|
|
|
Sweeping threat to majority rights Repeating a story worth repeating: A recent court decision has paved the way for “affirmative action” to be applied to the bill of rights itself. In Harper vs Poway Unified School District:
The decision is up for en blanc review by a panel of 10 judges—a procedure that is reserved for cases that have particularly fundamental legal consequences. Stanley Womack provides links to the decision and the dissenting opinion. Although many are of the opinion that the Ninth Circuit’s extremist decisions are vulnerable to reversal by review, the history of the Supreme Court on majority rights is anything but rational. Repeated assaults on the law of this type will, over time, eventually decay toward the extremist views through simple omission of judicial review of the bad decisions which then become enshrined in case law as precedent. PS: Judge Reinhardt’s father was a film director, his mother a screen writer and his wife the executive director of the ACLU of Southern California—all Jewish. Comments:2
Posted by On Holliday on Thu, 20 Jul 2006 20:59 | # Good points, both James and Steve in your own blog post. Of course, the argument that whites should have less rights than minorities because whites “have the power” and minorities do not is internally inconsistent. If whites “had the power” then they would not allow themselves to be discriminated against with respect to school admissions, hiring, immigration and, now it seems, the Bill of Rights. The same argument holds with respect to the assertion that group activism is illegitimate for whites, and legitimate for non-whites, because “whites have the power.” Again: if a group in society is predominant with respect to political and social power (here I am talking about having the group get its way with respect to its interests, *not* that aracial individualists of the group in question hold political office, etc.), then how is it possible that the entire establishment - ostensibly controlled by this group and “serving” (according to the PC spiel) the “racist” interests of that group - discriminates against the group? If whites really “had the power” then, at the very least, whites would have the same rights as others to group-organize and to express controversial opinions - if not *more* rights to do so. This is really strange manifestation of group power in that the so-called powerful group: whew! Lucky whites have the power - imagine if we didn’t! But, what use this power if it doesn’t translate into practical sociopolitical utility? Doesn’t power imply that your interests are being served? And, if so, doesn’t it suggest that whites have, at least per capita, *less* power than any other group? What the reality actually is, is that it are the white *elites* - who have no loyalty at all to their race and make common cause with other groups to pursue individualist interests - who have “the power”, along with both overclass and underclass minority groups. The white masses are, as James would put it, ethnically disenfranchised. No matter what “spin” the racial left tries to put on this, it is quite clear throughout history that a socially dominant group should more rights than other groups, not *less.* It is precisely because white elites have abandoned the white masses - and the white masses are too stupid and indoctrinated to realize this in any coherent way - is why the so-called “dominant minority” is discriminated against in favor or “powerless minorities”, an absurdity unprecedented in history. Or, is it that whites are being “paid back” or *past* power - with the implication that whites are no longer privelaged (which goes against of course the thesis of *current* “white skin privelage and “institutional racism”) and that it is a reasonable legal doctrine to punish present and future generations for the “sins” of their ancestors. Of course, said “sins” are merely having the temerity for having their own posterity enjoy the fruits of a civilization and society built by whites - an attitude considered normal when expressed by all other peoples. The key here then is the betrayal of whites by their elites, and the oxymoronic statement that whites cannot have the same rights as others because whites have the power in the society that discriminates against them. 3
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on Thu, 20 Jul 2006 21:06 | # I can’t recall the last time this Clinton appointed dick-head DIDN’T get overturned on appeal.The 9th Circuit Court is a joke-their wearing the black robes are more suitable for “trick or treating"on Halloween.Lawyers just love him;it keeps the money rolling in. 4
Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 20 Jul 2006 22:22 | # Addendum: Judge Reinhardt’s father was a film director, his mother a screen writer and his wife the executive director of the ACLU of Southern California—all Jewish. 5
Posted by Stanley Womack on Fri, 21 Jul 2006 00:09 | # Market Dominant Minorities A useful tool in understanding how members of a particular ethnic group may rise to dominating positions in one or another profession or occupation may be found in some conceptual work by Professor Amy Chua in her book “World on Fire” which spells out how democracy may conflict with market globalization and ethnic diversity. If we switch the issue to “Government & Media Dominant Minorities” and apply the same reasoning to government and media that the professor applies to markets, we may get new insights and new ways to discuss the situation. We have a short essay about it at: 6
Posted by Luke on Fri, 21 Jul 2006 00:54 | # Excellent analysis, On Holliday. The inconsistancies and contradictions you point out are glaringly obvious when you think about it, but no one ever does. Again, very well put. 7
Posted by C. Rosemond on Fri, 21 Jul 2006 06:51 | # Ditto, Nick Tamiroff. The 9th Circuit has been the most consistently overturned federal court in the country at SCOTUS during the Rehnquist era. It is likely to continue to be so with the Roberts bench. 8
Posted by On Holliday on Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:58 | # James, look at this: Note the possibility that the neuronal loss occurs “later in life”; that is, after birth. This is consistent with the theory that exposure to South Asian phenotypes may damage the development of the amygdala in susceptible white (male) children. Until more data is accumulated, it is probably safe for white families, especially those with boys, to practice social ostracism of South Asians. 9
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:34 | # Well, even so, prenatal environmental influences are important to consider. The neuronal loss may be a latter-stage development. What I want to see is more action on the legal front to force the multinationals to have to acquire legal insurance against the possibility that their choice of immigrants is damaging the community. Simple crime insurance would be a good start: If you hire a “guest” worker, you are responsible for compensating those victimized by the worker. Then it is more obvious that if you bring in a worker that causes health damage, you are liable for that damage. And I think this liability should extend for the entire duration of the “guest”‘s stay whether you still have him employed or not. In other words, if you bring some “temporary” worker is who you assist in becoming permanent, the damage caused by his extended stay is on your shoulders. 10
Posted by On Holliday on Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:53 | # Good point. Companies that hire immigrants are privatizing the profits while socializing the costs. They need be forced to accept some of the burdens that their choices impose on the community. Where’s the legal team willing to push this concept? 11
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 21 Jul 2006 14:42 | #
Judges who are frequently overturned pay no penalty? There’s no system of warnings, reprimands, or removals from the bench? Let’s see this Jewish nation-destroying judge and his Jewish nation-destroying ACLU-activist wife be deported to Israel and try some of their nation-destroying techniques over there, turned against Israel (instead of against the United States). Let’s see how long they’d last. 12
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 21 Jul 2006 16:59 | # Fred, your comment illustrates why I am not an anti-Zionist and indeed hope Israel survives the USrael excesses. Yes, they should be deported to Israel along with all members of Jewish organizations, and the real US, the “posterity” of the founders, should not take sides in the conflicts in the middle east. We’re over our heads there. 13
Posted by Steve Edwards on Fri, 21 Jul 2006 23:01 | # “Judge Reinhardt’s father was a film director…” I didn’t read any further, because I didn’t have to. Look - I’m probably the most aracial individual on this forum, who usually steers clear of these kinds of issues - it’s a bad habit, I suppose, not confronting EVERYTHING head on, and probably a hangover from my younger “progressive” days - but I just want to say this (and hear me out): The madness has got to stop. Everyone’s sick of it. And we have a pretty good idea that Jewish organisations are the primary supporters of the entire racket (indeed, I am open to the argument that while their support may not be a sufficient factor in keeping it alive, but nevertheless is undoubtedly a necessary factor). Why do they keep doing it? WHY? Can it please stop, for f——sake? I mean, I don’t demand that Israelis give up their freedoms and open their borders, so why do Jews do so in the West? And the horrible fact is…they actually do this - completely openly, without shame. I have an impeccable record on race-replacement: I (and I think I speak for most people here) consistently oppose race-replacement everywhere in the world it is ever attempted - Kosovo, South Sudan, the West Bank, Israel proper, Russia, Japan, China, South Africa…you name it - if the race-replacers have any of these people in their targets, then I’m gonna have some words about that. But all I ask is for just a little reciprocity. No, I don’t expect non-Europeans to actually shill for the interests of Europeans, and would never ask for as much - all that is required is an understanding that government-enforced race-replacement is just not on, wherever it might happen, and ending it (and reversing it) is a completely normal thing to aspire to. Is that too much to ask? 14
Posted by Steven Palese on Sat, 22 Jul 2006 05:14 | # Hello folks, I’ve been busy lately but this news item is simply too obscene not to comment on. This is what our tolerance toward anti-white racism is leading to. look at the statement again:
Notice the A, B, and C notes I added? Those are the racial theories that power and sustain the anti-white regime, specifically: (A) The Unique History of White Evil Theory This racial theory holds that “whites cannot evade history”. It is a racial theory because it justifies discrimination against a group based on their (Euro-Christian) ancestry alone irrespective of actual participation or consent (in slavery, holocaust, etc.) and therefore denies innocence as a defense. (B) The Unearned White Skin-color Privilege Theory This racial theory holds that “whites cannot evade responsibility”. It is a racial theory because it justifies discrimination against individuals based on their (Euro-Christian) ancestry alone irrespective of actual status or financial condition and therefore denies innocence as a defense. (C) The White Majority Deference Theory This racial theory holds that “majorities must serve minorities unless the minority is white”. It is a racial theory because its discriminatory logic applies exclusively to whites. For example, suggesting the reverse, that white minorities in South Africa or Detroit should have not equal but superior rights is widely considered insane. These three theories form the regime’s hegemonic ideology, a key concept I brought up earlier in this thread. If we destroy these racial theories we cripple the anti-white regime that is waging war on us. An anti-racism approach that focuses on these three theories is the only way out. Tomorrow I’ll post my responses to Daedalus in our ongoing Jewish Question debate at the phora and get back into the anti-racism struggle against these three racial theories. I’ll update my blog and post here the latest version of the leaflet that kills theory B. The leaflet is much improved and quite radical in some respects - I might piss off some traditionalists because I’m now referring to the Judeo-fascist regime as “the Cryptarchy”, Jews as “first class whites” and to us as “second class whites”. The term “ZioNazi pigs” has also made an appearance. Anyway, you’ll see it tomorrow and I hope I get plenty of constuctive feedback as I did last time. Rusty and Zach will see that their input has been taken onboard in its entirety. 15
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 22 Jul 2006 07:38 | # This decision was nothing but a Jewish ethnic attack on an ethnicity many if not most Jews consider their enemy. That’s it. Nothing else. It had nothing to do with principle whatsoever. “Principle” in the case of decisions like this comes purely as a rationalisation after the issue has been decided in such a way as attacks/weakens/punishes the ethnic enemy—for no reason other than that he is the ethnic enemy. Jews need to look squarely and honestly at the pure ethnic warfare many of their brethren are waging against whites, Europeans, Christians, and the West purely on grounds that they perceive them to be the ethnic enemy and intend to use what power and influence they have to bring them down. All questions of principle in cases such as this are nothing but a flimsy rationalisation after the fact. And white European Christians are getting sick of it, of this stuff coming from the Jews. Let the Jews start hearing that, in plain language. We’re sick of constantly being attacked by them in these highly-destructive, devious ways. I call upon the Jews( * ) to stop what amount to naked ethnic attacks on Europeans flimsily disguised as principled legal decisions. They’re not principled legal decisions, not a single one of them. ( * I call upon them as Jews, not as liberals: diaspora-Jewish liberalism is to a large extent simply a form of diaspora-Jewish nationalism, its purpose being to attack the “national enemy,” strengthening the Jews as a group by weakening their enemy as a group.) 17
Posted by ben tillman on Sat, 22 Jul 2006 18:45 | #
This cannot be repeated often enough. By the way, will Salter ever publish his “Ethnic Infrastructures” ? 18
Posted by Steven Palese on Sun, 23 Jul 2006 08:19 | # This is the latest version of the leaflet. It is designed to destroy the odious Unearned White Skin-color Privilege theory this disgusting court decision is using to justify its anti-white racism This version incorporates all comments made up to this point - I’m also including a pdf link for those wanting to get going and dive into battle. The final link currently points to my blog but if you want a custom version just say so on this thread and I’ll make you one with your link. I can also modify the terminology any way you want - I realize the 1st class white / 2nd class white terminology is very radical and may not suit everyone. I know puritans will spazz out at my suggestion that Jews are white - but if you pay attention you’ll notice I’m opening a chasm between our two groups that ordinary folk can understand and relate to. Leaflet images followed by pdf links - text in next post
Let me know what you think and whether it can be improved in any way. Bear in mind that I have no space left so additions will require subtractions. 19
Posted by Steven Palese on Sun, 23 Jul 2006 08:22 | # WAKE UP AND SMELL THE CRYPTARCHY Our democracy has withered down to a vote between Zionist warmonger A and Zionist warmonger B:
This is in turn driven by media control, a fact that single handedly redefines America as a covert fascist regime, or Cryptarchy. Media control and democracy cannot co-exist under any circumstances:
The Cryptarchy is not a recent development. The hidden ruling elite has been intimidating sitting presidents into behaving like frightened children for some time:
The Cryptarchy affects [2nd class whites] in many other ways, including personally. Our children are worth less than a third of a person while our [1st class white] elite, the two percent that eat half the pie, are forty times more privileged:
The Cryptarchy is founded and sustained on the dual persecution of [2nd class whites]:
continued in next post.. 20
Posted by Steven Palese on Sun, 23 Jul 2006 08:23 | # Leaflet text continued.. The Cryptarchy, aided and abetted by its regime uncle toms, imposes mass immigration against the democratic will:
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE FREELY Everyone on campus has group representation except for ordinary whites. The campus administration continues to deny whites a student union on the grounds that, in U.S. society, whites are “in power”, “privileged” and “the oppressors”. This racial theory is known as the Unearned White Skin-color Privilege theory. It is a racial theory because it justifies discrimination against individuals based on their (Euro-Christian) ancestry alone irrespective of actual status or financial condition and therefore denies innocence as a defense. We ask that either all groups be allowed group representation or none. As long as this equal rights demand is denied, volunteers will continue to distribute this leaflet. This leaflet is designed to refute the racial theory on which this denial is based. Ordinary whites are not “in power”, not “privileged” and not in a position to be “the oppressors”, Jews are. This doesn’t mean Jews (first class whites) should take the heat from this racial theory instead. It means the campus administration must stop relying on racism. To volunteer to join our campaign for equal rights and defeat the racial theories peddled by the campus administration, please visit our website. (We welcome non-racist Jews who oppose the dual persecution strategy against ordinary whites; Jews who support it are ZioNazi pigs whose pro-semitic bigotry won’t be tolerated). Ok I’ll now withdraw to my blog and update it so that it’s coherent with this leaflet - I’m somewhat ahead of it 21
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 23 Jul 2006 16:02 | # Steven, I think it’s quite good. There are details I wouldn’t have put in or would have said differently or which I frankly disagree with, but they’re not important. The important things are the general drift of the leaflet and its function as a counterattack. It should go forward if it can have an effect. If it does have an effect, more such leaflets should go forward. We’re in a war, one in which, we all know, the other side, including the Jews, don’t fight fairly so let’s not be too finicky about this or that detail where a project succeeds in having its hoped-for effect. Among those on the other side, the Jews in particular have used the dirtiest fighting methods imaginable and continue to do so—to take just one example out of hundreds, look at their invention of the “there are no such things as races” outrage over a century ago, and their using all the means at their disposal to push it on academia and the public. They know perfectly it’s a lie: Stephen Jay Gould, Ashley Montague, and all the others knew perfectly it was a lie, but their goal of attacking the European races and ethnocultures using that lie as a weapon took precedence over scruple. When you’re fighting a totally unscrupulous adversary, you needn’t scruple too much over details. 22
Posted by Steven Palese on Mon, 24 Jul 2006 21:31 | # Zach, the first class/second class dichotomy is now being emphasized as a consequence of three factors: One. Your post,
Two. Wintermute’s fnord observation. While the fnord argument may appear ridiculous on first reading, it’s actually very insightful and reflects your views as well. Read it yourself here. Then read it again. And one more time. That’s why I’ve essentially purged all occurences of the word “Jew” all the way down to the last few lines. I haven’t kept the matter secret, I’ve just avoided the kill-trigger word, or fnord. In those last few lines, I formally let the cat out of the bag then chase it with anti-racism sweeteners and a non-racist Jew / ZioNazi pig dichotomy,
It’s not even a fig leaf - I actually mean it. The problem lies in finding these non-racist Jews who oppose the dual persecution strategy and, by extension, the unearned privilege it bestows them. Israel Shamir is the only one I know of that meets the criteria. Notice also how that one line neutralizes their “racism”, “Nazi” and “anti-semitism” attack lines and converts them into verbal weapons for our team, i.e. “racist Jews”, “ZioNazi pigs” and “pro-semitic bigotry”. Three. It dawned on me that if we succeed, our first white student union will be flooded by panicked Jewish applicants out to insure there’s no unsupervised whites organizing and getting ideas - that’s a privilege reserved for them and their tools, not for us morally inferior honkies. The first class/second class dichotomy is the only way I can think of to either get them to back off or to continue the fight inside the student union by creating a second class white caucus within it. If we argue they already have a Jewish student union, they’ll say we should set up a Christian one (we don’t have that either). If we argue they’re not white, we get bogged down in DNA and/or ethnicity arguments that are too complex for students to handle effectively. I think this approach is the only way it’s going to work. We therefore have to be forward about it by plastering the concept on our leaflets from day one. Think of it as a wrestling manouvre. Instead of pushing them away as non-whites, we embrace them and crush them against our chest. 23
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 24 Jul 2006 22:30 | # Once again, Steven Palese: I like the way you think. 24
Posted by near the end on Tue, 01 Aug 2006 15:02 | # As a young white male I must say I am losing faith in our nation and our way of living, I have been struggling with race issues my whole life. However only recently it has become almost unbearable. All around me, my family, friends, people I see and meet in daily life, they all seem like sheep. Castrated, impotent, unable to stand up for their own people. Some of them dont even consider the continued survival of “caucasians”, as a viable option. It simply appears to me that there is a dangerous, (very dangerous)amount of apathy, self hatred, cowardice, and indifferance amoung white people today. White men are taught to be tolerant, respectful, and non-judgemental by a large number of white parents from an early age. Of course this would seem to be the right choice for parents when dealing with teaching their children about race and how to get along with other groups of people. However in my humble opinion this only causes racism in the long run, not only amoung white males, but white females, blacks, latinos, etc. etc. Post a comment:
Next entry: A letter to Steve
|
|
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 Steve Edwards on Thu, 20 Jul 2006 19:48 | #
I had a shot at this myself:
http://ravingwingnut.blogspot.com/2006/07/yet-more-anti-white-racism.html
Say - anyone found out the ethnicities of the judges who decided on this trial?