The Liberals are right - we should abolish race after all

Posted by James Bowery on December 23, 2008, 12:24 AM | #

The problem, of course, is that “universal war” does not care a whit what we may agree to.  Other than true individual sovereignty adopted as the social contract the best we can hope for is to minimize genetic selection by mass warfare—whether we are speaking of “war” in the universal sense or war in the mundane sense.  The only way I can see to do that is to replace the politics of liberal democracy—tyranny of the majority inadequately limited by a vague laundry list of selectively enforced “human rights”—with “voting with your feet”: human ecologies formed by mutually consenting adults via assortative migration and territorial reallocation to maintain sufficient carrying capacity given reasonable agricultural practices within the human ecologies.

Anything else and you may a well forget about humanity because all you will be selecting for are mass organisms that will turn humans into cognitive cogs—ultimately eusocial organisms similar to bees and just as stagnant in evolutionary terms.

Posted by Søren Renner on December 23, 2008, 01:32 AM | #

In this essay Diamed echoes Locke, Genesis (the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah), and lots of other stuff. Go Diamed! Woo hoo!

Posted by Joe on December 23, 2008, 02:08 AM | #

Easy to sell your idea to the whites.

Good luck selling it to anyone else…

I have come to believe the problem is NOT me, but in fact, everyone else indeed.

I was not born ‘racist’. I do not hate all races. I have only been FORCED by the actions of a particular race to hate just it, not the rest, but yet, I am made out to be the evil white man, I am the problem. I think not!

You don’t need genetics to solve Earth’s problems. All you need is a race war, unfortunately, with the only survivors being everyone except africans and arabs, the two unruly problem children of the planet.

Yes, call me what you will, a racist, a sick mind, but luckilly, AFRICANS have tought me first hand this is the only solution.

Posted by Captainchaos on December 23, 2008, 02:34 AM | #

Diamed, this is great stuff.  You speak from the heart and get much of it right.  This is a much better use of a log entry than for the drivel of anti-White scum like G de B (I beseech thee, oh merciful Odin, never let silver get his own log entry).

Posted by Anon on December 23, 2008, 03:20 AM | #

Easy to sell your idea to the whites.

Good luck selling it to anyone else…

If only it were easy to sell to whites, we wouldn’t be where we are today and this website wouldn’t even exist(and I mean that in a good way).  And not to be rude, I could give a shit less whether negroes, orientals, mestizos, jews or whoever buy it.  I don’t care about them.  They have their own lands and that is their problem.  Frankly, I expect those Others to try and do me and mine harm.  But I still can’t get over the fact that many of my own race wants to do me in and will applaud it, much less help(of course the crocodile will eat them last) as I get metaphorically dragged through Mogadishu(and it happens for real too, Lord does it ever).  I have a hard time expressing how fucked up that it is to me.

Posted by Armor on December 23, 2008, 03:45 AM | #

“I still can’t get over the fact that many of my own race wants to do me in” (—Anon)

It seems that some of our leaders have this fantasy of being raped by darkies. But what will happen is that their grand-daughters will really get raped, and they don’t even care about that.

“Go Diamed! Woo hoo!” / “Diamed, this is great stuff.”

I wish I knew what Diamed’s article means exactly.

“Let’s abolish race the only possible way, by rewriting it from the ground up, one SNP at a time, one child at a time.” (—Diamed)

You mean we should forget about the white race and try to create a new species in a laboratory? There’s something I don’t understand here!

Posted by Captainchaos on December 23, 2008, 04:06 AM | #

Armor: “I wish I knew what Diamed’s article means exactly.”

It is the struggle of an intelligent, idealistic man to come to grips with a world that is far too flawed to ever be worthy of his highest aspirations; it is his struggle to make it worthy, without compromising his ideals.  It is his evolution towards maturity. 

“We are White men, the only men worthy of the name.” That was one of the rhetorical lines I used to use at Takimag to seduce/entice the worthy there to come here.

“You mean we should forget about the white race and try to create a new species in a laboratory?”

Let him make the journey.  This guy got skillz, as the brothas be sayin’ un shit.

Posted by Gudmund on December 23, 2008, 04:21 AM | #

It is the struggle of an intelligent, idealistic man to come to grips with a world that is far too flawed to ever be worthy of his highest aspirations; it is his struggle to make it worthy, without compromising his ideals.  It is his evolution towards maturity.

Well said.

“You mean we should forget about the white race and try to create a new species in a laboratory?”

Let him make the journey.  This guy got skillz, as the brothas be sayin’ un shit.

That reminds me of what Diamed said in an earlier thread about reaching the stars.  GW didn’t care for the idea.  But then I think about stuff like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming

Perhaps right there is the meeting between Diamed’s ambitions and EGI.  New homelands away from all of this...not impossible, eh?

Posted by Gudmund on December 23, 2008, 04:27 AM | #

Intrepid spirits are imprinted in our genes.  Why shouldn’t we embrace even the farthest-fetched ideas if there is a chance they could be feasible? 

Europeans have always done great feats just because we could.  Why should we limit our aspirations?

The worst thing we could do is neglect our fiery spirits and not use them to maximum effect.

Posted by Lurker on December 23, 2008, 04:31 AM | #

Terraform Mars, evacuate the European peoples, leave behind those who embrace multiculturalism. That would be humane.

Leave the world to sink back into a pre-modern state or at least an Asian tyranny.

Posted by Gudmund on December 23, 2008, 04:45 AM | #

Terraform Mars, evacuate the European peoples, leave behind those who embrace multiculturalism. That would be humane.

Leave the world to sink back into a pre-modern state or at least an Asian tyranny.

Not a bad idea, was it?

Posted by Lurker on December 23, 2008, 05:37 AM | #

A good idea, yes, I wasnt being sarcastic.

Posted by Captainchaos on December 23, 2008, 05:59 AM | #

I prefer that the exploration and colonization of other worlds complement, and not be a substitute for, the protection of our genetic interests here on earth.  We are evolved for life on earth, our evolved nature is the source from which we derive our values.  To see what we value come to fruition we must act to sustain the conditions that are consistent with our evolved values - the preservation of nature, from which we derive our nature.

Posted by Gudmund on December 23, 2008, 06:12 AM | #

I prefer that the exploration and colonization of other worlds complement, and not be a substitute for, the protection of our genetic interests here on earth.

I wouldn’t have it any other way.

Posted by James Bowery on December 23, 2008, 06:25 AM | #

http://space.mike-combs.com/spacsetl.htm#What_is_space_settlement

Posted by silver on December 23, 2008, 06:32 AM | #

If the environmentalists would just admit the truth, accept the truth, if the nurture crowd would ever stop condemning us and start working with us, we could change the world ... Surely this is better than bayoneting babies? Come on everyone. Let’s make up.

Couldn’t the nurturers/carers/bedwetters demand the same of you?  “Come on Diamed, stop wishing to bayonet every poor, dumb bastard on earth (none of whom asked to be born), stop referring to them as genetic offal and demanding they be treated as such (stop demanding short cuts!) and we’ll work with you.”

The world—“humanity”—is a pretty damn bleak place, made all the bleaker by the deafening roar of lies told about it, and the trends those lies have established.  But that, as they say, is life.  And it isn’t improved one iota by wallowing in misery about how desperate it all is. 

And yet, on a deeper level, reality is actually something of a relief.  As bleak as things are, reality, mercifully, does afford us the opportunity to improve.  It could have been worse.  It could have been that there was no way to improve, that there was no “genetics,” thus no eugenics.  But there is, and thus there is a ray of hope, however faint.  (And, if nothing else, there is always the comfort of sweet death: we won’t be tormented into eternity.)

And that we racists, we whites, are the only people who can ever do anything about it. The truth may be agonizing, disgusting, depressing, and cruel---but the truth will set mankind free.

But it’s precisely because the truth is so agonizing, disgusting, depressing and cruel that we drape our lives with lies, and then exalt the lies.  Truth does offer freedom, but what a bitter pill to swallow! 

I’m one step ahead of you diamed.  You haven’t made it out of the tunnel yet.  I’ve come out.  And there’s calmness here, beauty too.  None of what you say is “wrong.” But getting so worked up about it makes you ineffective.  Me, I know the truth, and I care and don’t care.  I care because what else is there to do but leave behind a better world—a better “humanity”—than the one I knew?  I don’t care because I’ve reached a calmness where it doesn’t matter.  I’m not afraid to die.  I’m not even afraid to be killed.  It’s for others I live now, for the upward path.  For me it’s easy.  It’s for the others for whom it’s not so easy I say what I say and do what I do (and endure the insults of mental midgets).  Anyone who does is so is your friend, whether you know it or not, whether you care for it or not, whether you accept it or not.

Posted by Captainchaos on December 23, 2008, 06:59 AM | #

In the name of Odin, be ye silent, oh greasy wog!  LOL!

Calm down silver, on rare occasions you do give sound advice.

“...and endure the insults of mental midgets...”

Now that is just precious.  Believe it or not, your constant, truculent harangueing for a kinder, gentler WN ("irony"!) is not lost on me, and I suspect others.  It’s just that sometimes you’ve got to get down and roll around in the mud with the cretins (which is what I suspect that you fantasize that you do).  I will confess, I do enjoy scalping douche-bags like G de B, moralistic half-wits like Ivan at Takimag and of course deluded, hysterical wenches like Mizz Wenchstine. 

And then there is the special case of you, silver, everyone’s favorite wog.  If you want respect you’ve got to give it; doesn’t work any other way.  Stop, always, trying to be such a greasy little sneak.  Do you honestly think anyone is dumb enough to fall for it (and if they are we don’t need them)?  I for one, believe your heart is in the right place and consider you a worthy adversary, which inspires in me a grudging respect and affection.  Put down your greasy wog sword, brother.  No hard feeling on my part, seriously.

Posted by cladrastis on December 23, 2008, 07:13 AM | #

Couldn’t the nurturers/carers/bedwetters demand the same of you?

The nurturers/carers/bedwetters are not WILLING to compromise (because they’re in POWER).  They believe humanity’s immiseration can be ameliorated ONLY by improving his material conditions and are not NOT open to or interested in the idea of improving man’s genetic programming to effect the same goal.  I don’t deny the necessity of a proper environment for cultivating human genius, nor do I deny the necessity of eugenics for accomplishing the same objective.  Any rational person is willing to meet in the middle.  THEY aren’t. 

Enlighten me silver: what’s on the other side of the tunnel?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 23, 2008, 12:13 PM | #

“I’m not afraid to die.  I’m not even afraid to be killed.  It’s for others I live now, for the upward path.  For me it’s easy.” (—Silver)

Can we get some appropriate violin music going for that?

Posted by J Richards on December 23, 2008, 01:43 PM | #

Damn, Diamed is damning us!

There’s plenty of room for condemning evil in this world, without having to go around looking for categorical foes who we can smash with unrelenting fury, all the way down to the infants in their cradles.

Correct, but the reference standard by which all evil is judged is the behavior of the categorical foe indulging in the lowliest crimes, e.g., assassinating Rafiq Hariri, making it look like the work of the Syrians; then getting the Syrians removed from Lebanon; then sending troops into Lebanon, leading to the capture of 2 of their soldiers; then using it as a pretext to shell Lebanon with advanced weaponry obtained from the U.S., indiscriminately killing women and children, while blocking foreign aid to the bombed areas; killing U.N. observers in the area; getting almost all U.S. lawmakers to sign a resolution supporting this mass murder and wanton destruction; and shelling Lebanon with millions of cluster bombs just before a ceasefire in order to continue killing the Lebanese well after the bombing is over.

How can you condemn evil without most strongly condemning the supremely evil categorical foe? 

However if we spare an entire city of evil-doers because ten innocent nice infants are crawling around in it, it is our innocents, our good people, our women and children who are ravished and pursued with unrelenting fury.

In a situation like this, negotiation works best.  Give the city of evil-doers the option of destruction or handing over the ten infants and living in their filth, cordoned off from the good people.  The evil-doers will hand over the innocents.  There’ll be no need for collateral damage.

In a struggle for survival that has reached the highest pitch, we don’t have the luxury to sort out the good from the bad.

Survival is not under threat for whites as a racial group; notwithstanding pockets such as south Africa where whites live at risk of extermination, or even large scale Third World immigration; but quality of life certainly is, and quality can’t be maintained unless one sorts the good from the bad.

Am I glad that I can smash infants in cradles and still be moral? That I could bayonet a pregnant woman and still be moral? I’m not glad about it. And yet there it is.

You can’t be moral while indulging in either act.  But you can justify the act by showing that acting otherwise would be more immoral.  In other words, your act is immoral but justified in the sense that you prevented greater immorality.  The crux is the justification and there can be no generic way to go about it.  Any such justification must be tailored to the specific circumstances.

Life must come first, justice later.

Life is not worth living without justice.  When it comes to bare-bones survival, justice is a distant consideration, but the situation is nowhere so dire for most white populations and won’t be such in the foreseeable future.  If the situation becomes extremely dire or approaches it, no one needs to be told what to do; survival instinct will take over. 

That a greater IQ gap exists between me and africans than africans and dogs?

Rubbish!  You could teach high school level writing and high school math to some black Africans but to no dog.

Am I glad whites are the best at everything and no one equals us,

You mean best at avoiding sunburns, quickest at the 100m sprint and having the highest average IQ?

am I glad the rest of the world is largely a sanctum for the BEAST, a ravening satanic force that unmakes everything it touches and specializes in every living being carrying as much suffering, starvation, disease, stupidity, cruelty, hopelessness and helplessness as it can?

Ever heard of the Japanese?  Even the land of the cognitive elites is capable of producing something like the Buddha.

I’m not happy that nature has dropped the ball and populated the earth with mostly primitive savages and that there is nothing I can do to make them smarter or better (once they are born) because it’s all genetic.

Why do you let the savages bother you?  The savages will do what comes naturally to them, and as long as they do it in their homelands, why should you be bothered or try to make them smarter and better since you seem to have no problems with mass sterilizing or mass killing the savages?  Let the savages be savages in their homelands.  What’s the point of being a savage if one can’t act like one?

It’s outrageous that genocide is all that’s left to us. That killing babies is the right decision. That sterilizing billions of women is the best step for the happiness of the world.

Only in your paranoid, sick, demented view, or are you an agent provocateur?  Say, if most of the world comprises of savages with all sorts of vices, by your own acknowledgment, then how can you be talking about the happiness of the world?  Your comment would only make sense if you were talking about the very small minority that is supposedly besieged by the mass of savages.

Here are the facts. Only a few men have lived truly ideal lives. These people have met every expectation of virtue, been happy their whole lives, accomplished something incredible that will have an enduring, wondrous impact on the world, and transcended all limits that tried to baulk them. Another, still small segment has lived relatively good lives, been somewhat happy, accomplished something worthwhile that meant something to at least somebody. Everyone else is a net negative. They should never have been born. For their sake, and ours, it would have been better.

Where do diamonds naturally emerge from?  Coal.  There’s a lot of coal and very little of natural diamonds.  This is the way it is.  Much as you would only see diamonds but no coal, without coal there’d be no natural diamonds.

There is no God, but there’s a lot of evidence for Satan.

Your viewpoint.  I’ll tell you mine.  There’s a God and there’s lots of evidence for satanic Jews creating Hell on earth.

If a black and a white mixed together produced a high elf, I’d bless the couple and ask for pictures.

Not me.  I’d prefer ‘inferior whites’ to ‘superior white-black mixes.’

The only way anything can improve, is for us to correctly diagnose what is wrong in the first place. Genetics are the source of all our woes, so genetics must be the path out of them

I’ll give you the diagnosis.  It’s not genetics per se because a few genetic combinations produce the men you admire, but the problem is with some genetic architectures, mostly found among Jews.

If there were a way to give every baby the list of goods I mentioned above, I’d want to give it to them, whether they’re black, yellow, red or brown.

Why is my lie meter registering a 9.0?

With eugenics and genetic engineering, we could make every race better. We could abolish race entirely and make ourselves into an entirely new species, we could be equal, we could be good, we could be loving, compassionate, peaceful, empathetic, anything they wanted.

Dream on, if it’s a dream.  Setting aside the engineering or technological challenges, your utopia is no more possible than it’s for someone to simultaneously excel at professional level sumo wrestling and as a professional jockey.  There are many analogous scenarios within the realm of physiology or cell functioning.  An advantage in one realm sometimes may only come with a disadvantage in another realm.  Plenty of biologically problematic conditions are extremes of natural variation, and you can’t eliminate the problematic extremes without eliminating natural variation and thereby the organism unless you have the technology to design every individual from scratch, which, if ever possible, is generations away, but this won’t be possible because fine manipulation of very complex molecular structures requires molecular machinery that is unaffected by molecule-molecule interactions, something only possible in fantasy.

And that we racists, we whites, are the only people who can ever do anything about it. The truth may be agonizing, disgusting, depressing, and cruel---but the truth will set mankind free.

And what does this mankind comprise of?  Not the hundreds of millions or even billions you would have sterilized or even killed.

After we’ve discovered what evolution wants, what our instincts are asking for

Evolution doesn’t want anything.  It just is.

there is still one more question, and that is, should we continue playing by someone else’s rules? Or should we take matters into our own hands?

Playing by someone else’s rules?  But who are the people setting the rules?  You’ve flagged the environmentalists or the nurture crowd, no different from someone blaming the Illuminati or the military-industrial complex.  Give us names.

I can give you some names.

Dwight Eisenhower (morally bankrupt general; killed a million-plus German POWs)
Elie Wiesel (Master Holohoaxer)
Ben Shalom Bernanke (Swindling chief of the privately-held Federal Reserve)
Sam Zell (Swindler who bought - not with his own money - and bankrupted The Tribune)
Murray Rothstein (Sumner Redstone; media mogul spitting out lies about current affairs and misleading the public)
Abraham Foxman (obnoxious chief of the ADL, the principal organization behind hate speech laws and gun grab legislation)

The one thing common to these individuals and many others like them, especially the ones in control of the media, banking and government, is not that they’re environmentalists or nurturers but that they’re Jews.  There were lots of environmentalists in Australia in the 1950s but it was an overwhelmingly white nation, with a white immigration policy.  Who pushed for change and succeeded?  The Jews.

Before one seeks a solution, one must understand the problem correctly.  You have either not understood the problem or are attempting to provoke and mislead.  And your solution, genetic engineering, is something that I’m positive you are incapable of making any contributions to.  MR is not a hangout for biologists.  You should take your ideas to groups dabbling in the biological sciences.  And please don’t repeat your views about the necessity of mass sterilization and genocide; such views belong at Jewish forums.

Posted by Diamed on December 23, 2008, 06:26 PM | #

I don’t think you correctly interpreted what I wrote.  For instance, by environmentalist, I mean someone who believes the environment, not your genes, determines your personality, behavior, IQ, success, etc.  Another time you seem to not get what I’m saying, the IQ gap between africans and dogs really is smaller than between me and them.  It’s true that these africans can be taught to perform basic human actions, but that is so distant from the level of reasoning geniuses reach that it is just as impressive as a dog being taught tricks.

Another misinterpretation.  I didn’t say sterlizing women is a good idea, I said there has to be a better way than the false either-or we were being given by others.  That there are many options and sterilizing billions of women is not fair to us or them, but so long as they resist all the humane measures, inevitably a race war which will exterminate them or us is all that’s left.  In that case, I want it to be them.

I’m the last person on earth who would condemn the japanese.  As far as I can tell they’re the best people on earth, certainly the happiest and best run country on earth.

And so on.  Basically, don’t jump to so many conclusions.  You’re reading stuff into my article I never said.  Topping it off with claims I’m flat-out lying also shows you don’t get me at all.  Well, maybe the article just wasn’t for you.  I hope others can find a bit more to think about and chew on for a while.

Posted by Proofreader on December 23, 2008, 07:28 PM | #

Richards, can you point to a source proving Dwight Eisenhower was Jewish? I’ve heard a lot of things about his background, but this is a first for me. Thanks.

Posted by Captainchaos on December 23, 2008, 07:39 PM | #

Diamed: “That there are many options and sterilizing billions of women is not fair to us or them, but so long as they resist all the humane measures, inevitably a race war which will exterminate them or us is all that’s left.”

It is not a matter of them resisting our efforts to improve them, it is that we are being swamped by them because the gates of our citadels have been cast open by traitorous elements (Jews and race traitors) attached to the body of our people.  It is not too little altruism on the part of the White man -with the savages brutishly resisting our most persistent and noble efforts - it is too much altruism.  Billions of the teeming third-world hordes would not exist but for the bounteous carrying capacity created by the White man.  We do not owe them a living, or in fact life, but we must not descend to the level of rank savagery by implementing a positive program of extermination.  What we will do is stop artificially inflating their numbers, we will stop feeding them.  They are entitled to the level of sustenance they are capable of providing for themselves, that is what they will have.

What we will do is protect the natural treasures of this world from any despoilment the teeming hordes may affect.  We will be like guards protecting the bank from robbers: we don’t need to hunt down the robbers, where ever they are, and dispatch them.  The manliness of the White man, when properly asserted, is more than sufficient to bear the burden without over exertion.  Our task is to reassert the manliness of the White man, to see to it that the White man will yet live, unmongrelized, so that he can reassume his rightful role as steward of this earth.

Posted by Captainchaos on December 23, 2008, 07:59 PM | #

Proofreader: “Richards, can you point to a source proving Dwight Eisenhower was Jewish?”

I’m still waiting for some verification of the claim that the Jews placed the remains of the Lindbergh baby along with those of the Elephant Man; oh wait, that was my claim, never mind. 

In lieu of evidence I offer you this: Only The Jew Could Fool You, To Believe, That The Bones Of The Lindbergh Babe Did Not Cleave, To The Elephant Man, Whose Name Was Merrick, Who Had To Have A Jacket Tailored, So He Could Wear It.

No offence, Richards.  Just having a little fun busting your balls.  Cheers.

Posted by Desmond Jones on December 23, 2008, 09:14 PM | #

It is not too little altruism on the part of the White man -with the savages brutishly resisting our most persistent and noble efforts - it is too much altruism. Billions of the teeming third-world hordes would not exist but for the bounteous carrying capacity created by the White man.  We do not owe them a living, or in fact life, but we must not descend to the level of rank savagery by implementing a positive program of extermination.

How does civilized man limit the evolved trait of altruism?

The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil.

Charles Darwin (1871) The Descent of Man, 1st edition, pages 168 -169

Posted by Captainchaos on December 23, 2008, 10:02 PM | #

Desmond Jones: “How does civilized man limit the evolved trait of altruism?”

Aren’t you the guy who sticks up for the Nazis ("KMAC portrays it as heroic!")?

I guess the most straight forward way would be systematic discipline imposed on the lemmings via the will of psychologically sterner men.  If sufficiently muscular, would it or would it not work?  Of course it would.  What is needed is to reassert the tribally oriented manliness of the White man; is that not needed in your opinion? 

What do you suggest?  Rehashing Classical Liberalism?  LOL!  Been there, done that, it didn’t work.  I know, I know, it worked well until those darn Jews wormed their way in and screwed it all up.  But they did worm their way in, didn’t they?  Is there some re-tooled version of Classical Liberalism you can show me that will safeguard against the dreaded nematodes?  If not, I guess it’s a heavier model we will need, that is if we are serious about saving our race.

Posted by Captainchaos on December 23, 2008, 10:16 PM | #

Richard Spencer (Gottfried’s hand puppet) says at Takimag:

“Taki has decided to suspend indefinitely all commenting at Takimag. I’d like to thank those who’ve offered up thoughtful responses to our articles in the past.”

http://www.takimag.com/sniperstower/article/no_comment/

Gosh, it looks like my one man war on the faileocons has really yielded some results.  I hope this drives their site’s number of readers into the ground.  Faileoconservatism is a false opposition that drains off real struggle for our people into impotence.  Death to faileoconservatism!

Posted by Captainchaos on December 23, 2008, 11:22 PM | #

And now Gottfried’s hand puppet Spencer gives us this:

“Dylan Hales, who’s attempting an interesting Left-Conservative-synthesis thingamajig at his blog, has a long response up on the anti-Paul articles at Reason. Of note is Hales discussion of Murray Rothbard’s oft-misunderstood and oft-misquoted writings on the David Duke gubernatorial run in ‘91. Rotherbard was struck by the fact the Louisianans voting for Duke weren’t voting for Holocaust revisionism, or Klu Kluxism, or racism, or anti-Semitism etc. They were voting to slash taxes and government, end affirmative action, cut down on immigration etc. Rothbard’s point was that libertarians could capture this spirit and begin to refocus it through new leaders (who weren’t, you know, actually Holocaust revisionists and anti-Semites.) This kind of populist strategy is, of course, totally unthinkable for your average Reasonoid.”

http://www.takimag.com/sniperstower/article/the_left_conservative_on_the_left_libertarians/

No wonder they decided to suspend commenting, they want to suppress and defame explicit racialism.  FUCK YOU SPENCER!  Again: Faileoconservatism is a false opposition that drains off real struggle for our people into impotence.  Death to faileoconservatism!

Posted by J Richards on December 23, 2008, 11:46 PM | #

The Jewishness of Dwight Eisenhower

Here is an excerpt from the West Point Yearbook featuring Dwight.

In case one is wondering about the odd looks, his ancestry seemingly included Swedish.  But as is typical of white--non-white mixes, Dwight Eisenhower took more after the Jewish side, and was indistinguishable from the typical Jew in moral development or, rather, the near-lack of it.

Eisenhower is a derivative of the Jewish name Eisenhauer.

Gerald K. Smith of the America First Party even tried to warn the public about Eisenhower’s Jewish roots, and his strong Jewish backing.

Posted by Sacharite on December 24, 2008, 12:10 AM | #

So goes the saying Jews look Jewier with age… one could say the same about Sarkozy, who like Ike passed for a handsome Aryan lad. And now, an unmistakeable (and particularly evil-looking) Jewish mug:

Posted by Sacharite on December 24, 2008, 12:36 AM | #

Here’s John Key, the newly installed half-Jewish (mother’s side) New Zealand Prime Minister. Key is another Sarko clone, a total puppet of Washington D.C.

He’s rather Jewish-looking, but those features aren’t dominant at 47 years of age. (What seems to happen is the skin sags into the unheroic Jewish bone structure as muscle tone disappears, making that ‘Jewier’ look. In contrast, Europeans tend have broad, smooth features that may wrinkle with distinction.)

Posted by J Richards on December 24, 2008, 01:04 AM | #

The Lindbergh baby case

A brief examination of the events will show Jewish hands all over the kidnapping. 

Charles Lindbergh’s father (Lindbergh Sr.) had long opposed Jewish criminality: he was vehemently opposed to the Federal Reserve Act, demanded an investigation of the sinking of the ship Lusitania (a Jewish false flag), blamed Jews for drawing America into WWI, etc.  Jew stooge Woodrow Wilson had the print run of his book on WWI confiscated and destroyed.

Charles Lindbergh Jr. was following in his father’s footsteps, and with the backing of Henry Ford, could easily have become President of the U.S, which would mean no World War II.  Shortly after Lindbergh’s baby was kidnapped, Congresswoman Ruth Pratt asked Lindbergh to get in touch with gangster Morris Rosner, and Rosner appointed two gangsters, Irving Bitz and S. Spitale, to act as liaisons to the underworld.

Ransom was paid but eventually, a decomposed baby was found and said to be Lindbergh’s baby.  A Bruno Hauptmann was implicated.  Hauptmann had no connection to Lindbergh and no motivation whatsoever to kidnap Lindbergh’s baby.  Hauptmann just had the bad luck to hold something that his ‘friend’ Isadore Fisch asked him to, which was the ransom money.  Hauptmann’s defense lawyer was paid for by the Jew-owned New York Evening Journal, and he naturally did a lame job of defending Hauptmann.  The prosecuting attorney was David Wilentz.  Hauptmann’s trial was a farce; he was convicted and executed.  I bolded the Jews’ last names, and it’s obvious that this was - to borrow Alex Linder’s phrase - yet another instance of Jews Jewing Jewily.

The question is about the true fate of the baby.  There was no proper forensic investigation of the baby remains alleged to be Lindbergh’s, and the remains were quickly cremated. The Jews could have kept the baby alive to keep Lindbergh on a leash.

Posted by Dave Johns on December 24, 2008, 02:01 AM | #

Sacharite,

Please spare us your duplicitous stupidity.

Posted by Sacharite on December 24, 2008, 02:37 AM | #

Have an argument, “Dave Johns”? Otherwise, STFU. (And NO, I am not “silver”.)

Posted by Sacharite on December 24, 2008, 02:41 AM | #

Btw, I came to post this article by David Aaronovitch. Couldn’t believe my eyes when I saw it. One would think Jews would try to be a bit more subtle with the internet reporting on their every move and all…


Barack Obama has identified himself as a ‘mutt’. We, too, should acknowledge our fastest-growing ethnic minority

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/david_aaronovitch/article5126706.ece

Posted by n/a on December 24, 2008, 02:49 AM | #

“Swedish-Jew” is obviously a joke. Eisenhower has no known Jewish ancestry, nor does he look like a Jew.

Posted by Dave Johns on December 24, 2008, 02:52 AM | #

And NO, I am not “silver”.

HUH? Where the f**k did THAT come from???...... Oh, I get it. You forgot to take your meds.

Posted by J Richards on December 24, 2008, 03:49 AM | #

n/a,

Swedish-Jew is not a joke.  His father was a Swedish Jew.  Not looking like a Jew is a non-argument.  An important factor behind Jewish success is the ability of the Jews to infiltrate (as cryptos) gentile societies from the Middle East to European nations.  If all Jews had a Jewish look to them, how would this be possible?  You’ll always find some Jews who could phenotypically fit in a white or Middle Eastern population.  It’s only when you look at the aggregate do the Jews stand apart and we can talk about Jewish features in terms of a higher frequency of some shapes or a general shift toward some shapes.

Posted by Dave Johns on December 24, 2008, 04:01 AM | #

Eisenhower was not genetically a Jew. Get over it!!!

Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 24, 2008, 02:21 PM | #

I haven’t 1) the stomach to read David Aronowitz‘s pro-miscegenation column linked above by Sacharite or 2) the need, the reason I lack both being I know beforehand what that column is:  a Jewish orgasm at the prospect of the elimination of all Euros from the Earth through Negro-Euro miscegenation, Euro erasure having been for two-millennia-and-counting the chief Jewish preoccupation after crass materialism and just plain obsessive-compulsive lucre-worship.  Jews don’t usually go around publicly acknowledging this aim (either aim, actually, but the latter would be as easy for them to hide as it would be for, say, President Bush to hide that he’s a dead ringer for a chimpanzee or the Alfred E. Newman character in Mad Magazine):  they treat it the way the French Army officer corps from 1870 to 1918 treated the national humiliation of the loss of Alsace-Lorraine and their desire to get it back:  “Speak of it never, think of it always.” When Jews like Alon Ziv and David Aronowitz spill the beans, other Jews peer petrified at the goys through the slightly parted middle and ring fingers of both hands covering their eyes to see if all hell will break loose but all hell never does, only bovine cluelessness, so the Jews get bolder and bolder.  I don’t have to read this latest instance of that, so I’ll skip it.

Posted by Proofreader on December 24, 2008, 02:26 PM | #

Richards, I too believe the West point yearbook piece was to be taken in jest. There were rumours though that Ike’s mother, Ida Stover, was part-black.

http://blacksuperwomen.com/tag/ida-elizabeth-stover-eisenhower/

Here’s another picture:

http://www.eisenhowermemorial.org/stories/WW2-0028.jpg

Posted by Svigor on December 24, 2008, 02:46 PM | #

How does civilized man limit the evolved trait of altruism?
By overriding it with general intelligence.  “Altruism” is only run amok because hostiles set it loose.  “Altruism” isn’t our problem, our problem is we’re getting our asses kicked in the game that counts.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 24, 2008, 03:05 PM | #

“Altruism” is only run amok because hostiles set it loose.

That’s exactly right, incidentally, at least as concerns Saul Alinsky, one of European Man’s worst Jewish enemies ever, who wrote that the other side (Jews and those allies they ring-led, in other words) (no, not “liberalism” and not any other vague miasma) needed to, among other strategies, use Euros’ Christianity against them by demanding that they adhere to certain Christian principles of altruism to the letter, principles that are impossible to adhere to “to the letter” and still have a nation (or race) left.  The Vatican and the Prod chief priests could easily counter this Jewish attack-strategy by applying the exact same reasoning that excuses Christians from applying those same Christian principles of altruism “to the letter” in an endorsement of communism:  Christians are allowed under Christianity to hold and keep their private property and likewise to hold and keep their race and nation.  They could have reassured their Euro flocks with that sort of elementary analagous reasoning.  But they didn’t, and as a result the Jews are winning the most deadly game Euros have found themselves playing in the past ten thousand years.

Posted by Svigor on December 24, 2008, 03:48 PM | #

James, interesting space link, but I’m curious - do you think anything short of strapping engines on the back will be sufficient?

I can’t think of anything that would propel Jews into space faster than the knowledge that there were Judenrein space stations out there, somewhere.

Posted by Fr. John on December 24, 2008, 04:11 PM | #

“There is no God, but there’s a lot of evidence for Satan. There is no heaven but a lot of evidence for the fact we’re already living in Hell.... There are no guardian angels but you can bet the entire world is a giant conspiracy of false history, false morality, and false reality making sure it will use and abuse you your whole life without you ever finding out about it.”

At this time of year, to read this column, and to see these lines above, makes me realize how hopeless Man is, without God.  and how like the Talmuddied ‘secular worldview’ this sounds. Which is no surprise, for atheism and talmudism are joined at the hip. Who else tried to ‘kill God’? Why are they called, the Deicides (Christkillers) if not for that ‘uncomfortable truth’?

Of course there is a God!  What utter rubbish, to say that ‘god’ does not exist, but ‘satan’ does!!!
God created the Angels, and it was only Lucifer’s conscious, wilfull rebellion that made him what he is. God merely allowed him to become ‘epistemologically self-consistent.’

And, since YHWH God created the Angels, then Adamic Man (the White Race- far too complex to go into, but trust me, there seems to be far more believability in that premise, than that the Khazars are the ‘chosen people’!) has Guardian Angels, who watch over us, and protect us, but only if we are willing to keep away from sin, and invoke their aid in our moral decisions.

Am I glad that Whites have clearly shown their prowess as a ‘superior life form’ on this planet? Well, if that is God’s desire (which it seems to be), then, OK. What else do the verses in Holy Writ allude to, when St. Paul says, “Who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, why has thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, over the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? [Rom. 9:20-1]

I cannot speak as a black man, or a chinaman, or an Amerindian, and FRANKLY, nor do I want to. I feel no need to indulge in any sort of fantasy about ‘oppressed peoples’ if YHWH God sovereignly deigns to create them ‘for us, and for our posterity’, especially when we see the lengths of EVIL to which ‘they’ stoop when they presume to assume the reins of power. Doubt me? Just go over to http://www.the politicalcesspool.org, and type in Obama, Affirmative Action, Diversity is our greatest stregth, etc.)

To paraphrase the old Jewish prayer, “Lord, I thank Thee that I am not......” (fill in the blanks)

And, instead of whining about what they are not, (which is the gist of this whole article) why not accept what God has made YOU? An intelectually and morally endowed White Man. And then, GO FROM THERE!?

One of the symptoms that we clearly have ‘erred and strayed from thy ways like lost sheep,’ is in this exchange:

‘That a greater IQ gap exists between me and africans than africans and dogs?

Rubbish!  You could teach high school level writing and high school math to some black Africans but to no dog.”

I would ask, WHY TEACH THEM? If they are nothing more than beasts, (that moniker is self-attesting, just by looking at behavior in US crime stats/black on white crime, Katrina, OJ, Obamania, Mugabe, South Africa, and even Greece’s recent riots, as this forum has clearly made to show it is NOT the ‘native Hellenes’ that are back of them) then why ASSUME (making an ‘ass’ out of ‘u’ and ‘me’) that we either a) should or b) HAVE TO educate savages? As G.B. Shaw so aptly put it, “The conversion of a savage to Christianity is the conversion of Christianity to savagery.”

A slave class does not DESERVE to be raised to the level of a patrician class. This was known in Ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, and any other civilization one cares to mention. Did the HEbrews in teh OT teach their slaves to read? I sincerely doubt it.... just as they did not include them in their cult’s rituals, all in order to keep their CULT-ure PURE.

I know this flies in the face of all those who have substituted egalitarianism, altruism, multiculturalism, niggerism, and homosexism in place of Biblical religion, but the focus and locus of TRUE Christianity is derived from the OT Hebraic Religion, which was a)Patriarchal, b) monotheistic, c) familial/racial/clannish and d) exclusionary to the max!

I am through with pretending that Universalism is the Christian Gospel. IT isn’t and it never was.
CHristianity is the White Man’s Religion, end of story. As Belloc noted, ‘Europe is the Faith; the Faith, Europe.”

And in light of that, and the time of year, I would attest with the hymn writer, “veiled in flesh, the Godhead see, Hail the Incarnate Deity, Pleased as Man with men to dwell, Jesus, OUR Emmanuel.’

OURS, and no others. We are the Israel of God [Gal. 6:16] We are the “Chosen People”, We are the Heirs of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob. And no hook-nosed people from a ‘sh*tty little country’ or ‘Benedict Arnold’ so-called ‘pope’ can keep us from ‘ruling the gentiles.’

Amen.

Posted by Donald Miller on December 24, 2008, 07:14 PM | #

Friar John said something quite remarkable just above. “I am through pretending that Universalism is the Christian Gospel.  It isn’t and it never was.”

This is a shock to me because I have never agreed with him before, but he has put his finger directly on the root cause of excessive altruism, misplaced compassion, hateful self-abnegation, thoughtless retreat, and fraudulent egalitarianism.

Down with universalism!  Mock it.  Make jokes about it.  Denounce it.  Identify it whenever you see it in any formulation.  Unwind its deceptive tendrils from our ideas, goals, and purposes.  It is a great curse.  And deleveraging it can return us to some kind of sanity.

Posted by Gudmund on December 24, 2008, 10:37 PM | #

Down with universalism!  Mock it.  Make jokes about it.  Denounce it.  Identify it whenever you see it in any formulation.  Unwind its deceptive tendrils from our ideas, goals, and purposes.  It is a great curse.  And deleveraging it can return us to some kind of sanity.

Right on.  Universalism is the product of this generation’s version of liberalism.  It is the naive, quixotic desire to escape from reality more than it is a legitimate form of thought.  It is illusory, reason-denying, logic and fact-ignoring, ivory-tower nonsense.  And it is poison to our race. 

Just thought it merited saying again.

Posted by Gudmund on December 24, 2008, 10:43 PM | #

Addendum:

‘Liberalism’ is skillfully used to manipulate young, idealistic whites into working against their EGI.  It is an ingenious tactic that our enemies use as a Trojan Horse.  In college, I recall women were especially caught into the bleeding heart nonsense.  But actually the most sanctimonious and holier-than-thou white liberals there were men.

Ladies and gentlemen, why should I give a fuck about the genocide in Darfour when my own people are being done in and nary a protest is raised (except at sites like this!)?

Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 25, 2008, 02:13 AM | #

As Belloc noted, ‘Europe is the Faith; the Faith, Europe.”

I’m having a problem reconciling Europe with Xtianity’s geographical origins.  Please help.  My intelligence is sub-MR.  Thanks.

Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 25, 2008, 02:29 AM | #

Friar John said something ...

Yeah, I do that too.  Probably because my iq and education are sub-MR.  Too many Robin Hood stories as a youngster - wink, wink.  Fr. John would probably prefer ‘Father’ to ‘Friar.’

Posted by Gudmund on December 25, 2008, 03:35 PM | #

I’m having a problem reconciling Europe with Xtianity’s geographical origins.

Judaeo-Christianity-Islam.

Three weeds from the same root.

I’m something of a neo-pagan myself.

Posted by Aryaman on December 25, 2008, 06:48 PM | #

What utter rubbish!

‘Our task is to reassert the manliness of the White man, to see to it that the White man will yet live, unmongrelized, so that he can reassume his rightful role as steward of this earth.’ (Cap’nchaos)

Thats like me saying ‘The Sanatana Dharma is the only truth there is’. Clearly, the descendants of the monotheistic faiths, like you, shall never cease to covet the entire earth.

Defending one’s right to exist in one’s homeland is one thing, maligning every other person and going to the extent of advocating your superiority over his is another. It just shows your insecurity. I never had any designs on your land or people. It was the ‘white man’ who came to mine, looted it for two centuries, partitioned it and reduced my people to paupers. And now, as we struggle to climb back up we are laughed at as ‘inferior’! Even a retard can see the flaw in the reasoning.

Posted by Svigor on December 25, 2008, 06:57 PM | #

Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 25, 2008, 02:13 AM | #

As Belloc noted, ‘Europe is the Faith; the Faith, Europe.”

I’m having a problem reconciling Europe with Xtianity’s geographical origins.  Please help.  My intelligence is sub-MR.  Thanks.

Can’t help you there.  I had problems with my faith long before my political awakening; my senses told me a grand design was not how the universe worked.  A big machine, where you want to keep your hands and clothing well away from the gears, seemed far more resonant.  One cannot make himself believe.

The geographic and demographic origins are a really big nail in the coffin, though.

On the other hand, my political awakening has caused me to divorce from anti-Christian thought, which has those same geographic and demographic origins.  If Jews hate it that much, it can’t be all bad.  And Christianity is OBVIOUSLY a strong bulwark against Jewish/globalist machinations.

So I guess I’m a “cultural Christian” now, or a “secular Christian,” the same way most Jews are secular, or “culturally” Jewish.

Change a couple of pronouns.  Worship your ancestors or something - no need to bulldoze all those beautiful old churches.

Posted by Donald Miller on December 25, 2008, 08:06 PM | #

Christianity has something for everyone (except universalism).  Consider the man called Doubting Thomas.  His day is celebrated on December 21 and he was a skeptic who, it is claimed, wanted to insert his hand into the side of Jesus where the Roman spear penetrated after the resurrection.  Thomas met the risen Christ, inserted his hand (see picture below), and was rewarded with a strong rebuke by Jesus for lack of faith.

But I like to think of him as Thomas the Skeptic, sort of the man from Missouri.

Very interesting story, unknown to most people.

http://www.artcyclopedia.com/artists/detail/Detail_caravaggio.html

http://www.germanculture.com.ua/library/weekly/aa120100h.htm

Posted by Captainchaos on December 25, 2008, 08:44 PM | #

Aryaman: “What utter rubbish!”

Calm down, Man of Arya, you do realize you’re addressing a White man, don’t you?  Show proper respect.  LOL!

“Thats like me saying ‘The Sanatana Dharma is the only truth there is’.”

The truth is: there are certain conditions that are necessary to “secure the existence of our people and a future for White children.”

“Clearly, the descendants of the monotheistic faiths, like you, shall never cease to covet the entire earth.”

Calm down.  India is not very high on my list of priorities.  Here is what is: reclaiming North America, Europe, Russian Siberia, New Zealand, Australia and southern Africa for the White Race; outlawing miscegenation; re-structuring the economy and the social order to increase White, non-mongrel birth rates to the greatest degree within reason; repatriating tens of millions of non-Whites to their ancestral homelands; re-asserting the influence of the White Race in, primarily, South America and Africa to combat environmental despoilment (and other places if necessary); indoctrinating and training White men to prepare them for the awesome task of the salvation of this earth.

“Defending one’s right to exist in one’s homeland is one thing,”

We will take all of the above that I mentioned back, no apologies, no negotiation: we will fight to the last man, to the bone: victory or death!

“...maligning every other person and going to the extent of advocating your superiority over his is another.”

From the perspective of civilization building capacity the White Race is objectively superior.  Check out Charles Murray’s book Human Accomplishment if you are interested in the truth.  It isn’t my fault, I am not the author of nature.  Human beings evolved under different selective pressures in distinctive climates/geographic locations for tens of thousands of years: those are the results.  Don’t come crying to me about it.

“It just shows your insecurity.”

LOL!

“I never had any designs on your land or people.”

Tell that to race-replacement advocating scum like Dinesh D’Souza and Ramesh Ponnuru who are in league with the neocon Jews.  BTW, D’Souza is a miscegenator who is married to a White woman: he is, therefore, guilty of committing genocide against the White Race.

“It was the ‘white man’ who came to mine, looted it for two centuries, partitioned it and reduced my people to paupers.”

LOL!  The British invested untold wealth and effort into building your country from a turd-world sinkhole into something that can be -if you put on your rose-tinted glasses and squint - called a society limping towards respectability.  When the British left you guys went nuts and started killing each other.  But that is not all, now you are following the British back, as well as swamping America, with your rabble.  We will not stand for it.  Your countrymen will be coming back to stay with you, greet them warmly.

“Even a retard can see the flaw in the reasoning.”

It’s a retard that thinks there are flaws in my reasoning (hint: look in the mirror).

Posted by Diamed on December 25, 2008, 10:09 PM | #

It’s hilarious how much venom third worlders have for whites and how they first seek to dehumanize us so that the next step of exterminating us (through their favored methods of miscegenation and immigration) is justified as ‘justice’ and ‘revenge’ and ‘karma.’ It’s all a lie however.  Everywhere white people went, the native populations of third worlders increased, they didn’t decrease.  Even in North and South America.  They have zero complaints against us, we have been nothing but a blessing to the whole world.  It doesn’t matter, they aren’t concerned with history.  They are just looking for excuses to kill us, rape us, steal from us, and not feel guilty when they go to bed.

Typical non-white behavior.  As far as I’m concerned, anyone who misrepresents history in order to demonize whites is guilty of ‘incitement to hatred and genocide’ of whites and should be hauled up for ‘hate speech’ crimes.  Since they are actually slandering us, while we are only telling the truth, it would be much fairer if these jews and their third world speech organs were all hauled up before our courts and tried for what they said.  Boy it would be nice if we were writing the laws once more, and retroactively--I have so many people that need a good trial in mind.

Posted by Captainchaos on December 25, 2008, 10:45 PM | #

Diamed: “It doesn’t matter, they aren’t concerned with history.  They are just looking for excuses to kill us, rape us, steal from us, and not feel guilty when they go to bed.”

“It was even as the day thus began to turn against Gondor and their hope wavered that a new cry went up in the City.... In that clear air watchmen on the walls saw afar a new sight of fear, and their last hope left them.

For Anduin, from the bend at the Harlond, so flowed that from the City men could look down it lengthwise for some leagues, and the far-sighted could see any ships that approached. And looking thither they cried in dismay; for black against the glittering stream they beheld a fleet borne up on the wind: dromunds, and ships of great draught with many oars, and with black sails bellying in the breeze.

‘The Corsairs of Umbar!’ men shouted. ‘The Corsairs of Umbar! Look! The Corsairs of Umbar are coming! So Belfalas is taken, and the Ethir, and Lebennin is gone. The Corsairs are upon us! It is the last stroke of doom!’

And some without order, for none could he found to command them in the City, ran to the bells and tolled the alarm; and some blew the trumpets sounding the retreat....

The Rohirrim indeed had no need of news or alarm. All too well they could see for themselves the black sails. For Éomer was now scarcely a mile from the Harlond, and a great press of his first foes was between him and the haven there, while new foes came swirling behind, cutting him off from the Prince. Now he looked to the River, and hope died in his heart.... But the hosts of Mordor were enheartened, and filled with a new lust and fury they came yelling to the onset.

Stern now was Éomer’s mood.... He let blow the horns to rally all men to his banner that could come thither; for he thought to make a great shield-wall at the last, and stand, and fight there on foot till all fell, and do deeds of song on the fields of Pelennor, though no man should be left in the West to remember the last King of the Mark. So he rode to a green hillock and there set his banner, and the White Horse ran rippling in the wind....
Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall!
These staves he spoke, yet he laughed as he said them. For once more lust of battle was on him; and he was still unscathed, and he was young, and he was king: the lord of a fell people. And lo! even as he laughed at despair he looked out again on the black ships, and he lifted up his sword to defy them.

And then wonder took him, and a great joy; and he cast his sword up in the sunlight and sang as he caught it. And all eyes followed his gaze, and behold! upon the foremost ship a great standard broke, and the wind displayed it as she turned towards the Harlond. There flowered a White Tree, and that was for Gondor; but Seven Stars were about it, and a high crown above it, the signs of Elendil that no lord had borne for years beyond count. And the stars flamed in the sunlight, for they were wrought of gems by Arwen daughter of Elrond; and the crown was bright in the morning, for it was wrought of mithril and gold.” - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King, LoTR Book 5, Ch 6, The Battle of the Pelennor Fields

Let the Jews have their chutzpah, White men have courage.

Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 25, 2008, 11:35 PM | #

And Christianity is OBVIOUSLY a strong bulwark against Jewish/globalist machinations.

I dunno.  Obvious is traditional jewish hatred of Christianity.  Less obvious is Christianity’s effectiveness as a bulwark against jewish machinations in the modern era.

Posted by Svigor on December 26, 2008, 02:59 AM | #

Then why are Christians outbreeding other whites?  If Jews hated Christianity and it was bad for us, they’d swallow their pride and promote it, sort of the way they despise blacks, but promote them.

Posted by Dave Johns on December 26, 2008, 04:47 AM | #

Then why are Christians outbreeding other whites?  If Jews hated Christianity and it was bad for us, they’d swallow their pride and promote it, sort of the way they despise blacks, but promote them.

Antonio Gramsci and those that formed the Frankfort School didn’t care, to say the least, for Christianity either.

Hmmmmm.... is there any political continuity between them, the radical Left (led by Jews, of course), and many who claim to be White Nationalists???

Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 26, 2008, 04:58 AM | #

Then why are Christians outbreeding other whites? 

I dunno.  Show this ignoramus the stats, please.  Are Catholic mestizos and injuns Christian – that is, do they believe in Christ?  Are they “white,” according to the US goobermint?  If yes, then there’s a large part of the answer. 

If Jews hated Christianity and it was bad for us, they’d swallow their pride and promote it, sort of the way they despise blacks, but promote them.

There is variation.  Traditional jews hate Christianity.  Others promote the jew-safe version found in 99% of today’s dioceses and denominations.  Pat Robertson is not a bulwark of opposition to jewish machinations.

Posted by Dave Johns on December 26, 2008, 05:19 AM | #

Others promote the jew-safe version found in 99% of today’s dioceses and denominations.

iqmoralcorrelation,

If what you state is true, does that make you happy or sad? And why?

Posted by Dave Johns on December 26, 2008, 05:46 AM | #

I guess WN, in its present formulation, is perpetually destined to be the proverbial car spinning its wheels in a patch of mud; trying to extricated itself only to sink deeper into the muck.

Posted by Dave Johns on December 26, 2008, 06:39 AM | #

Hey, I’ve got an idea!...Let’s insult white Christians. They only make-up the majority of whites! Yeah, that’s the ticket. That’ll attract the masses to our cause. Brilliant!!!!

Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 26, 2008, 07:53 AM | #

If what you state is true, does that make you happy or sad? And why?

Hey, I’ve got an idea!...Let’s insult white Christians.

99% of today’s white judeo-Christers would be insulted by the claim that Christianity stands as a bulwark against jewish machinations.  How does that make you feel?  Not well, is my bet.  If so, then we have more in common than low IQ.

Posted by the Narrator... on December 26, 2008, 11:48 AM | #

Then why are Christians outbreeding other whites?
Posted by Svigor on December 26, 2008, 02:59 AM

A White man I can define.
A Christian....not so much.

Are Catholics Christians?
Are Mormons?

Depends on who you ask. And I’ve seen polls of late that show over half of Christians today no longer believe Christianity is the only way to heaven.

What you are speaking of is faith. Religious people do seem to breed more than non-religious.
That has nothing to do with a specific faith though as the billion plus populations of China and India demonstrate.

Ideally, numbers shouldn’t be a problem. In fact America and Europe are overpopulated.

The declining birthrates would be a welcome relief on Western resources (and living space) were it not for the fact that Western governments are importing non-Whites to replace them.

.
My view of Christianity is that it is as much European as it is Oriental. The bastard child of cultural miscegenation, in other words.
The writers of the New Testament, being native to Palestine two thousand years ago, were reared in a world that was rooted in oriental (monotheistic) tribalism but dominated by Greek thought and Roman politics.

In that world a Jew (Paul) and a Greek (Luke) could both be full fledged Roman citizens.
Not surprisingly they developed a religion where a Jew and a Greek could both be full fledged citizens of the same heaven.
They made Jesus their new Caesar and themselves his praetorian guard.
Then, with the mindset of a Greek philosopher and the ambition of a Roman general, they set out to conquer the known world. The carrot on their stick was much like that of the Romans, citizenship in the “kingdom”.

Their religion offered the unifying (all encompassing) element of oriental monotheism, but the morals and standards were mostly of the Western, Pagan (pre-Christian), variety.
This is demonstrated in the fact that Christianity only developed fully in Europe. It started in Palestine (the cross-roads of three continents) and should/could have reached darkest Africa and China at about the same time it reached Scandinavia. But (aside from a few stray missionaries) it didn’t.

Christianity became pretty much a European religion.
Western man did with it what he did with the magic ‘BOOM-BOOM’ powder the Asians stumbled upon....reworked it into something that was both useful and dangerous to the user.

In fact Europeans reworked it to the point that they removed or downplayed much of its middle-eastern monotheism through the development of The Trinity as well as through devotion/worship of Marry and the “saints”.

Does that mean we should reverence it?
Not at all.

Yes, it is a part of our history, but then, so was the Black Death.
European Christendom represented the best and worst aspects of Western man.

The best would take to long to get into, but the worst is obvious. Namely, the altruistic temptation of universalism.
And, also, that Western man turned a little brown man from the deserts of Palestine into a god.
It’s no wonder that their descendants would turn a little mulatto man into a President.

Christianity may have “served” our people at one time, but it’s kinda like keeping a Grizzly Bear for a pet.
Sure, it may provide hours of entertainment for the family and, with certain safety precautions in place, a sense of protection. But as long as there is a chance that the thing will get out of control and maul you and your loved ones to death, it just isn’t worth keeping around.

...

Posted by Dave Johns on December 26, 2008, 03:10 PM | #

iqmoralcorrelation proclaims: “99% of today’s white judeo-Christers would be insulted by the claim that Christianity stands as a bulwark against jewish machinations.”

99% you assert? Wow! How did you come up with that percentage? Wait, let me guess: Your “high IQ” enabled you to figure that out all on your own? LOL

Posted by torgrim on December 26, 2008, 04:01 PM | #

“A White man I can define.”
“A Christian not so much."---Narrator

“The writers of the New Testament, being native to Palestine two thousand years ago were reared in a world that was rooted in oriental (monotheistic) tribalism, but dominated by Greek thought and Roman politics."---Narrator

Succinctly put, to the point and much better written than anything I have managed to write, about this most important, yet misunderstood, portion of our European heritage!

What is most interesting is, we get to replay this senario again with an oriental, (monotheistic) religion, once more....,oddly referred to, as the “religion of peace”, only without Greek thought....

Well done, Narrator!

Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 26, 2008, 04:14 PM | #

99% you assert? Wow! How did you come up with that percentage? Wait, let me guess: Your “high IQ” enabled you to figure that out all on your own? LOL

The assertion bothers you, no?  Why?  Do you have proof to the contrary?  Or is it because deep inside you fear I’m right.  After all, the judeo-Christianity of Protestantism is a prerequisite for 501c3 tax status and Vatican II’s effect on Catholicism is greater than Mel Gibson’s.  The enabling of jewry by Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, is widespread in the modern era.  How can this be?  Please explain slowly, for my low IQ can process only so much information at a time.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 26, 2008, 04:31 PM | #

Dave Johns, let me pick your brains in regard to Christianity, since you’re a Christian: 

1) In Christianity, are there come aspects of communal preservation which it’s unchristian to assure, even if done humanely, such as avoiding immigration policy that’s ethnoracially grossly incompatible? 

2) If it’s mean to do that and therefore unchristian, why isn’t it mean and therefore unchristian to hold more property than a poor person?  (The Church deems you still Christian if you hold more property than a poor person, and does not require you to give it all away.) Why doesn’t Christianity require extreme communism, in other words?  I know it doesn’t, but WHY doesn’t it, if extreme ethnoracial self-abnegation is required?  Why is the most extreme self-abnegation required in one sense (Christians aren’t allowed to have race) and not the other (Christians ARE allowed to have property)?  Both kinds of inequality, racial inequality and inequality of material wealth, engender bad feelings, feelings of inferiority, envy, and social strife.  It’s not as if one kind of inequality engenders those and not the other:  both do.  If those make one kind of inequality mean they must make the other kind mean.  So why’s one OK with Christian hierarchies and not the other?  Put it another way:  if the Vatican tells me I have to let all the Negroes in Togoland come to my country becuase it’s mean not to, can I tell the Vatican it has to put all Catholic Church property, real estate, and art treasures in the world up at auction, the proceeds to be donated to the people of Togoland because it’s mean not to?  To not do one seems as mean or as OK as to not do the other. 

3) It it’s not mean to implement humane preservationist immigration measures and therefore not unchristian, why are all Christian hierarchies except the Eastern Orthodox siding with those who attack advocates thereof?

Posted by Dave Johns on December 26, 2008, 04:46 PM | #

Liberalism and political correctness, brought on mainly by Jews and secular progressives, are what’s destroying us. And if you want to know what really bothers me, it’s things like this:-

Here’s a statement President Sarkozy made one week ago:  click on video at the link:

http://www.thecivicplatform.com/2008/12/24/frances-jewish-president-pleads-in-favor-of-race-mixing-ie-biological-genocide-of-the-autochthonous-population/

Here’s my transcription:

Quel est l’objectif?  Ça va faire parler, mais l’objectif c’est relever le défi du métissage:  défi du métissage que nous addresse le vingt-et-unième siècle.  Le défi du métissage, la France l’a toujours connu — et en relevant le défi du métissage la France est fidèle à son histoire.  D’ailleurs c’est la consanguinité qui a toujours provoqué la fin des civilisations et des sociétés. 

La France a toujours connu au cours des siècles, a toujours été au cours des siècles, métissée.  La France a métissé les cultures, les idées, les histoires.  La France qui a su métisser ses (ou “ces”?) cultures et ses (ou “ces”?) histoires en a construit, produit, un discours universel parce que elle-même, la France, se sent universelle dans la diversité de ses origines. 

Mesdames et Messieurs, c’est la dernière chance:  si ce volontarisme républicain ne fonctionnait pas il faudrait alors que la République passe à des méthodes plus contraignantes encore.  Mais nous n’avons pas le choix:  la diversité à la base du pays doit se trouver illustrée par la diversité à la tête du pays.  Ce n’est pas un choix.  C’est une obligation.  C’est un impératif.  On ne peut pas faire autrement, au risque de nous trouver confrontés à des problèmes considerables.  Nous devons changer, alors nous allons changer.

Here it is in English:

What is the goal?  This will be controversial, but the goal is to take up the challenge of race-mixing (or “of becoming mixed-race") which the XXIst Century urges upon us.  The challenge of race-mixing (or “of becoming mixed-race") is something France has always been acquainted with:  in taking up the challenge of becoming mixed-race, France is being faithful to its history.  Furthermore, it is consanguinity which has always brought about the end of civilizations and societies. 

Through the centuries France has always known, through the centuries France has always been, mixed-race.  France has taken cultures, ideas, and histories and mixed them.  Thanks to her ability to mix her (or “these”?) cultures and her (or “these”?) histories France has built, has produced, a universal discourse because she herself, France, feels universal in the diversity of her origins. 

Ladies and gentlemen:  this is your last chance.  If this can’t be done in a voluntary spirit of citizenship it will be necessary for the government to resort to more forceful methods.  [Scroob note:  that shocking sentence being an important one, I’ll translate it another way that’s more awkward but more “literal,” in order to leave as little doubt as possible in regard to what is being said:  “If this republican voluntarism were to fail to function, it would be necessary for the Republic to resort to even more forceful (or ‘even more constraining’) methods.”] We have no choice:  the diversity at the country’s base must be reflected in diversity at the country’s head.  There is no alternative!  It is an obligation and it cannot be ignored!  We cannot do otherwise, lest we find ourselves facing major problems!  We must change; therefore we shall change!

We saw Julien Dray’s comments in the other video (discussed in this thread above) insisting the French nation have drilled into its head that its future is to become mixed-race, and now the supposedly “right-wing” French persident says the same thing.  Are there any doubters of my oft-made claim that race-mixing of the Euro nations is being explicitly planned behind the scenes and consciously pushed?

Much appreciation goes to Fred Scrooby for bringing this to our attention.

Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 26, 2008, 04:49 PM | #

Narrator,

So the key to understanding Belloc’s “Europe is the Faith; the Faith, Europe” is the reworking of the oriental Christ story by the European elite for its benefit and not the jews’?  If true, would that partly explain the jewish hatred of Christianity?

Posted by Dave Johns on December 26, 2008, 05:11 PM | #

Fred,

You’re not going to get any argument out of me regarding the sheer ignorance and short sightedness the current crop of Church leaders have towards race-replacement. I’ve always agreed with you up and down the line on that issue.

What I take issue with though, are those, not you Fred, that think it’s some sort of a winning strategy to denigrate Christianity. I firmly beleive if white preservationists are ever going to attract the masses of whites to our side, we have to change our approach. Insulting Christianity is a losing marketing strategy, it’s toxic. In fact, it’s just plain dumb.

Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 26, 2008, 05:45 PM | #

This individual is exercised by the claim that modern Christianity is not a bulwark of opposition to jewry:

December 26, 2008, 05:19 AM

December 26, 2008, 05:46 AM

December 26, 2008, 06:39 AM

According to him the claim denigrates Christianity.  However, he goes on to write:

You’re not going to get any argument out of me regarding the sheer ignorance and short sightedness the current crop of Church leaders have towards race-replacement.

Does he agree, then, that modern Christianity facilitates race-replacement?  If yes to race-replacement, then why not yes to the facilitation of jewry?

Posted by iqchristardcorrelation on December 26, 2008, 07:09 PM | #

iqmoralcorrelation: “Does he agree, then, that modern Christianity facilitates race-replacement?  If yes to race-replacement, then why not yes to the facilitation of jewry?”

So does the universalist bent of Christianity form a spot of weakness and lend itself to the weakening of exclusionary White racial consciousness?  No shit.

Can you ween the sheep off it?  I dunno.  The Judeo-Bolsheviks tried to, tried to mightily, but it didn’t work. 

So what is to be done?  I dunno.  Maybe, if you can’t extirpate it make it work for you?  Imagine a howling mob of former Evangelicals who want to “get the Christ Killers” stoked by the verbal styling of Fr. John.

Posted by Dave Johns on December 26, 2008, 07:37 PM | #

“Does he agree, then, that modern Christianity facilitates race-replacement?”

Of course I do. And it’s undoubtedly due to the fact that modern Christianity more reflects modern-liberalism in its teachings as opposed to the conservative teachings of pre WWII traditional Christianity. “The long march through our institutions” is almost complete.

http://www.americanvision.org/article/has-the-ghost-of-antonio-gramsci-returned/

Posted by Fr. john on December 26, 2008, 09:38 PM | #

“Imagine a howling mob of former Evangelicals who want to “get the Christ Killers” stoked by the verbal styling of Fr. John.”

You mean sounding and speaking like the great rhetoriticians of old?

Like Luther, like Chrysostom? Both of whom would not have blinked an eye at the Apostate Deicides, nor cared a fig for their ‘right to exist’?

The older Christianity is my model, my mindset, the paradigm from which I operate.
Anything else is just gobbledygook.... or have you not been listening to Rowan Williams lately?

Posted by iqchristardcorrelation on December 26, 2008, 10:26 PM | #

Fr. John: “You mean sounding and speaking like the great rhetoriticians of old?”

Oh Lord, my God.  Most High, Powerful and Righteous.  You soiled yourself by consigning your ineffable Majesty to flesh - so that I might enjoy eternal life.  Oh Lord, you were so weak, as a lamb.  What soul full of rottenness could not be touched by your guileless, defenseless goodness as such?!  What people, inspired by hatred of Holiness, could harm Thee thence?!  The Jews!  The Deicides of Mercy!  The Satanic spawn of filth and depravity!  Oh Lord, I know now what I must do.  None less than an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, is just.  Oh God, your bludgeoning by their clawed hands must not go unpunished!

“Like Luther, like Chrysostom? Both of whom would not have blinked an eye at the Apostate Deicides, nor cared a fig for their ‘right to exist’?”

Hmmm.

Posted by danielj on December 26, 2008, 10:28 PM | #

The same Luther that condoned bigamy?

Luther was not an Orthodox brother like you, but rather, a Protestant; the kind of Protestant responsible for the Enlightenment and the bags full of misery that it carried in tow but because Luther said some nasty things about the Jews he his all right in your book?

He did indeed have a way with words, but I imagine Cicero, Socrates and Demosthenes - who overcame some form of speech impediment, to be much finer examples of rhetoricians.

The older Christianity is my model, my mindset, the paradigm from which I operate.

How old?

The one practiced by Christ?

The one that was practiced in “Christian” Rome which was really an ugly amalgamation of ancient Pagan rituals, fertility celebrations and season and star worship papered over with a thin veneer of Christ and a healthy dose of state enforcement to ensure compliance?

The one that was practiced in “Christian” Geneva where Calvin’s trigger finger was never hesitant to gather up some kindling and burn some poor fool at the stake.

The one practiced at the turn of the century by the completely Judaized dispensationalists?

The one practiced by Billy Graham which lacks any resemblance to the Christianity of the Bible or the Christianity that preceded it?

Christianity addresses the nations and races and encourages them to turn to Christ for salvation. It comes down squarely in the camp of tribalism and a covenant of salvation passed down under such an order through the sign of Baptism. It allows for genetic curses, Ham and his descendants being most notable and the blindness of most Jews to the truth that Christ was the Mashiach Nagid but it also allows for the breaking of genetic curses, the most important breaking of which occurred at Calvary.

God is no respecter of persons or nations and they will all wither at the blast of His nostrils but God does not hate us arranging ourselves tribally. The most unnerving thing about the Curse is that we are all sons of Adam, even the niggers, and staring into that abyss and reflecting has driven many a wise man to proclaim that all is vanity and chasing after the wind.

All I can do is look at those poor wretches and proclaim, “But for the Grace of God,” and this fact gives me simple gratitude and quiet meals eaten in perfect peace.

Christ does not condone us lowering Him into the mire of Nationalist Politics where he can engage in hand-to-hand combat with Odin any more than he condones his reduction to simple bumper-sticker slogans.

Christ does not condone race replacement and neither does he command us to fuck our third cousins exclusively to maintain minimal genetic defect after being convinced of the validity of some Finnish study on outbreeding.

It seems I must be ruled by the present financial overclass and their Jewish allies or a bunch of incomprehensible race-mystics extolling the boundless virtues of violently enforced genetic homogeneity.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 26, 2008, 11:09 PM | #

“It seems I must be ruled by the present financial overclass and their Jewish allies or a bunch of incomprehensible race-mystics extolling the boundless virtues of violently enforced genetic homogeneity.” (—Daniel)

Wow, where are the race mystics “enforcing genetic homogeneity” ruling?  Sounds like my kinda place, how soon can I move there?

As far as “Jesus Christ does not mandate race-replacement,” could you maybe tell that to ... well, to every Catholic and Prod clergyman on the planet?  Word doesn’t seem to have reached them yet ...

Posted by iqchristardcorrelation on December 26, 2008, 11:11 PM | #

danielj: “Luther was not an Orthodox brother like you, but rather, a Protestant; the kind of Protestant responsible for the Enlightenment and the bags full of misery that it carried in tow but because Luther said some nasty things about the Jews he his all right in your book?”

Blasphemy!

“The one practiced at the turn of the century by the completely Judaized dispensationalists?”

Fr. John will show them the true faith, according to Christ.

“Christ does not condone us lowering Him into the mire of Nationalist Politics...”

Christ has anointed Fr. John as His instrument that He shall wield for the purpose of a National Revolution for Salvation.  The Deicides will no longer see to the mongrelization of European Christendom with their Satanic wiles.

“...even the niggers,”

“It allows for genetic curses,”

“...it also allows for the breaking of genetic curses, the most important breaking of which occurred at Calvary.”

If they just pray hard enough they’ll stop being niggers.

Posted by danielj on December 26, 2008, 11:29 PM | #

If they just pray hard enough they’ll stop being niggers.

Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 12:34 AM | #

As far as “Jesus Christ does not mandate race-replacement,” could you maybe tell that to ... well, to every Catholic and Prod clergyman on the planet?  Word doesn’t seem to have reached them yet ...

I suppose it is up to you and I to convince them Fred. Perhaps the Holy Spirit will do His job?

Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 27, 2008, 12:54 AM | #

iqchristardcorrelation,

Can you ween the sheep off it?

I dunno.  Probably not. 

So what is to be done?

I dunno.  Ignore the problems associated with Judeochristianity for appearance sake?  Spend 50-100 years “infiltrating” Judeochristianity to make it “work for us,” perhaps?  Inundate Pat Robertson and Pope Ratzinger with email and letters? Start up an Internet site?  Accept that this is the end of the White race and exploit that fact for whatever monetary advantages it brings?  You tell me.  My IQ is sub-MR.

Imagine a howling mob of former Evangelicals who want to “get the Christ Killers” stoked by the verbal styling of Fr. John.

So very conservative and Billy Piercey.  The proponents of Ye Olde Tyme Religion lost the battle for Christianity 45 years ago.  There will be no resurrection in our lifetime or the next.  Time to move on to something else, perhaps?

Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 27, 2008, 01:25 AM | #

The older Christianity is my model, my mindset, the paradigm from which I operate.
Anything else is just gobbledygook....

I dunno.  You want to sell the Olde Tyme Religion?  Very well.  Christians prefer making tax-deductible contributions, however.  Summer soldiers and sunshine patriots, they are.  Very similar to Internet activists.  Convince the IRS to award your church 501c3 tax status and the Olde Tyme Religion may make a comeback.  Doubtful, but possible.

Posted by iqchristardcorrelation on December 27, 2008, 02:14 AM | #

iqmoralcorrelation: “...Billy Piercey.”

Was he on the plane “the day the music died”?  Or was it the day WN died?

“Probably not.”

I concur.

“Ignore the problems associated with Judeochristianity for appearance sake?”

If you can’t get rid of the lemons why not make lemonade?  Whattayasay?

“Spend 50-100 years “infiltrating” Judeochristianity to make it “work for us,” perhaps?”

Fr. John is motivated to spread the word of our Lord Jebus Crisp consistent with White racial preservation.  Stop working for the cause, John.  Sometimes nothing is better than something.

“Inundate Pat Robertson and Pope Ratzinger with email and letters?”

The idea would be to siphon off their followers.

“Start up an Internet site?”

Why not?  Fr. John has one.  What do you say to Jeboos’ True Believers when they balk at racialism?  They won’t give up the faith.  So feed them a sly rationalization arguably consistent with the faith.

“Accept that this is the end of the White race and exploit that fact for whatever monetary advantages it brings?”

Not much money in WN as it stands.  If I was willing to accept the end of the White race I would just watch Seinfeld reruns and swill Budweiser and screw mestizas.

“You tell me.”

Do you think if we built microcommunities the lemmings would come?  Like if Field of Dreams?

“My IQ is sub-MR.”

An ironic affectation to facilitate a passive-aggresive interrogation?  Your IQ has got to be at least 120 to pull that off.  Whattayathink?

“Time to move on to something else, perhaps?”

How long would it take to get the lemmings to come to the microcommunities in sufficient numbers to make a difference, 50 - 100 years?

“Convince the IRS to award your church 501c3 tax status and the Olde Tyme Religion may make a comeback.  Doubtful, but possible.”

Well, he’s most likely not going to become an atheist, er, secular or worship Odin.  We get those to do what they are motivated to do.

“Summer soldiers and sunshine patriots, they are.  Very similar to Internet activists.”

Is that what you think of Guessedworker and Michael Rienzi?

P.S. How do we get rid of that pesky faith gene?  Eugenics?  To do eugenics we’d need power and we are not in power…

Posted by iqchristardcorrelation on December 27, 2008, 02:48 AM | #

iqmoralcorrelation,

My IQ is sub-Saharan.  Explain a few things to me please?  How do we promote microcommunities?  With Internet sites?  Do we sell the concept generally sans specific examples?  Do we try a ‘marketing’ approach for it; portray it as glamorous, adventurous, unconservative? 

How do we sell WN generally, sans microcommunites?  Do we go with the “fear and loathing” approach?  Do we try to inspire a positive love of kind in our people?  Do we name the Jew?  Do we try to tailor our approach to the individual; say skew it towards Christians for Christians, towards atheists for atheists?  The Jews know how to market, they use psychological leverage.  They ask themselves what this guy wants, and convince him he will get it.  You can’t bullshit a bullshitter, but you can bullshit a lemming all day long.  Should we try to beat the Jews at their own game?

Posted by Dave Johns on December 27, 2008, 04:44 AM | #

“How do we promote microcommunities?”

Pray to God for a miracle, because a miracle is what it will take for the concept of microcommunities to ever translate into reality.

Posted by Captainchaos on December 27, 2008, 05:51 AM | #

Dave Johns: “Pray to God for a miracle, because a miracle is what it will take for the concept of microcommunities to ever translate into reality.”

I have great respect for “iqmoralcorrelation”.  He is an intelligent man of honor who has dedicated his life to the preservation of our people: a soldier’s soldier, a WN’s WN, a White man’s White man.  His microcommunity concept is ingenious, it looks very good on paper; but can it be translated into reality?  As he has stated, the finished product isn’t yet complete.  If he could market it as a finished product that people of, say, average intelligence could be reasonably expected to make work, it could be a winner.  Most people aren’t smart enough, however, to educate themselves via the instructional manuals he has so generously provided here, and to infer the rest of the “how to”.  He needs a sufficient number of adherents to the concept to make it worthwhile (five groups scattered across the country doing it would be meaningless); that means many people around the mean IQ, 100, of our people.  The more the demographic situation deteriorates the more our people will be looking for security, both material and in the more mundane sense.  Depending on how bad things get, it is not unreasonable to assume average people may be afforded a better standard of living in self-sufficient microcommunities, than in racially-mixed, system-dependent neighborhoods.  It would be better that he would make these arguments himself, and would show us a bit more of the finished product, than engage in childish “Christard” bashing.  What really was the point of it?  None, as was demonstrated. 

If you want to sell your wares to the lemmings you’ve got to speak their language.  You are selling to lemmings, true, but the trick is not act as if you are. 

Again, no disrespect to “iqmoralcorrelation” intended.  If his concept can succeed I want it to succeed.  If it comes off the way he has it drawn up on paper it is a winner. 

I think I understand why GW keeps the greasy wog (LOL!) silver around now, a little trolling resistance keeps you on your toes, it makes you up your game; as does a comments section.  We face resistance in life, and the life of our people is what we fight for. 

GW, save us sinners.

Posted by the Narrator... on December 27, 2008, 10:10 AM | #

So the key to understanding Belloc’s “Europe is the Faith; the Faith, Europe” is the reworking of the oriental Christ story by the European elite for its benefit and not the jews’?  If true, would that partly explain the jewish hatred of Christianity?
Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 26, 2008, 04:49 PM

I think the jews hate Christianity because White people are associated with it.
If White people had adopted and adapted Hinduism a thousand years ago then the jews would be pouring their contempt on that today.
The success and power of Europeans, from the Greek city-states to the British Empire, contrasted too strongly the image jews held of themselves as the most important and powerful people on earth (via God of course).

If The West truly exists, then everything they believe about themselves is a lie.
This is why they aren’t content to simply see us miscegenated out of existence today, but must explain away our past glories as well.
They do this in two ways.
1. Demonize those past glories to create a stigma of them with which no on would want to be associated.
2. Credit those past glories to the efforts of non-Westerners who had their brilliant ideas stolen by the mischievous White-devil.

.
But Christianity is pretty much a European religion. In the same way gun powder is a European invention. The ingredients for both came from abroad, but the finished product was original to Europe.

And looking at the Christianity of blacks and hispanics you notice that the European (read, better) aspects of it fall away. In their hands it is about personal and/or tribal material gain and political power rather than spiritual enlightenment.
Beyond that, it is just downright crude and debasing.
For a compare and contrast, just listen Handel’s Messiah right before you listen to the typical black Christan bug-a-boo thump-thump praise music.

.
The break between Old and New Testament is so profound that they shouldn’t even be placed together.

The god of the Old Testament, created in a world dominated by oriental tribalism, culture and thought, is vindictive, petty illogical and tyrannical.

The god of the New Testament, created in a world dominated by European Culture (Greek thought and Roman politics) is merciful, forgiving, more pragmatic and somewhat ennobling of the human spirit.

They are two different gods. It’s rather obvious.

The more damaging Biblical doctrines were not harmful to us in the past because they were ignored or simply went unread. 

After all, Jesus teaches that he came to set father against son and mother against daughter.
Once, when a would-be follower approached Jesus, he asked the Messiah to wait on him while he buries his recently departed father. Jesus replies, “let the dead bury the dead.”
When a follower tells Jesus that his (Jesus’s) family is near and wished to see him, Jesus replies, “whoever obeys God is my mother, brother or sister.”
And he makes it clear elsewhere that to follow him you must be prepared to abandon your family.

Of course I’m guessing that Jesus said all this in a broader Jewish tribalistic sense. After all he expressed nothing but contempt for gentiles (us).
There is a passage at the end of Mark where the resurrected Jesus tells his followers to preach his message to all the world, but that passage was added to the book much later.

Europeans later took the teachings of Jesus (which were already partly based in European thought) and fine-tuned them through extra-Biblical doctrine in the guise of hermeneutics. This made them more applicable for themselves and their peoples.

In other words, Europeans made Christianity great, not the other way around.
Christianity is only partly based on the Bible and the teachings of Jesus.

This is evidenced in the fact that (if you remove the muslim immigrants) any sane person would feel a helluva lot safer in post-Christian Sweden than in Current-Christian Haiti.
Or put another way, White atheists and pagans are more Christian than devout Christian blacks, hispanics or Asians because Christianity is simple White morality cohesively articulated.

In fact you might say there are two Christianities.
Biblical Christianity and True Christianity.

It’s the Biblical Christianity that (along with other things) is eating us alive today....

.

Posted by Fr. John on December 27, 2008, 11:39 AM | #

I enjoy reading this posts on this blog, until the Christophobes of various stripes start their bantering. It would seem that, in this current exchange, I am now the object of the vilification. So be it. No biggie. And I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. You can’t talk to a bigot, (whether of the left or of the anarchist side of things) so I am not going to bother. As the old adage says, “if you can’t get through to a heretic after the second or third exchange, leave him in his error.” (the next clause is also implied- ‘For that’s where he wishes to stay’)

That mindset also seems to confirm the old debate over free will, vs. predestination: for a heretic will choose to be damned, and God merely confirms their choices, allowing the unregenerate to free will himself into hell.

In that case, “let the dead bury the dead.”

But the comments Narrator just posted need a bit of refutation, if only to set the record straight. You wrote:

“The break between Old and New Testament is so profound that they shouldn’t even be placed together.
The god of the Old Testament, created in a world dominated by oriental tribalism, culture and thought, is vindictive, petty illogical and tyrannical.
The god of the New Testament, created in a world dominated by European Culture (Greek thought and Roman politics) is merciful, forgiving, more pragmatic and somewhat ennobling of the human spirit.
They are two different gods. It’s rather obvious.”

Sorry, but no. That is one of the oldest heresies in the book- literally! (lol) Christ said that ‘I and the Father are one.” He also said that , “not one jot or tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” [Matt. 5:17ff.]
The blessing of the NT covenant is, of course, different, IN THAT IT WAS ENLARGED. But that is about it. The Ten Commands, the racial purity clauses, the sacrament of initiation remain (though the clearly procreative act of ‘cutting off’ from the ‘nations round about us’ - i.e., circumcision, becomes the WHOLE BODY act of ‘dying and rising again’ in Baptism) while the offering of sacrifices still pertains; it’s just that the Eucharist, and the priestly caste of those who ‘offer and are offered’ now expands beyond merely a Temple in an obscure village in Judea, to all the altars of the world.

Otherwise, NOTHING changes. God still is ‘the God of His people’ [cf. Matt. 1:21 for N.T. corroboration] he still calls us to ‘come out of the world, and be ye separate’, there is still a ‘holy seed’ that should not fornicate with the heathen round about us, and there is still a demonic seed that seeks the ill will of the people of God [Gen. 3:15, John 8:44]

The only reason people have posited a ‘vengeful God’ of the OT, and the ‘gentle Jesus, meek and mild’ (and thereby, totally ineffectual) in their eyes, is so that they can sin with impunity. No, God’s wrath still exists; it is the corollary of his Mercy and Goodness to those ‘who are predestined to be saints.’ As the old song says it, “you can’t have one without the...other!”

This makes the damned in our midst rather uncomfortable. But then, God was sent to Earth at Christmas to ‘comfort the afflicted’… and ergo, to ‘afflict the comfortable.’

Sh’ma Yisroel, YHWH Eloheynu, YHWH Echod. ‘Hear o Israel, the Lord OUR God is One Lord.’ -Christ concurred, for He is God. And if the Trinity is ONE, then so should His People be as well. Carping that you don’t like that, doesn’t change the facts.

Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 01:18 PM | #

I think the jews hate Christianity because White people are associated with it.
If White people had adopted and adapted Hinduism a thousand years ago then the jews would be pouring their contempt on that today.
The success and power of Europeans, from the Greek city-states to the British Empire, contrasted too strongly the image jews held of themselves as the most important and powerful people on earth (via God of course).

This is of course true, and it it is for the same reason that we hate Judaism; it is associated with Jews.

Jews are only successful when they operate inside a socio-political environment that is not of their own creation and in any other circumstance they just wander around hopeless in the desert. God gave them a kingdom for an extremely short historical period which they ran into the ground by adopting multiculturalism and the god’s of the surrounding countries.

If The West truly exists, then everything they believe about themselves is a lie.
This is why they aren’t content to simply see us miscegenated out of existence today, but must explain away our past glories as well.

Who controls the past, controls the future.
Who controls the present, controls the past.

It is just a fight for power.
.

But Christianity is pretty much a European religion. In the same way gun powder is a European invention. The ingredients for both came from abroad, but the finished product was original to Europe.

The Bible itself endorses this idea on racial terms through a prophecy of Noah directed toward his three children which roughly correspond to the three major races:

and saith: `Cursed [is] Canaan, Servant of servants he is to his brethren.’

And he saith: `Blessed of Jehovah my God [is] Shem, And Canaan is servant to him.

God doth give beauty to Japheth, And he dwelleth in tents of Shem, And Canaan is servant to him.’

Gen 9:25-27 Young’s Literal Trans.

And looking at the Christianity of blacks and hispanics you notice that the European (read, better) aspects of it fall away. In their hands it is about personal and/or tribal material gain and political power rather than spiritual enlightenment.

Than their “Christianity” isn’t really Christianity is it?

For a compare and contrast, just listen Handel’s Messiah right before you listen to the typical black Christan bug-a-boo thump-thump praise music.

This is a theological issue. There are churches that argue against polyphony in the Liturgy or simply against musical accompaniment and others that have drums which is entirely African in origin.

The break between Old and New Testament is so profound that they shouldn’t even be placed together.

There is no break. The Old Testament is allegory and it is the Gospel concealed, the New is the Gospel revealed. Christ declares to two of His disciples in Luke 24:27:

And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

The entire Bible is Christocentric and without understanding that one can not understand the Scriptures.

The god of the Old Testament, created in a world dominated by oriental tribalism, culture and thought, is vindictive, petty illogical and tyrannical.

Statements like this prove that you have not studied the issue but are repeating others on the subject.

The god of the New Testament, created in a world dominated by European Culture (Greek thought and Roman politics) is merciful, forgiving, more pragmatic and somewhat ennobling of the human spirit.

It is the same God of the same Hell fire but in the New Testament He is emphasizing a different aspect of His salvation plan and a different aspect of His character as a result.

They are two different gods. It’s rather obvious.

Only to the uninitiated

...And he makes it clear elsewhere that to follow him you must be prepared to abandon your family.

But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

1 Tim 5:8 King James Version

We are also commanded to stay with our unbelieving spouses and render them their due.

Of course I’m guessing that Jesus said all this in a broader Jewish tribalistic sense. After all he expressed nothing but contempt for gentiles (us).
There is a passage at the end of Mark where the resurrected Jesus tells his followers to preach his message to all the world, but that passage was added to the book much later.

Now you are straying into the area of textual criticism and interpolation which I’m almost sure you know even less about than exegesis.

In other words, Europeans made Christianity great, not the other way around.
Christianity is only partly based on the Bible and the teachings of Jesus.

This is evidenced in the fact that (if you remove the muslim immigrants) any sane person would feel a helluva lot safer in post-Christian Sweden than in Current-Christian Haiti.
Or put another way, White atheists and pagans are more Christian than devout Christian blacks, hispanics or Asians because Christianity is simple White morality cohesively articulated.

This is all too true.

In fact you might say there are two Christianities.
Biblical Christianity and True Christianity.

True Christianity is Biblical, but I understand what you are getting at.

It’s the Biblical Christianity that (along with other things) is eating us alive today....

No, it is the unbiblical false Christianity that is getting at us but it is certainly not eating us alive. This “Christianity” is one of our lesser worries, as most people are only nominal practitioners of it and they are not even a majority of the population.

We in the Eurosphere are entirely post-Christian.

Posted by the Narrator... on December 27, 2008, 01:39 PM | #

I wasn’t vilifying you Fr. John.
Quite the contrary, I have a lot of sympathy for your position in trying to defend your faith within the topic’s context.
I know it can’t be easy, and it is probably frustrating and heartbreaking to go amongst other Whites who share your racial opinion but not your religious.

.
You’re right in that a pro-White argument can be made from a Christian viewpoint.
The problem is that an alternate pro-universalistic, egalitarian, argument can be made as well from a Christian viewpoint.

it’s just that the Eucharist, and the priestly caste of those who ‘offer and are offered’ now expands beyond merely a Temple in an obscure village in Judea, to all the altars of the world.
Posted by Fr. John on December 27, 2008, 11:39 AM

That’s just it, it’s universal.
We don’t have to be vindictive or mean to other races but we simply can’t function as a healthy society with a religion/philosophy that is potentially universally inclusive. Either in this world or the one hereafter.

The only reason people have posited a ‘vengeful God’ of the OT, and the ‘gentle Jesus, meek and mild’ (and thereby, totally ineffectual) in their eyes, is so that they can sin with impunity.
Posted by Fr. John on December 27, 2008, 11:39 AM

I wasn’t juxtaposing what Jesus says with what God in the Old Testament said, but rather the personality of God as presented in the Old Testament vs. the New Testament.

I know the Narrative of the New Testament fairly well. Jesus’s actions on the cross didn’t just save the lost but condemned the indifferent.
The way had been paved and so Man is without excuse.
I know all of that.

But that whole narrative was, coincidentally, played out only after the Hebrews found themselves in a European dominated era.
What was the hold up?

Wouldn’t it have been more expedient for that to have happened right after the expulsion from Eden?
It’s kinda a like the convenient narrative friendly fact that the devil didn’t show up to tempt Adam when he had him all alone.

The martyr sacrificing himself for everyone else is a theme that is pretty much Eurocentric. Thus the story appealed almost exclusively to Europeans. And this fact is augmented by the fact that most third-world Christians pay more homage to the Marry narrative than to the Jesus one.

This makes the damned in our midst rather uncomfortable. But then, God was sent to Earth at Christmas to ‘comfort the afflicted’… and ergo, to ‘afflict the comfortable.’
Posted by Fr. John on December 27, 2008, 11:39 AM

Yes, the community activists encourage the impoverished proletariat to dream of turning the tables on the exploitative bourgeoisie.
I guess it just looks more poetic when Jesus says it.
But it doesn’t change what it is…

.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 27, 2008, 01:51 PM | #

“It would be better that [Iqmoralcorrelation] would make these arguments himself, and would show us a bit more of the finished product, than engage in childish ‘Christard’ bashing.” (—CC)

“Iqmoralcorrelation” and “Iqchristardcorrelation” are different guys.

The thing “Iqmoralcorrelation” does need to stop engaging in is coming here to snipe at the participants always with the same criticism that they’re not doing anything useful, only wasting time that could be better spent developing microcommunities and a barter economy:  “Summer soldiers and sunshine patriots, they are.  Very similar to Internet activists.”

Let him by all means get microcommunities and a barter economy up and running, but by spending 24/7 in this site’s threads criticising the participants as not doing anything useful he’s only wasting time that could be better spent ... well ... developing microcommunities and a barter economy:  A summer soldier and a sunshine patriot, he is.  Very similar to guys who spend 24/7 hanging around blog threads telling participants they’re not doing anything useful, only wasting time that could be better spent developing microcommunities and a barter economy. 

When a guy comes on here and starts in with 1) theme and variations on “easy online racialism” (he doesn’t know what in the F he’s talking about, and only makes himself sound like a moron by perpetually spouting that line or its many equivalents) and 2) how much lower his intelligence/IQ/educational level is than the typical MR participant, you know you’re dealing with “Iqmoralcorrelation” and you’re justified in wondering why ... well ... why he’s not spending his time developing ... well, developing .... microcommunities and a barter economy rather than ... well ... rather than ... hanging around here going on about 1) theme and variations on “easy online racialism” (he doesn’t know what in the F he’s talking about, and only makes himself sound like a moron by perpetually spouting that line or its many equivalents) and 2) how much lower his intelligence/IQ/educational level is than the typical MR participant, only wasting time that could be far better spent developing ... well ... microcommunities and ... well ... a barter economy.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 27, 2008, 02:05 PM | #

I think they’re great ideas he has, and as I’ve said in the past I support anything that works.  “Iqmoralcorrelation“‘s error is not thinking up original ideas, it’s his continually sniping at the participants here. 

We’ve got that message already.  We’re “easy online racialists” engaged in “rehasing the same failed policies that have been a failure for 50 years,” and so on, and so forth, and so on, and so forth, etc., etc., etc.  We’ve got the message already.  We got that part. 

Now don’t you have something more useful to do, such as ... well ... such as develop microcommunities and a barter economy?

It’s the sniping at the participants here that is vehemently rejected, not whatever plans he has in mind for getting us out of this mess.  By all means, develop them.  And stop coming on here to do your imbecilic, and I mean imbecilic, sniping.

Posted by the Narrator... on December 27, 2008, 02:26 PM | #

Jews are only successful when they operate inside a socio-political environment that is not of their own creation and in any other circumstance they just wander around hopeless in the desert. God gave them a kingdom for an extremely short historical period which they ran into the ground by adopting multiculturalism and the god’s of the surrounding countries.

If The West truly exists, then everything they believe about themselves is a lie.
This is why they aren’t content to simply see us miscegenated out of existence today, but must explain away our past glories as well.

Who controls the past, controls the future.
Who controls the present, controls the past.

It is just a fight for power.
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 01:18 PM

No, it’s kinda different.
White people haven’t tried to downplay the power and glory of Israeli history because there’s nothing to downplay.
Compared to Athens, Jerusalem was a cow-town in antiquity.

In fact, if anything, Whites have been trying to build Israel’s history into something more than it was in an effort to boost the Bible’s (and thus God’s) credibility.

White people are the ones that go around digging up others peoples lost history, encouraging them to be proud of it.

The Bible itself endorses this idea on racial terms through a prophecy of Noah directed toward his three children which roughly correspond to the three major races:

and saith: `Cursed [is] Canaan, Servant of servants he is to his brethren.’
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 01:18 PM

Of course I’m sure you know other people (most Christians) interpret that otherwise.
If the text plainly said Canaan’s skin turned black, his hair went kinky and his skull altered its shape, then you might have something.
But it doesn’t, so you don’t.

And looking at the Christianity of blacks and hispanics you notice that the European (read, better) aspects of it fall away. In their hands it is about personal and/or tribal material gain and political power rather than spiritual enlightenment.

Than their “Christianity” isn’t really Christianity is it?
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 01:18 PM

That was my overall point. Christianity isn’t so much a religion as it is an articulation of White man’s morality (warts -altruism- and all).

The god of the Old Testament, created in a world dominated by oriental tribalism, culture and thought, is vindictive, petty illogical and tyrannical.

Statements like this prove that you have not studied the issue but are repeating others on the subject.
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 01:18 PM

Actually I was a Christian for the first twenty plus years of my life.

I wasn’t criticizing the god of the Old Testament, just critiquing him. Within the narrative of the story I wouldn’t hesitate to call him good and benevolent. His actions were logical, righteous and overall beneficial to various individuals who severed him......within the narrative of the story.

“...And he makes it clear elsewhere that to follow him you must be prepared to abandon your family”.

But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

1 Tim 5:8 King James Version

We are also commanded to stay with our unbelieving spouses and render them their due.
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 01:18 PM

Paul said that, not Jesus.

And let’s be honest, Paul was kind of like a Used Car salesman.  “I become all things to all men,” I believe he said.

“Of course I’m guessing that Jesus said all this in a broader Jewish tribalistic sense. After all he expressed nothing but contempt for gentiles (us).
There is a passage at the end of Mark where the resurrected Jesus tells his followers to preach his message to all the world, but that passage was added to the book much later.”

Now you are straying into the area of textual criticism and interpolation which I’m almost sure you know even less about than exegesis.
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 01:18 PM

I’m pretty sure that last bit of Mark was tacked on later. If I’m wrong so be it, but if I remember right it was added at a later date.

And with all do respect, exegesis is just a fancy name for Public Relations- Damage Control for the good book.

No, it is the unbiblical false Christianity that is getting at us but it is certainly not eating us alive. This “Christianity” is one of our lesser worries, as most people are only nominal practitioners of it and they are not even a majority of the population.

We in the Eurosphere are entirely post-Christian.
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 01:18 PM

That’s just a “No True Scotsman” type of argument.

If you ever do come across two Christians who can completely agree on what Christianity truly is, be sure and take a picture. Because it’s about as rare an event as a big foot sighting…

.

Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 02:52 PM | #

No, it’s kinda different.
White people haven’t tried to downplay the power and glory of Israeli history because there’s nothing to downplay.
Compared to Athens, Jerusalem was a cow-town in antiquity.

True.

Conceded.

White people are the ones that go around digging up others peoples lost history, encouraging them to be proud of it.

Whites do it at the behest of university Jews and most of them do it without explicitly understanding the Jewishness of their professors and patrons.

Of course I’m sure you know other people (most Christians) interpret that otherwise.
If the text plainly said Canaan’s skin turned black, his hair went kinky and his skull altered its shape, then you might have something.
But it doesn’t, so you don’t.

It doesn’t have to say that. The lineages recorded demonstrate that tribes and nations were descended from these three and bear their marks and the three have separate genetic histories.

I’m not even arguing that Haamaites are niggers but rather that God uses man’s tribalism and does in fact curse tribes. This ties in with Diamed’s essay in a way since it is scary to realize what we have in common with the boogers.

That was my overall point. Christianity isn’t so much a religion as it is an articulation of White man’s morality (warts -altruism- and all).

100% agreed. The Germans took forever to “convert” which they didn’t really do. Europe was “the faith” but it was not the faith expounded in the text of the Bible.

Paul said that, not Jesus.

And let’s be honest, Paul was kind of like a Used Car salesman.  “I become all things to all men,” I believe he said.

To a Christian, there is really no distinction between the inspired words of Paul and the literal words of Jesus since it is all Holy Writ, inerrant and inspired.

I’m pretty sure that last bit of Mark was tacked on later. If I’m wrong so be it, but if I remember right it was added at a later date.

And with all do respect, exegesis is just a fancy name for Public Relations- Damage Control for the good book.

That is the fundamental error that atheistic and modern Christians make when dealing with the Greek Mss. Older doesn’t equal more accurate. I could direct you to some fantastic essays on text formation if you are truly interested.

That’s just a “No True Scotsman” type of argument.

If you ever do come across two Christians who can completely agree on what Christianity truly is, be sure and take a picture. Because it’s about as rare an event as a big foot sighting…

Quite the relativist you are for a former Christian! We can’t agree on truth so there is no truth?

When you can find two White Nationalists that can agree on what WN is then take a picture

Posted by the Narrator... on December 27, 2008, 04:28 PM | #

“White people are the ones that go around digging up others peoples lost history, encouraging them to be proud of it. “

Whites do it at the behest of university Jews and most of them do it without explicitly understanding the Jewishness of their professors and patrons.
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 02:52 PM |

Maybe some, but a lot of Whites are genuinely interested in such things. I mean, can you imagine another race reenacting historical civil wars?
From Renaissance Fairs to Stamp collecting and Antique furniture, White people like to study and preserve everything old under the son accept (today) themselves.

It doesn’t have to say that. The lineages recorded demonstrate that tribes and nations were descended from these three and bear their marks and the three have separate genetic histories.
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 02:52 PM |

Yes but thanks to Calvary we’re all “One” in Christ now.

See the problem?

To a Christian, there is really no distinction between the inspired words of Paul and the literal words of Jesus since it is all Holy Writ, inerrant and inspired.
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 02:52 PM

Yes I know that, never-the-less it always helps to distinguish who is saying what.
Because Paul and Peter never disagreed about doctrine.
And James and Paul were in perfect doctrinal harmony, naturally.

That is the fundamental error that atheistic and modern Christians make when dealing with the Greek Mss. Older doesn’t equal more accurate. I could direct you to some fantastic essays on text formation if you are truly interested.
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 02:52 PM

I’m sure they’d be fantastic and interesting, but doesn’t the fact that they (as well as exegesis) exist kind of knock in the head the idea that the Bible has a clear and coherent text?

Quite the relativist you are for a former Christian! We can’t agree on truth so there is no truth?
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2008, 02:52 PM

That’s hardly what I was getting at.

We have to stifle our own altruistic notions when it comes to those outside our tribe.
Like I said before, we don’t have to be unkind to non-Whites, but neither do we need to be actively good or helpful to them either.

If you say that only White people can be your spiritual kindred, fine. But if there is even a slight possibility that the definition can be extended to include non-Whites then there is a problem.

Where then will the Christian put his loyalty? With his biological brothers or his spiritual ones?
Where will he place his hope? With a future physical White kingdom, or a spiritual (all races included) one?

...

Posted by iqchristiancorrelation on December 27, 2008, 05:23 PM | #

Fr. John: “I enjoy reading this posts on this blog, until the Christophobes of various stripes start their bantering.”

Some “Christophobes” have a deep appreciation of the spiritualized yearning that Christianity promises to one day fulfill if only we love Him - but can’t bring themselves to believe none the less.  Others are prudent enough to conceal - most of the time - their contempt and sniggering at the “Christards” because they realize it is a “turn off”.  I’ll let you guess which is which.

“It would seem that, in this current exchange, I am now the object of the vilification.”

Not from my end.  Heck, I even gave you some material - in the grand rhetorical style - for one of your sermons.  I want you to continue building your doctrine - the one true doctrine, according to Christ - and educating White youngsters about their obligations to God, country and race.  And also I see a nice synthesis of the microcommunities concept and the one true doctrine, according to Christ.  Wouldn’t it be nice if we could get many more communities like Warren Jeffs’ up and running, but without all the polygamist nuttiness?

“You can’t talk to a bigot, (whether of the left or of the anarchist side of things) so I am not going to bother.”

You’re a good man, Fr. John.  It’s Mr. Microcommunities cognitive dissonance, his love of the lemmings vs. his contempt for the lemmings, that keeps tripping him up.  If you want to be the man, as I suspect iqmicrocommunutiescorrelation does, you’ve got to be a uniter, not a divider; like Pres-o-dent Bush said.

“As the old adage says, “if you can’t get through to a heretic after the second or third exchange, leave him in his error.””

But heretics and believers can work together for common goals.  If we don’t save the White race Western Christianity is toast.  If Christianity will be a friend to the White race, I will be a friend to Christianity - word is bond.

Posted by iqmoralcorrelation on December 27, 2008, 07:10 PM | #

If you can’t get rid of the lemons why not make lemonade?  Whattayasay?

Much gas has passed since my last poor contribution. 

Lemonade from lemons?  More like chocolate from a turd.

Belief systems notwithstanding, this heretic of sub-MR mental ability thinks the hyper-sensitive egos of sanctimonious prigs should not be coddled when they are wrong.

The True Faith is a European reconstruction of an Oriental story.  If pushed to it the enemy can believably point to the story’s “middle eastern” origins and say it was stolen.

Furthermore, the True Faith failed.  It was breached and crushed as a “strong bulwark against Jewish/Globalist machinations” more than 45 years ago.  There is no returning to it, just as there is no return to the America of 1955-65.

Judeochristianity is jew-worshipping equalitarianism for gentiles.  In a sense it symbolizes the recovery of stolen property and a form of historical “justice” for the eternally persecuted jew.  It is not a “strong bulwark against Jewish/globalist machinations.”

To both the IRS and judeochristian mind Fr. John is a heretic.  They will not legally support his bid for 501c3 tax status.  Nor will many, if any, on this blog support his message to the degree required if donations to his cause are not tax deductible.  Easy money online racialists are sunshine patriots.  This stings, of course, but is the truth nevertheless.

My personal attitude toward Christianity notwithstanding, these facts must be dealt with – not ignored for the sake of an unity of message that can never be anything more than online, superficial, and temporary - at best.

Billy Piercey’s scenario of Christian pitchforks stirred by a fake television preacher is ludicrous.

Like it or not, this individual of sub-MR IQ who suffers from cognitive dissonance continues to maintain that the emperor has no clothes! Pay attention or continue to fruitlessly spin wheels in this online hobby.