course, the govt-media brainwashing machine
that associates any form of pro-White sentiment with toothless Klansman or goose-stepping Nazis. The brainwashing activates the internal censor in the vast majority of Whites and prevents them from speaking out in their own interest. Since anything resembling WN is seen to be at once both sinister and comic the reluctance is understandable. The Minutemen were the latest to be put through the drill and had to repeatedly deny any racialism or affiliation with “white supremacists”. I’m sure they would have turned away Jared Taylor had he shown up.  Once you have the public so well-trained not much coercion is necessary.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 05:30 AM | #

In response to Geoff’s and “also’s” posts above, I’ll just add—without passing judgment one way or another on the posts—that I agree with Steve Sailer:  everyone should marry the one he loves, all differences of race, religion, nationality, etc., notwithstanding.  Period.  Full stop.  End of story.  Whom anyone falls in love with is STRICTLY NONE OF MY BUSINESS beyond in principle wishing the couple every happiness and success in their future life together. 

Neither German nor Negro racial/national self-preservation depends one way or another on the formation of individual couples such as this one. 

Respective German and African-Negro racial/national self-preservation DOES depend on the respecting by élite interests of the wish all communities have not to be forced to accommodate alien races sent to dwell amongst them in such inappropriately large numbers that they actually displace and finally replace the original people.  The nexus between Geoff’s and also’s posts on the one hand, and on the other the natural wish of all community majorities to live among their own kind first and foremost is simply that when this wish of community majorities is respected, as it certainly ought to be in all cases, large-scale demography-threatening miscegenation does not take place.  In a sense, people not wanting excessive incompatible immigration into their communities amounts to their not wanting large-scale miscegenation either, because one is the consequence of the other.

I view Negro-white, yellow-white, brown-white, and every other type of miscegenation on an individual level strictly none of my business.  (How could any thinking person possibly view it otherwise?) What I oppose is the iron-fisted imposition of alien races on whole communities in unwanted volumes, especially when the result is the gradual enfeeblement and replacement of the original community through the step-by-step evolution simultaneously along several pathways which we all know only too well.

I aim at preserving the races of communities and nations, not at passing judgment on whom someone falls in love with and decides to marry.  Someone will say, “Well, just multiply this particular mixed couple by tens of millions and the race vanishes.” But when communities’ wishes are respected as regards incompatible immigration this sort of thing doesn’t get multiplied by tens of millions.  There are natural forces at work that preserve races and nation-states intact—provided they are not brutally contravened by government pushed by self-regarding, self-interested, uncaring, detached, hostile, devious, and destructive élites.

Posted by Andrew L on April 07, 2005, 07:03 AM | #

The top part of the report is true, with Whites and Nuclear weapons, I for the life of me can not Imagine a nuclear war head traveling far on the end of a spear, or an arrow for that matter, did I miss something , ha .And if we did not have Buildings would they blow up caves?, in Afganistan, we did, yep IQ in there some where, Leftoids still deny it, but what would they know about IQ, you have to have one to understand.Watch out for those spears.

Posted by seelow heights on April 07, 2005, 07:07 AM | #

A one-sided race war with the government and minorities making war against Whites
I should have said unresisting whites.
Also, I agree with Fred; don’t this blog into something resembling Stormfront. The focus should be on the lies and coercive power of the Multicult Regime.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 07, 2005, 07:34 AM | #

Fred, Seelow,

I take your point.  I do not entirely consider Heidi and her beau, however, to be magnificently conscious, mature and independent beings, sans all suggestibility and self-freed of the deadly embrace of Western culture and life in general.  Nope, they are weak actors, mostly slaves - like the rest of us.  Their choices and actions feed from and into our culture, taking from and adding to the miscegenative currents.

I have in my computer a part-written post titled “The life of a beautiful woman” on exactly this subject.  So I do agree with Geoff that it has quite profound relevance to our subject matter and can most certainly be addressed at some depth and without recourse to the type of prejudice you rightly counsel against.

Maybe I shall have to dust the draft off and post it.

Posted by Andrew L on April 07, 2005, 07:44 AM | #

Geoff is right, If the Commander and Chief controls the Defence forces, and the paradox is , he also is General of the new Invasion forces, so who will order the defence forces to defend against foerign invasion, Sanctioned by the Commander in Chief, Thats a mind bending conundrum,I suppose he can combine forces and totaly destroy America, But he is meant to defend agains foerign invasion, someone has got it wrong.and defend the rights and constitution of Americans, did some one explain that to President Bush, or not.

Posted by J. Richards on April 07, 2005, 08:55 AM | #

albion: I presented ranked statistics among the top-notch programmers at TopCoder, whereas you simply cite the racial composition of grad students at top science/engineering schools, without providing any indication of how these students rank with respect to raw ability.  You try to distinguish between White Gentiles and Jews, even though my post simply compared Whites vs. non-whites…you should know that several Jews are a type of White people and that the Jews that are overrepresented in the top science and technology schools are usually White.

As to your statement that “I have seen reports that more than 50% of science and engineering PhDs are from foreign countries” and your statement that “…technological innovation in the United States is increasingly dominated by non-whites” are concerned, consider the facts.  American Schools pay TAs and RAs miserably; you could earn more packing groceries, and many White students would rather earn a decent living via a regular job.  Hence the reason – in part – why you see so many grad science students from Second- and Third-World nations, and this is observed most extensively among the lower-ranked schools within the top 50 or top 100 schools.  Additionally, several grad European science students from well-off nations are here because research, usually free of much red-tapism, is far better funded here (even though they will earn a pittance as a TA or RA), and some of them may want to exploit the economic opportunities available here. 

A lot of invention and innovation occurs in industry, not in school, and you need to look at the racial composition in industry, where you will see White domination, something that you cannot blame on racism because the bottom line in industry is profit and profit trumps any racial concerns, i.e., industry would not be foolish enough to keep away brighter minorities from top-notch R&D work to maintain the domination of White males.  Schools are better known for basic science research, which is often funded by industry.  Surely, Asians are overrepresented in science and technology departments of Universities, but they are not prominent among the innovators.  In molecular biology, the typical seminal paper and the typical groundbreaking research is the brainchild of a White male, even though Asians publish several papers and are found aplenty in molecular biology labs.  I will post more on this topic at a later date.

Posted by JW Holliday on April 07, 2005, 09:49 AM | #

Arcane wants to know what kind of results would not be to GC’s liking.  I think this is obvious: a rising white racial consciousness is going to be uncomfortable for a non-white minority member who supports deracination for the white majority.

It is already galling, right now, for GC when intelligent, professional whites reject his aracial cognitive elitism in favor of a putative racial solidarity.  That’s why he has a problem with Jared Taylor.  Taylor is exactly the sort of intelligent, articulate white guy that GC wishes would embrace high-IQ Asian immigrants.  But a look at AR confirms that, for Taylor, South Asians like GC are “them” and not “us”.

How many other whites, given the chance, would segregate themselves from GC and Razib as soon as possible?  GC’s “I’m an American and how dare you think otherwise” would suffer a blow if a significant portion of American whites expressed themselves differently.  Practical separatism would diminish GC’s personal field of action to whatever territory is set aside for Asian-Americans.  Right now, he’s got it made.  That wouldn’t last long in a balkanized America.

As regards the snide remark about balkanization and moderation vs. extremism, I am unconcerned by what Arcane thinks about my views on that subject.  Racial balkanization is the best thing that can happen.  Chemotherapy is harsh, but it is better than dying of cancer- and the current regime is cancer for white Americans.

As regards Albion …

In an age of instantaneous electronic communication where even American MRIs are read by doctors in India, it is not necessary for Americans to “live with” Asians in order to reap the benefits of their genius.  After all, the fact that the Chinese are extreme xenophobes who expelled white British workers after the take-over of Hong Kong did not prevent them from using things invented by those of British (and overall European) ancestry.  I believe that the rising salaries, increased prestige and, most of all, cultural coherence that would occur in a balkanized academia would attract more white Americans to such careers.

Posted by Stuka on April 07, 2005, 12:30 PM | #

Honestly, I despise them: I despise the greedy and de-nationalized elites that allow this to happen. I despise the arrogant foreigners that wrest a future from my countrymen; the countrymen whose ancestors built the nation...I’m not shy from saying I’ll fight to defend my country (not the gov’t) from this invasion. But I can’t do it alone.

Very well said. We’re not alone.

Fascinating discussion on this thread. Although, I’m not sure why any of you pay attention to Razib and his crew.

Posted by - on April 07, 2005, 12:35 PM | #

When children are involved, love cannot be the only consideration. Regardless of the race-destroying effects of miscegenation, we should at least be concerned for the well-being of the hybrid children who will be reared by parents psychologically dissimilar to themselves; denying them a spiritually nourishing upbringing, even assuming their parents stay together, which is less likely than if they were of the same race. To not be wary of the consequences, and not take race into account, is selfish of potential parents. To the race-mixer, the hybrid is a disposable stepping stone on the road to panmixia but it’s an entire life tragically blighted from the outset.

Posted by Kubilai on April 07, 2005, 12:57 PM | #

A comment on the Seal/Heidi relationship that was discussed above.  In particular to Fred Scrooby’s comments.  While I do agree that love truly is blind and I had no problem seeing a relationship of this nature a short 5 to 10 years ago walking the streets.  Things have changed dramatically for us that I no longer view it as an “individual” decision any longer.  As Fred alludes to in a roundabout way, these “love is blinders” or LIBs (LOL) are happening at an alarming rate and the only reason is due to the close proximity different races are forced to habitate.  That along with the constant droning of not being a “hater” in the media has made it a “cool” thing to find someone of another race because after all, we are the same right except for skin color, right?

Again, WITHOUT the concerted effort towards miscegenation from all sorts of different avenues, I did not have a problem with it.  However, the situation is quite different now and I cannot condone the idiocy of a Seal/Heidi relationship and the message it relays to impressionable young minds because it translates as simply another nail in our collective coffins. 

For God’s sake, if people are willing to view a German and “British” marriage as acceptable, then they’ll pretty much accept anything....

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 07, 2005, 01:22 PM | #

Fred:

Miscegeny was illegal in most parts of the United States, until the late 1960s. I support those laws, I support a community protecting itself from such predation. Marrying a black is the greatest tragedy that can befall any race. Its simply a crime.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 07, 2005, 01:37 PM | #

Again Fred:

Those miscegenation laws were passed by representatitves of the people of the US. I know that Jackson Co, MO. had their miscegenation law on the books until 1967.

I think my views on racial separation and laws written to uphold that standard are not the exclusive domain of stormfronters.

Furthermore I accept Steve Sailer’s concept of race as a sort of extended family. As a family member I don’t want Klum to ruin our home.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 01:43 PM | #

I received an e-mail questioning my post of 4/7, 1:50 AM, in which the correspondent showed he’d misunderstood points 1 and 2 which I’d tried to make.  It’s my fault for expressing myself clumsily in that post.  In point one I was saying I didn’t think acceptance of the out-of-Africa theory was based mostly on political correctness, and in point two I was saying (for the benefit of non-scientific types who might read papers like the one linked in Fonda’s post) that scientists who dispute the out-of-Africa theory aren’t disputing that the ancestors of all people alive today originally came from Africa, but only whether, when those ancestors of ours came out of that continent, they were modern humans or humans at a more primitive stage of human evolution.  Either way, no scientist disputes that all people alive today descend from ancestors who came out of Africa to populate the rest of the world.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 01:46 PM | #

Geoff, thanks very much for those responses.  You and I view things a bit differently.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 07, 2005, 01:51 PM | #

To hell with the scientists, priests, quacks, the simpsons, or anybody else that says to marry a negro. Don’t be stupid!

Posted by Stuka on April 07, 2005, 02:00 PM | #

Well, my opposition to the completely grotesque Klum/Seal match is entirely selfish, as it means I no longer have a chance with her. Oh well.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 07, 2005, 02:00 PM | #

Fred:

It really doens’t matter if we disagree or not. The culture, via TV, Radio, Movies, Churches, and universities is encouraging black predation on white females.

Whether I oppose this, or not, it matters little.

Whatever my views I do not countenance violence against the transgressors, unless sanctioned by law.

Though I will implement stigma, as should all concerned Whites.

Posted by NatVan on April 07, 2005, 02:16 PM | #

you should know that several Jews are a type of White people and that the Jews that are overrepresented in the top science and technology schools are usually White.

Speak for yourself, Richardberg.

I also reject the offensive, disjunctive hyper-nationalism of the German National Socialists who ignored, for example, the rights and interests of their Slavic neighbors to the East.

Yeah. I’m SURE it’s the Slavs who you were concerned about. Speak for yourself, Hollowitz.

That’s why he has a problem with Jared Taylor.  Taylor is exactly the sort of intelligent, articulate white guy that GC wishes would embrace high-IQ Asian immigrants.  But a look at AR confirms that, for Taylor, South Asians like GC are “them” and not “us”. 

Yeah, but Jews are considered white by Taylor, right? Which is why you’re A-OK with him, right Hollowitz? This would be hilarious if it weren’t so brazen. Two more operators or shabbos goys making moves straight from the Horowitzim playbook. Mike Levin would be proud!

Listen up people: Jews are the reason for white dispossession. J-E-W-S. Asians are a sidelight. Blacks and Mexicans are an annoyance. They are all symptoms, and the Ashkenazim are the disease. The borders would never have been opened without the Jews. The Civil Rights act would never have been passed without the Jews. White women would not have been turned against white men without the Jews. Europe and its kindred would never have been brought to their knees by guilt-tripping over the Holoco$t without the Jews. Russia would never have been subject to murder and destruction without the Jews.

No Jews = No NAACP, no lies about hate crimes, no Jacoby/Kristol/Chomsky/Zinn/Lewontin/Gould/Friedan/Steinem/Sontag/Schwartz/Goldberg/Marx/Freud to pathologize whites, manliness, America, self defense, etcetera etcetera. No Nuthin.

Cue Hollowitz and Richardberg insisting that Jews are white, and that Hitler was all bad, and German nationalism was “offensive”, and no matter WHAT we do, racial balkanization shouldn’t be RELIGIOUS balkanization, oh no sirree. It wasn’t like Hitler was reacting to Jewish communists in his country promising to do the same thing they did to Russia! Nah...couldn’t be...they’re white you know. Jared Taylor and Hollowitz and Richardberg told me so. 

All hat and no cattle, these folk...or should I say all yarmulke and no cattle. Hollow out nationalism before it even starts. Oh sure, at first it’s just subtle remarks about the “offensive” German nationalism and the “well spoken” judeophilic Jared Taylor. But just wait till the hammer drops and the purge starts. Like National Review this will become yet another Israeli outpost. Get fitted for tefillin boys!

Posted by Guessedworker on April 07, 2005, 02:34 PM | #

Natvan,

Goodbye.

Posted by dlg on April 07, 2005, 03:22 PM | #

You banned Natvanstein? How rude! LOL

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 03:38 PM | #

I take your point.  I do not entirely consider Heidi and her beau, however, to be magnificently conscious, mature and independent beings, sans all suggestibility and self-freed of the deadly embrace of Western culture and life in general.  Nope, they are weak actors, mostly slaves - like the rest of us.  Their choices and actions feed from and into our culture, taking from and adding to the miscegenative currents.

Well said.  It is unlikely that such a union would occur in the absence of (1) relentless propaganda emanating from the hostile meme machine and (2) the breakdown of the ties of community.  One can have sympathy for “weak actors” and “slaves”, but the behavior cannot be condoned; it has consequences for us.  To the extent we can, given our limited apparatus for dissemination of memes, we must condemn such behavior.

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 03:54 PM | #

It really doens’t matter if we disagree or not. The culture, via TV, Radio, Movies, Churches, and universities is encouraging black predation on white females.

This will get your hackles up, Geoff:

Joss Stone

In the context of a junior high school in particular, the articulation of a notion of predation on “white females” has particular resonance.  As we know, blacks are more physically mature for their age (and are often older than their classmates because they have failed a grade).  At that age, as well, status is disproportionately accorded to those displaying athletic prowess.  There is a very real danger of exploitation, impregnation, and abandonment.  However, in a broader sense, the predation is not against individual women but against our community.  This is the point that Fred overlooks.

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 04:17 PM | #

This is fundamentally why the order was given to kill the Branch Davidians.  No, David “Koresh” hadn’t made any noises about race or immigration, but any show of strength by armed whites who aren’t self-professed liberals cannot be tolerated....

I must point out that Koresh’s group was multi-racial:  many blacks, mestizo Hispanics, and Jews included.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 07, 2005, 04:28 PM | #

That Joss Stone link is dead.  Any chance of a repair.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 04:34 PM | #

Ben Tillman, thanks for pointing that out.  I hadn’t thought of that when I posted my comment but thinking back now, I do recall there were some Negroes among the folk who perished at Waco (all killed on orders from behind the scenes that came directly from Hillary, orders which were carried out immediately by Janet Reno). 

The point I was making in my comment stands.

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 05:14 PM | #

Will Joss’s love affair cost her the Gap millions?

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 05:21 PM | #

That doesn’t seem to work, either.  Perhaps if you copy & paste:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=343511&in_page_id=1773

Posted by Guessedworker on April 07, 2005, 05:29 PM | #

OK, it’s a software problem of some sort.  Copy & paste, like the man says.

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 05:40 PM | #

J. Richards:

…you should know that several Jews are a type of White people and that the Jews that are overrepresented in the top science and technology schools are usually White.

The very essence of being Jewish is membership in an organization that has set itself up in opposition to the communities it lives within, an organization that seeks simultaneously to manipulate, dissolve, and digest that community.  As members of such an organization, Jews canot be considered “white” in the relevant—i.e., the biopolitical—sense. 

The fact that Jews are not that genetically distant from us and are even closer phenotypically is the crux of the problem.  The function of the immune system is to distinguish “self” from “non-self” and to protect the body against the dangers posed by “non-self”.  What is derided as xenophobia is simply the same principle applied to human social organisms.  As is reflected in the words of J. Richards, Jews continually confound our societal immune system.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 05:43 PM | #

In regard to the poster signing as NatVan earlier:  does anyone know what people like him, who dwell on the role of Jews and Jewish organizations to the exclusion of every other factor, think of articles such as this one for example, which documents the role of the Catholics?  What do people who dwell exclusively on the role of the Jews think of the fact that no one has ever heard any establishment Christian speak out in opposition to forced race-replacement?  When was the last time anyone heard John Spong, Rowan Williams, Gene Robinson, Billy Graham, Robert Schuller, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, or the late Pope speak out against race-replacement immigration?

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 06:30 PM | #

“Conservatism would naturally serve to protect and bind the ethny. Within it is a latent Nationalism that has no need of display. It is quiet.”

Brilliant! This is exactly true of the Australian nationalism I grew up with. Such nationalism was simply an everyday part of culture and identity, and didn’t need to be aggressively reinforced at all.

I don’t see it as quite so brilliant.  I’m skeptical of a return to “golden age” thinking on this matter because it’s what allowed the present situation to come about.  In my opinion, explicit racial awareness is necessary to prevent a repeat.  In the case of reality-deprived nations like Japan, I think education programs designed to illuminate the alternatives would be in order.  Of course in practice this isn’t necessary because the Japanese elite have made up their minds on the subject and probably don’t plan to sell their people down the river any time soon.  Still, I have no doubt the Japanese would be better off for it.

The objections to this explicit awareness sound like the aspects of gentlemanliness that we can do without (I’m all in favor of gentlemanly behavior - in it’s context - in most regards).  Gentlemanly behavior arose in Europe among select European populations.  It’s application outside its normal sphere is usually maladaptive.  Aesthetics take a back seat to my race’s well-being I’m afraid.

The fact is that a racially unaware population is one that depends on circumstance for its own preservation.  “Polite” silent agreements to pretend the subject doesn’t exist is a step toward that grave.

I mean none of this to say that race should be a constantly reinforced subject, or that a heavy-handed approach is required.  I just mean to say that the old “safeguards” weren’t so safe and demand revision.

{on second thought, maybe that is what I mean.  Unless a deliberate effort is made to make racial awareness an issue, a population is a few decades of manipulation away from racial abdication)

Fred Scrooby:
everyone should marry the one he loves, all differences of race, religion, nationality, etc., notwithstanding.  Period.  Full stop.  End of story.  Whom anyone falls in love with is STRICTLY NONE OF MY BUSINESS beyond in principle wishing the couple every happiness and success in their future life together.

Social norms influence behavior.  I view race-mixing as a force destructive of my race, something I want preserved.  Therefore, I feel social norms that discourage race-mixing and encourage inmarriage are a positive.  I see no practical reason behind your pronouncements, only a universalist ideology that serves no useful purpose.  The individual has a right to marry whomever he wishes, and the group has the right to heap opprobrium on whomever it wishes.

Neither German nor Negro racial/national self-preservation depends one way or another on the formation of individual couples such as this one.

I don’t see how you can support such an argument.  In fact, I think it internally inconsistent if not self-contradictory.

Respective German and African-Negro racial/national self-preservation DOES depend on the respecting by élite interests of the wish all communities have not to be forced to accommodate alien races sent to dwell amongst them in such inappropriately large numbers that they actually displace and finally replace the original people.

I disagree.  The respect you mention is of great import to racial preservation, but it is not an absolute requirement.  A properly racially aware people needs no government to support that awareness.

The nexus between Geoff’s and also’s posts on the one hand, and on the other the natural wish of all community majorities to live among their own kind first and foremost is simply that when this wish of community majorities is respected, as it certainly ought to be in all cases, large-scale demography-threatening miscegenation does not take place.

I don’t see racial preservation as something with so simple a cutoff point.  There are things which help and things which hinder it.  Racemixing hinders it.

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 06:31 PM | #

I view Negro-white, yellow-white, brown-white, and every other type of miscegenation on an individual level strictly none of my business.

Unlike most WNs, I don’t see race-mixers as race-traitors (how can anyone betray something they know absolutely nothing about?  how does one break an agreement one has not made?)

That does not mean that I view race-mixing as “none of my business.” One of the central points of racial preservation is precisely that my entire race is my business.  Yes, my fellow whites may marry who they wish, and I may shun and heap scorn upon whom I wish as well.  Really, this whole “it’s all good” attitude isn’t the self-evident affair that you seem to think it is.  There are a great many “personal choices” that are prohibited by law, social convention, religious practice and the like.  In a WN state, whites might very well marry whomever they wish, and their fellow whites might very well decide whether or not said spouse would be allowed to immigrate.

But when communities’ wishes are respected as regards incompatible immigration this sort of thing doesn’t get multiplied by tens of millions.

It’s all very well to say that natural forces will take over in the absence of countervailing unnatural forces, and it’s probably true.  It’s also true that communities have the right to decide their own makeup, just as individuals have the right to choose their own partners.  Heidi might indeed love her token of altruism, and her hypothetical white community might indeed decide that they she should love him somewhere else.

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 06:45 PM | #

Scroob, I’m all for a more rational WN meme concerning Jewry.  I’m constantly battling Stormfronters to challenge their received beliefs concerning Jewry, to keep them honest.  I find much of WN ideology on Jewry immensely counterproductive.

That said, let’s not equate Catholics and Jews in this context.  Catholics don’t form the vast majority of the so-called whites who shill for destruction of the white race and the pathologization of whiteness.  Catholics didn’t form the vast majority of the authors of Boasian anti-anthropology, Freudian quackery, Marxist Critical Theory, the Bolshevik revolution, the Communist agitation of Weimar Germany, the 1965 immigration “reform,” etc.; Jews did.

That Catholics didn’t put a stop to Jewry at all points is a shame, but it’s not even in the same ballpark as what Jewry’s been up to.

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 07:48 PM | #

Fred:

The Jewish community led, and the Catholic Church followed.  The Jewish community set the fashion, and the Catholic Church adopted it.

Aside from the more general sort of cultural transmission (see Boyd & Richerson), the Jewish community directly lobbied the Protestant and Catholic leadership in the 1950’s and 1960’s.  This need not be inferred from changes in Christian secular political positions; it is a matter of historical record.  See, e.g., John Murray Cuddihy’s 1978 book, No Offense: Civil Religion and Protestant Taste, for the influence of Reinhold Niebuhr’s Jewish milieu on his thinking, and the January 25, 1966, article in LOOK magazine:

How the Jews Changed Catholic Thinking

Also see Kevin MacDonald’s discussion of Niebuhr in his response to a Paul Gottfried review:

MacDonald

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 08:20 PM | #

Race Mixing:

Quite a few posts here expressing various opinions but none really get to the bottom if it.

Race-mixing of the kind we see today is possible only with a degradation in the character of the white female. This ultimately goes to the sexual revolution, the liberation of women and the corruption of female virtue (not many among us are old enough to even remember such a thing as female “virtue"). But it did exist once upon a time:

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/ch3_09.htm

Sex before marriage was not commonplace until the 1960s. In a society where women maintain their virtue, race-mixing reduces dramatically. It wasn’t anti-Miscegenation laws that kept race-mixing to a minimum in the United States, it was public opinion and the scorn that attended women who broke the “mould” and befriended black men. The concept itself was too alien for any black men or white women to ever entertain. This applied not only to the South (where an inter-racial couple could face violence) but it was just as strong in the North which had no legal segregation.

Race-mixing is most commonly found in the British underclass and working-class these days where the sexual revolution has really worked its “magic”.

While the simplest solution (at least in Europe) is repatriation of all aliens, our society has been wrecked and sexual licentiousness has now run amok. Anyone who cannot see that is missing the wood for the trees.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 08:37 PM | #

I should also add here:

The morality of race-mixing and the elevation of the Negro are now concepts that the western media exports with a certain vehemence across the entire world. It is no longer restricted to the western viewer or listener.

The corruption of mores is now a global phenomenon. The driving force (or the engine room) of this pheomenon is the phenomenally powerful western media that determines (most of all) the tastes of the young. Once you have corrupted a generation of young, centuries of rigid rules and traditions can disappear in an instant in a cloud of dust.

See here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/06/movies/06bomb.html?oref=login&pagewanted=print&position=

Posted by Guessedworker on April 07, 2005, 09:00 PM | #

Cue WM.

Yes, Phil, I agree with all you say, save that there are two sides to this sad story: brazen media and entertainment industry intentions on the one hand, yes, but the pathos of human suggestibility on the other.  I find a certain compassion for the mislead.  It is not a crime to be weak, for sure.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 09:20 PM | #

I stand corrected. I note that Svigor touched on this subject earlier:

Social norms influence behavior.  I view race-mixing as a force destructive of my race, something I want preserved.  Therefore, I feel social norms that discourage race-mixing and encourage inmarriage are a positive.

I would add to what Svigor has said:

Mass Democracy is a slave of public opinion. Public opinion is the God that 99 men out of 100 bow down to - like an invisible hand that drives people to condemn one thing and approve of another thing.

To pretend that it is irrelevant is to live in a fantasy world.

Posted by Arcane on April 07, 2005, 09:48 PM | #

seelow, You said:
The most effective form of repression is,of course, the govt-media brainwashing machine that associates any form of pro-White sentiment with toothless Klansman or goose-stepping Nazis.

Tell me, with the exception of American Renaissance / New Century Foundation, VDare.com / Center for National Unity, the European American Issues Forum, and some chapters of the Council of Conservative Citizens, what WN grouping in the US does NOT have associations with Nazis?

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 09:52 PM | #

Tell me, with the exception of American Renaissance / New Century Foundation, VDare.com / Center for National Unity, the European American Issues Forum, and some chapters of the Council of Conservative Citizens, what WN grouping in the US does NOT have associations with Nazis?

Tell me, with the exception of Gene Expression, La Griffe, Steve Sailer, VDare, American Renaissance and a handful of other sites who except Nazis talks about racial differences in intelligence? And does the US Government not preach (with plenty of support from the US media) that people who speak of racial differences in intelligence are “would-be Hitlers”?

Posted by Arcane on April 07, 2005, 09:53 PM | #

Wow, maybe I was wrong… the National Alliance dude from National Vanguard is totally nuts! You guys are moderates by comparison… although I will say that what he says about Jews isn’t much different than what some of you have said about them, just in much cruder terms.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 10:11 PM | #

“The Jewish community led, and the Catholic Church followed.  The Jewish community set the fashion, and the Catholic Church adopted it.” (—Ben Tillman, 7:48 PM)

The Catholics couldn’t think for themselves?  They still can’t, on this issue?  The Protestants couldn’t? And still can’t? 

Certain Jews and Jewish groups have a lot to answer for.  So do certain Catholics and Protestants—even more so.

On a different topic:  Arcane, I wouldn’t talk about Nazis if I were you—the non-white whose site you blog for is an advocate of genocide against the white race.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 10:12 PM | #

although I will say that what he says about Jews isn’t much different than what some of you have said about them

Such as?

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 10:13 PM | #

Arcane,

I found another Nazi. Check this out:

http://galeb.etf.bg.ac.yu/~fd030490d/nazi.jpg

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 10:17 PM | #

The corruption of mores is now a global phenomenon. The driving force (or the engine room) of this pheomenon is the phenomenally powerful western media....

Did you see this, Phil?

Fast forward into trouble

Four years ago, Bhutan, the fabled Himalayan Shangri-la, became the last nation on earth to introduce television. Suddenly a culture, barely changed in centuries, was bombarded by 46 cable channels. And all too soon came Bhutan’s first crime wave - murder, fraud, drug offences. Cathy Scott-Clark and Adrian Levy report from a country crash-landing in the 21st century

Post hoc ergo propter hoc?  You be the judge.

Posted by Arcane on April 07, 2005, 10:20 PM | #

Wow, way to ignore my question!

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 10:25 PM | #

Ben,

I have friends who have visited much of South East Asia. They tell me that you can get almost any major American TV channel (Cable that is) anywhere in Asia these days. Kids the age of 13 (Thai or Malay kids) walk around in shopping malls dressed like “gangsta rappers”.

The chest-thumping, flag waving American “patriots” will rejoice in this. I am less sure. Fred Reed had an outstanding article on this:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/reed/reed41.html

There are several angles to Globalization. One, which I don’t disapprove of, is nations trying to build better socieites with Western capital and technology. But another aspect is that western TV values (race-mixing, gangsta-rapping, licentiousness, female sluttiness, homosexuality) becomes the value system of the generation that grows up on this stuff. And all one needs to destroy one’s heritage (whatever it is worth) is just turn on the TV.

As an organ of destruction, nothing better has ever been invented in the history of mankind.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 10:31 PM | #

What does Hollyork promote? Toleration of foul language and a concomitant coarsening of society; hostility between men and women; truculent illiteracy and the values of the black ghetto; the elevation of homosexuality and promiscuity; disdain for religion; use of drugs, interracial sex, destructive feminism, eradication of the remnants of Anglo-European Christian civilization. It is not accidental.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 10:33 PM | #

More:

Television is infinitely scaleable. With satellites, Hollywood bathes the world in the same mire. In Mexico, where I live, television and cine are heavily American. A month ago I was in Chile for a couple of weeks. Television was heavily, heavily American – CNN in Spanish, for example. Crossing into Argentina at Bariloche, I found the same. In Thailand, things are little better.

In the living rooms of the whole world, Hollywood has a little window open to the minds of the people. Nobody can escape. In remote towns in the Bolivian altiplano, the values of Hollyork dance on screens. Children in India, in Iran and Uruguay, day after day gradually become what Barbra Streisand and Sylvester Stallone think they should be. Such people know and care nothing for civilizations that have existed for thousands of years.

How perfectly incredible that a group of – what? A hundred producers, studio heads, and network CEOs? A thousand to be conservative? – can bypass governments, subvert ancient cultures, and make the world as unhappy and divided as they have made the United States.

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 10:40 PM | #

Arcane, what’s so special about “associations with Nazis?” The Democrat party has “associations with Communists, Marxists, and socialists.” So what?

You seem to think that WNs who wish to seem reasonable must avoid any contact with any National Socialist.  Why should a WN or a racially aware non-WN observe this “rule?” Further, just what is it about National Socialists and others that has crawled up your ass?

Yes, I understand that an infinitesmal number of WNs advocate genocide against non-whites, but that isn’t a requirement of either WNism or National Socialism.  Why not stick to the point and condemn genocidalists and genocidalism?

I just don’t get all creepy-crawly over the word “Nazi” the way you do.  I find your use of the word as an epithet laughable.  I oppose genocide and the provocation of “hot” race war, but I don’t mind someone adapting National Socialism to the current times (I do think those outside of Germany who profess unreconstructed National Socialism rather idiotic, but that should go without saying).

The “Nazis” seelow was referring to wasn’t the actual National Socialists extant, but rather the caricature of the Nazis of the Third Reich propagated endlessly and at enormous expense of capital and effort by the Jews in the entertainment industry.

Posted by dlg on April 07, 2005, 10:46 PM | #

Actually, Phil makes a good point about not many people aside from Nazis being willing to discuss racial differences, IQ and “the Jewish question”. This is why I often find myself on sites (including this one) where views are expressed which I find abhorrent - because at least they’re talking about these things.

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 11:03 PM | #

That’s true dlg, and has some interesting consequences.  For example, the fact that WNs represent the lion’s share of those willing to discuss HBD is likely to have two consequences: WNs will have a hugely disproportionate chance to bend the ear of the average Joe in search of information on HBD, and the mainstream media will have to broach the subject of HBD in order to rope Joe back onto the reservation.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 07, 2005, 11:06 PM | #

Wow, maybe I was wrong… the National Alliance dude from National Vanguard is totally nuts! You guys are moderates by comparison… although I will say that what he says about Jews isn’t much different than what some of you have said about them, just in much cruder terms.

Shucks, now I’ll have to ban everybody.  You, too, dlg.  Don’t do a good enough job of defending your own people.

Nope, it’s just gonna be Arcane from here on.  And GC.  And Randy.  Let’s hear it for Randy.

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 11:10 PM | #

Oh, and if you find abhorrent views frequently-expressed here, you’d better keep clear of any Leftists sites.  The advocation of buggery, nihilism, debauchery, race-suicide & race-destruction, collective ethic theft and dispossesion, and across-the-board eradication of posterity might give you the vapors LOL.

Posted by dlg on April 07, 2005, 11:37 PM | #

Actually, I do stay clear of leftist sites. When it comes to blog surfing, I stick to a neocon/libertarian/HBD orbit.

Posted by Effra on April 08, 2005, 12:01 AM | #

Phil Peterson: “Race-mixing is most commonly found in the British underclass and working-class these days where the sexual revolution has really worked its “magic”.”

However, this miscegenation (said to be the most intensive in the world) can be interpreted as the black-minority male incomer conceding defeat and breeding his bloodline out by dilution. Given the large disparity between numbers of white and black low-IQ people of reproductive age, the grandchildren of b/w mischlings are likely to mate with whites and further reduce the Negroid quantum. Provided we maintain rigid barriers against further black influxes-- and public opinion is heavily restrictionist-- we may wash most of the negritude out of the British bloodstream by c. 2080, given the speed at which the underclass reproduces.

Assortation-- the tendency of culturally and intellectually similar folk to flock together-- ensures that not too many blacks will score high-class white British girlfriends, while the unfeminine looks and chippy characteristics of black sistahs limit most of them to casual relationships with other blacks. Admittedly this sex skew limits the pace of assimilation via race-mixing, but we have not yet discussed assisted repatriation… And the more black delinquents are locked down, the fewer opportunities they will have to be ‘babyfathers’ with black women.

Possibly the greater threat to Britain’s homogeneity comes from equally intelligent Asiatics marrying whites; but so far the phenotypes of Anglicised Hindus, Chinese and Buddhists (though not Muslims) have seemed more compatible with ours. Moreover, most Islamist Muslims of the suicide bomber type are low-caste Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Arabs and Negroid converts, who are unlikely to make much of a splash in the White/Oriental/Jewish marriage market. They may plant literal time bombs, but not demographic ones.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 08, 2005, 12:18 AM | #

Effra, I’ve noticed your observation in the USA. Especially the preponderance of White Male / E. Asian female(Chinese & Japansese) intermarriage.

The low class (perhaps cognitively depressed) whites are mating with the blacks, and the middle/upper class whites are mating with the orientals.

I’m not sure what this means for the future. Yes, I think you’ve hit on something.

Again, I see few marriage between the S. Asian Muslim types you detail, except the occasional white degenerate woman, doing it for money so the Paki can get citizenship.

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 12:37 AM | #

The damage that race-mixers do is hardly limited to themselves.  I think the example they provide is more damaging.  Mixed-race children mingle with their white relatives, and these white children are raised to think of them as their own.  I’m close friends with such a family, and it’s frustrating to see this at work.

Blacks presumably have little problem with expressing their disapproval of these “mischlings,” (in the example above, the black family of course is the one openly mortified at the miscegenation) but whites?  Most whites would be sooner drawn and quartered than “teach a child to hate.” (really, in my experience, it has far more to do with preventing children from repeating potentially embarassing/problematic ideas at school than it does with preventing children from “hate,” but the effect remains the same).

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 08, 2005, 12:51 AM | #

This business of viewing the white underclass of a white country as dispensable is wrong.  Each nation-state’s race is an organic whole, none of whose parts can be replaced with an incompatible race without some sort of negative consequence to the whole.  The races of nation-states shouldn’t be tampered with in any of their parts, upper, lower, or middle.

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 11:19 AM | #

Well, Svigor almost answered my question… almost… I give him credit for at least giving something of an answer.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 08, 2005, 11:39 AM | #

Jeez, Arcane, your question is NOT a question.  It is an implicit accusation to which no “answer” can be given.  How often do you beat your wife, by the way?

Posted by J. Richards on April 08, 2005, 01:09 PM | #

Guessedworker,
I am glad that unlike razib of GNXP, you did not simply erase the rant by NatVan, thus showing your stronger commitment to freedom of speech.  I would recommend that you not ban NatVan but flag such absurd posts in the future with the disclaimer that the outrageous comments expressed do not reflect the views of any on the bloggers at majorityrights, but are left there by the moderators in the spirit of freedom of speech.  I don’t think that you need be much concerned about NatVan spamming the comments section frequently because NatVan will post at most a few more rants and will go back to posting at Stormfront or equivalent.

NatVan,
Whereas Kevin MacDonald has convincingly argued that some Jews have played a prominent role in working against Western interests in the 20th century, it is hardly appropriate to hold all Jews responsible.  I have known several Jews for whom their Jewishness is no more a part of their identity than, say, the fact that they have brown hair or drive a Honda Accord or equivalent.  Several Jews look White and are interested in preserving the West as much as many White gentiles, i.e., these individuals are appropriately referred to as White.  On the other hand, there are several leftist White gentiles that would destroy the West with glee.  Learn who your allies are in preserving the West and don’t spurn someone as a potential ally if he/she simply happens to be Jewish.  By the way, I am not Jewish.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 08, 2005, 03:05 PM | #

J Richards,

I did IP-ban him.  The reason was two-fold. 

First, when a commenter has exhibited, let us say, untoward emotion I have til now reckoned on being able to appeal to some understanding of the way one behaves in another’s house.  There’s nothing special about this.  It’s just how ordinary, decent people behave.  In Natvan this decency was not immediately apparent, nor any redemptive qualities for that matter.  I could foresee only a long, pointless and unedifying argument if I attempted to engage him.

Second, it’s not as if his subject matter is never aired here.  The MR threads are enlivened by a small number of broadly nationalist commenters who are intelligent and articulate but also decent people.  They seek to persuade on the basis of factual debate, not abusiveness.  This is a better way for newcomers to the JQ to encounter the nationalist side of the argument.  It is a tender plant, however, and needs to be protected against the ruder elements.

Posted by HonestAbe on April 08, 2005, 04:35 PM | #

Was anything NatVan said substantially wrong? Is it not true that Jews ARE mostly responsible for the trends he identified? One does not exactly see Chinamen agitating, agitating, agitating against “racism”. Chinese imported at the turn of the century kept their heads down and worked on railroads; Jews undermined gentile society progressively, starting with Franz Boas and culminating in Noel Ignatiev. The distinction could not be sharper, and speaks to the question of why we are focusing on two Asiatics rather than the real threat to Western Civilization.

Is it not important to ask why Richards and Holliday think Jews are white, or why they say Jews should be treated on an individual basis but nonwhite right-wingers should not, or why they seem to like Jared Taylor so much? 

Banning NatVan for his crude and confrontational tone is understandable. Banning him for his content is not. Tillman, Wintermute, and others would agree with 99.999% of what he said.

I would much prefer an honest ethnic like Razib to an infiltrator. Forgive me for my paranoia, but given that erstwhile conservative institutes like National Review are now printing screeds in favor of Trotsky by Stephen Schwartz et alia, my caution on this matter should be understandable.

Are Richards and Holliday gentiles? Perhaps they are “not Jews” in the same way the converso Larry Auster is “not a Jew”? Perhaps they have significant others or dear friends who are Jewish? Such a relationship would strain their balance to the same extent an interracial match would.

These are important things to know - as important as knowing that the authors at GNXP are Asiatics. Knowing that, I can take their genetical arguments and discard their political ones. Knowing whether Richards and Holliday are Jews - or married to Jews, or have Jewish in-laws, or are Jewish converts, or have any such compromising ancestry - would be of utmost relevance to the readers of Majority Rights.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 08, 2005, 05:09 PM | #

Abe,

JW is known to me personally to be an American of European extraction.  I am perfectly confident that JR is English in the fullest sense.

Concerning “content”, it is not a matter of whether Natvan is substantially right or wrong. I have not banned an opinion.  Indeed, if I wanted to kill off all mention of the JQ on this blog I would let Natvan run and run until we were all heartily sick of it.  No, it is for the opposite reason - I believe the JQ must be debated on its merits - that I have banned harmful advocacy.

I believe JW will answer your other points in the next day or so.

Posted by Salopian on April 08, 2005, 06:27 PM | #

Back on thread, and a warning to Joss Stone.

This is the real, *human* cost of the promotion of miscegination to the young, dim and impressionable.

This story was in the local papers when I went home to see the folks at Easter. In Shropshire of all places!

Note Mr Denniss has fathered 15 (fifteen!) other children!

http://www.shropshirestar.com/search/results.php

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 06:46 PM | #

J. Richards:
I have known several Jews for whom their Jewishness is no more a part of their identity than, say, the fact that they have brown hair or drive a Honda Accord or equivalent.  Several Jews look White and are interested in preserving the West as much as many White gentiles, i.e., these individuals are appropriately referred to as White.  On the other hand, there are several leftist White gentiles that would destroy the West with glee.  Learn who your allies are in preserving the West and don’t spurn someone as a potential ally if he/she simply happens to be Jewish.

I have given this issue much thought and I agree with you that all Jews are of course not bad* or even enemy and that Jewishness is certainly not ipso facto evidence of malfeasance or racial enmity.  I disagree that it is as simple as identifying who is who and keeping the bad apples out.  Crypto-Judaism, widespread Jewish self-deception, the Jewish propensity for activism, and Jewish intelligence mandate a longer look at the issue.  I personally think it is safer to err on the side of caution.  There are only 14 million Jews in the whole world.  Subtract those that in some way, shape, or form oppose white racial interests and you haven’t enough of them to populate a small city.  That reward isn’t worth the risk (Jewry has a history of infiltrating and subverting opposing movements).  Remember, Jews have been practicing ethnic warfare for thousands of years.  They’re much better equipped for it than we.  If they want to form explicitly Jewish groups working for the preservation of the white race then I say all power to them.  I draw the line at welcoming them into the ranks of non-Jewish groups.

Also, I think self-identifying as Jewish makes a particular statement.  If I was a Jew who felt I was white and that the white race must be preserved, and I knew what I know now, I would quite simply cease being a Jew altogether.  I would disclose that I had been born a Jew and that I no longer was.  I think a requirement of this sort should be considered by all those who think Jews eligible as allies; I also think it would turn away the vast majority of potentials as surely as Jesus turned the rich man away in Mark 10:21.

Again, I argue all of this in the context of Jewish history and in erring on the side of caution.

*I think even most “bad” Jews are motivated by a varying mix of “good” intentions and self-deceptive justifications.

Posted by dlg on April 08, 2005, 07:09 PM | #

Svigor, if being a Jew is in fact an ethnic category, then one can’t cease being a Jew any more than one can cease being white, no?

Fyi, I am a Jew who considers himself white (I’ve never met one that didn’t). I’m more concerned about the disappearance of Jewry than I am about the disappearance of the white race, for simple statistical reasons. As you note, there are about 14 million Jews in the world. How many white people are there in the world? How many countries are majority white? For Jews, there is always the issue of self-prerservation. For white people and nations, it is more a matter of getting collective houses in order (e.g. through restrictive immigration). There is no danger of extinction.

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 07:15 PM | #

Svigor,
OK, for hypothetical reasons, let us suppose that, yes, Jews are indeed the main antagonist to the survival of the “White” race. What would you say should be done about the “Jewish problem?”

1. Who would qualify as a Jew? How much Jewish “blood” would a person have to have in order to not qualify as a Jew?

2. Would you simply eliminate the rights of Jews, or would you deport them?

3. To where would you deport Jews? To Israel?

4. Once deported, would that mean that the “Jewish Question” had been solved?

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 07:31 PM | #

As you note, there are about 14 million Jews in the world. How many white people are there in the world? How many countries are majority white? For Jews, there is always the issue of self-prerservation. For white people and nations, it is more a matter of getting collective houses in order (e.g. through restrictive immigration). There is no danger of extinction.

Its true that because of lower numbers Jews are in greater danger of extinction, on the face of it.

However, as many commenters here have noted, Jews have aggressively promoted open borders in the United States, the most philo-semitic nation on earth. It is now an established fact that organized Jewry in the US has given complete and unflinching support for open borders. The only reason whites are threatened in the US today is because of open borders (which Jews by a massive majority continue to support). Now before our dearest friend Arcane yells “Nazi!” (on a side note, I have seen men obsessed with women and/or money neither of which is particularly healthy but not unnatural. But to be obssessed with Nazis every waking minute of your life.....anyway), what I have said has been noted in an excellent and thought provoking article by Lawrence Auster (I hope Arcane doesnt turn around and yell Nazi at him next). 

The question is why do Jews support this? The majority of American Jews must believe that reducing American whites to a minority is essential for the survival of Jews or perhaps beneficial for Jews in the long run. Ergo, there is a clear conflict of interest here. You agree? Jews cannot have open borders and Gentiles cannot have closed borders. You can’t have both.

As for the idea that Jews care less about whites and more about themselves - this is clearly established and requires little corroboration. My only point then is that if it is legitimate for Jews to pursue their own interests as a group (even when they are not citizens of Israel but America) even when their interests are in direct conflict with the interests of Gentiles, it cannot be illegitimate for Gentiles to pursue their own interests. If anything, American whites have nowhere to go. Jews have Israel to go to if America sinks. And traditionally Jews desert a sinking ship before almost anyone else. Jews left South Africa in large numbers long before the end of Apartheid (even though the anti-Apartheid movement was heavily populated by Jews).

As a white Gentile (even though I am not American) it is impossible for me to have unquestioningly philo-semitic views on the Jewish question. To do so, I would have to block all knowledge of this issue, which isn’t possible.

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 07:41 PM | #

what I have said has been noted in an excellent and thought provoking article by Lawrence Auster (I hope Arcane doesnt turn around and yell Nazi at him next).

Auster is one of my favorite writers and, based on my last long correspondence with him, a pretty good guy. He’s also a Catholic-convert from Judaism, which means that people like Svigor would frown upon him.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 07:47 PM | #

Auster is one of my favorite writers and, based on my last long correspondence with him, a pretty good guy. He’s also a Catholic-convert from Judaism, which means that people like Svigor would frown upon him.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/000637.html

Auster doesn’t hold to the “poposition nation” ideology that our dear friend Arcane adores so much.

Auster has in fact admitted repeatedly on his site that the 1965 Act was a disaster for American whites. He does not see America as a nation only defined in “ideals” but sees it as a majority white nation, a nation historically populated and built by Europeans.

I wonder what our friend Arcane makes of all that. I suppose his reads Auster’s views on the West Bank and that suffices for his purposes. But there is more Auster than that.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 07:50 PM | #

What is European America?

Our friend Arcane on the other hand has white in Quotes.

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 07:52 PM | #

Phil, You said:
Auster doesn’t hold to the “poposition nation” ideology that our dear friend Arcane adores so much.

I have never subscribed to the “proposition nation” idea. I don’t know where you got the idea that I did… just because I disagree with your ideas as to what makes up a nation doesn’t mean that I subscribe to that.