|
|
|
This thread business Yesterday, in a brief debate with the star of Tory Euroscepticism Daniel Hannan - it had to be brief because he has no time to waste on the BNP, apparently - I was informed that:
That was on the subject of whether his own English people (actually, he’s half-Irish) have the same right to life as any other people, and this was on the subject of whether they have, in addition, the same right to land:
And this creature, in all his anti-English civicism and fatuous libertarianism, is supposed to be an Old Marlburian and an Oxford grad, and high-grade political material. His problem, of course, is that there is a certain depth and gravity to the argument we bring to the MSM threads which no one, and certainly not he, can match, and with which many are completely unfamiliar. We talk about existence and genocide, natural rights and interests, power and coercion, political corruption and deception. We shock. We break taboos. We challenge complacency, received wisdom, the habitual way of doing things. When we go on the threads we do so as revolutionaries. We are there to change everything. We are there to fight, and we fight to win. This is where we validate not just our politics but our racial selves: where we can be useful and contribute to the cause. This is where we can demonstrate that we are not what our enemies say we are, that the enemy’s ideological position is easily destroyed, and that the path we have taken is true and right for others to follow. For did we not also benefit from others who have performed this same small service? It is important, then. It is important that we do the job well. So I thought I would pull together some of the rules of thread warfare as I understand them. Again. As ever, your own thoughts and experiences of what works in which media would be appreciated. Choose a worthwhile opponent The first rule of engagement is commonly said to be to know your enemy. Then to know the ground you fight on. Not for us. We have a vast plethora of targets. So make it count. Choose one with a “high tariff”. Choose one where the audience is large or valuable or both. Choose one where the moderation will allow you to operate freely at least at the beginning. Be aware that the liberal illusion of moral superiority is fragile. Vanity will soon set in, and the response to your success will be censorship. This is as true of supposed beacons of hip, free-living radical libertarianism like Samizdata as it is of the controlled mainstream like CiF. It was, as Svigor and Captainchaos discovered, true of Takimag. Maybe a softly, softly approach would maintain access to such media. But to what gain for us? Not so much a taking of moral high-ground as an examination of their moral quagmire As Daniel Hannan demonstrated by his sniffy disdain for the BNP, these people actually believe they are better than us, not only intellectually but ethically. They really need to be disabused of this comforting notion. It is ground that I have covered at MR before, with particular attention to the racism that actually lurks in these liberalistically perfected minds. And since racism is so very important to their moral modus operandum, it’s racism that offers the most opportunities for our prurient investigation.
Bully the bastards Just a personal preference. The older I get, the less forgiveness I have for lightweights who can’t wait to put down “the racist” who arrives at their favourite media website - the stupid ones who insist on getting involved when, actually, one is there for a worthwhile prey. I get more satisfaction than is probably healthy from informing them that they are just flies to be swatted, and their anti-racist skills won’t help them now. Make a point of issuing the threat at the outset. Tell them what you are going to do to their treasured belief system. Lay it on. Then go to work. Push the boundaries Be aware of the big picture, discourse-wise. It is incumbent on articulate and informed nationalists to shift the ground of public opinion before our politics can function:
Shifting the median towards us, however, is not achieved by whispering softly less one offends against faux-correct morals. In the tug-of-war the flag only moves because of superior power at one end of the rope. Break the taboos. Expand what can be said at the margin, and you expand what it is usual to say at the centre. Make them answer questions, and more questions There are many questions which liberals, left or right, simply cannot answer. There are many questions which Jews cannot answer. Questions about human interests and values, human equality, human nature ... questions about double standards, Judaism and Jewish racial supremacism ... questions about the right to life (and for people who want to dig a little deeper, about the contingency of same upon our natural, common convulsive reaction to the facticity of death) ... almost any truly human and important question is unanswerable by people who think, or claim to think, that the unfettered will is All. Questions signal the will to attack. Questions shape the debate. Ask them in runs of several at a time. Leave your opponents no space to wriggle free. It works. Try it. Manufacture and disseminate word-viruses There are some phrases that I use repetitively, in the hope of them becoming familiar to the dissident ear and used more widely. The first one, and still the most frequently employed for me, is race-replacement. The much-missed Fred Scrooby donated this to the nationalist cause. It had some kind of life beforehand, and appears once or twice in Frank Salter’s opus which was published in 2003, a year before MR launched. But Fred hewed it from the word-rock separately and, as far as I am concerned, deserves full credit for its invention. I began dumping it on nationalist blogs, including Simon Darby’s, and using it at CiF to try to get it into the language. Now CiFers are well aware of it, and the hateful ones react to it like a disturbed snake. BNP activists tend to restrict themselves to using just replacement. The other r-word is deemed largely unsayabale, so I can’t tell to what extend they have picked up the term. Another effort I’ve made is to replace the silly and weak-sounding adverb multiculti with the dark and threatening noun the Multicult. I habitually mis-spell it by capitalising the “c” to emphasise its self-purpose. I don’t want the term to only be associated with Multiculturalism. To me, it is the developing race-less world of the elites’ Globality and Judaism’s Olam Ha-ba. It is the antithesis of England, Europe, our land. It is the nation in which we die. How much of this can be communicated through a few thread comments, of course, I don’t know. These things take much, much more force and fidelity to purpose than one man can muster. Another phrase that I use, albeit more selectively, is Soren’s pleasingly graphic but subtle description of liberalism as the struggle against the struggle for existence. Another is the official Holocaust narrative, which I generally follow up with as opposed to the history of Poland, 1941-45” or somesuch. But my favourite at the moment is this truism, for which many thanks to ben tilman: It is impossible for a people defending itself from aggression to be “racist” or “xenophobic”. Self-defence is a morally unimpeachable cause. The racism belongs solely to those who strive to deny the right to defence. Repetition has power, as someone once said about things that are not actually true - a qualification that does not apply to our discourse. Good hunting. Comments:2
Posted by Frank on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 02:51 | # Peter Brimelow refers to race replacement as: Electing a New People Nonwhite children under 3 are now a majority in the US, not 50 years since whites, and likely their children, were ~89% of the population. It’s akin to an employee training his foreign replacement… It’s an outrage: natives settle and build a society, and foreigners move in to enjoy the perks. 3
Posted by Frank on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 02:56 | # Brits seem to be among the purest in the world. I don’t know whether that’s 10000 years of heritage or more. The English were very closely related to the the natives. 4
Posted by Wolf on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 03:54 | # Using “genetic distances” one can clearly distinguish between, say, immigrants from Denmark and those from, say, India: “Cavalli-Sforza’s team compiled extraordinary tables depicting the “genetic distances” separating 2,000 different racial groups from each other. For example, assume the genetic distance between the English and the Danes is equal to 1.0. Then, Cavalli-Sforza has found, the separation between the English and the Italians would be about 2.5 times as large as the English-Danish difference. On this scale, the Iranians would be 9 times more distant genetically from the English than the Danish, and the Japanese 59 times greater. Finally, the gap between the English and the Bantus (the main group of sub-Saharan blacks) is 109 times as large as the distance between the English and the Danish.” 5
Posted by Wandrin on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 05:34 | # The only thing i’d add is if a person isn’t used to debating then they should start slow, small and simple and work up as they gain practise. 6
Posted by Frank on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 07:09 | # It’s funny how in America: Mayans, Iroquois, Inuit, etc. are all native to the Americas as a whole - two continents! While Britain is declared a “nation of immigrants” for having had French and English (of nearly identical stock) cross a Channel that’s a mere 21 mi wide at one point. 7
Posted by Bill on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 09:19 | # Over at Police Inspector Gadget’s blog, Feb.12 2011. http://inspectorgadget.wordpress.com/ Inspector Gadget ‘allowed’ in his latest essay ‘Student Protesters Can Behave If They Want To’ a link to the Gates of Vienna. See comment by tonyq @ (20 comments in approx.) Referenced link to Gates of Vienna. http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/02/my-yesterday-in-luton.html Inspector gadgets notes under link the following. (Gadget Note: I have read this and I will allow the link; however, I and therefore by definition this Blog, DO NOT support the EDL, UAF or any other political party) The number of comments garnered is in the order of 120 ‘ish. Skim down the comments and note the number of references to the link, and these are the people at the sharp end. There is a mountain to climb. 8
Posted by Lurker on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 11:15 | # Bill, Im sure youve seen the coppers blob. It seems to have gone now. That was pretty good in its day I remember, maybe through rose tinted specs, that the comments could be quite robust. Then the policeman running it moved to Canada and some other guys took it over, by then it had a pretty large readership, lots of police commenters. It was totally emasculated, a state PC approved version of what it had been before. Even to the degree that the guys running it would deny factual certainties like the disparity in white & black violent crime. The whining was pathetic. I stopped reading it then and as I note today the blog has sunk with all hands. Whats the point of that sort of enterprise when its only parroting what you can see anyday in the MSM? Its almost as if a reasonably trustworthy source had been ‘turned’ by TPTB. 9
Posted by Leon Haller on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 11:51 | # Good post.
What is especially pathetic is that the ridiculous gumba Richard Spencer is now the director of the National Policy Institute. Doesn’t it publish TOQ? How did that happen? 10
Posted by Frank on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 16:01 | # Leon, didn’t you used to get in trouble over at Chronicles in the comments, years ago? I recently resubscribed to it, and I think I’ve figured out what Dr. Fleming desires: an aristocracy (ideally) or monarchy that rules over a multi-ethnic area within the US. Nationalism he fears would lead to dual-morality, e.g. a nation-state seeking to expand for Lebensraum. According to a recent article of his, nationalism inevitably leads to empire… How that’s so: your guess is as good as mine. I’ve read him for years, and I still can’t fully grasp his positions. It very much seems to me that nationalism is the most poweful force that could resist empire… I’m certainly not of his view… What sort of rulers would we have to put up with to manage us? The proper rulers ought to be from one’s own stock. It’s funny, I found vindication for my views within the Greek texts he recommends. Anyway, he’s a brilliant thinker despite the otherworldly stance, which might apply to the Balkans and other parts of Europe but not the US. 11
Posted by Revolution Harry on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 18:00 | #
I’d be intrigued as to what your response was. There’s nearly 700 comments otherwise I’d search through the thread. 12
Posted by sk on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 18:09 | # According to the UN convention on the prevention and punishment of genocide 1948, race-replacemant is a method of genocide. “Deliberately inflicting conditions on the group calculated to physically destroy the group(the whole group or even part of the group.” Multicult is a code word for inflicting genocide on white children and ONLY white children in their own homes. Genocide says it exactly. 13
Posted by Frank on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 19:55 | # I just LOVE IT when GW dons his cheerleading outfit and flashes some nice leg. This piece rocks. 15
Posted by Robbo on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 20:43 | # There are anti-whites on both sides of politics, committing genocide against white children and thinking themselves virtuous for doing so. Conservative respectables, commit white genocide for the economy. Leftists commit white genocide for social justice. Either way, the whole damn lot should be sued, for everything they have, under common law. We can use the UN Genocide Laws as evidence. Lets get this thing rolling! 16
Posted by Bill on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 20:55 | # Lurker February 14, 2011, 10:15 AM When he left, I stopped calling in. I didn’t realise it was to continue under new management. I can’t remember when I first alighted on Inspector Gadget’s Ruralshire patch. Straight off I was taken by his style of writing, I think it’s his eye for peripheral detail that entices you into his world. (Almost gumshoe film noir at times) Like everything else these days, behind it all I ask, is it the real deal? If it’s genuine then he is running great risk of loosing everything. The police are being tasked (increasingly) with the fallout of what we here talk about. Many moons ago, I reckoned that one day, they’re going to find themselves between a rock and the other place. A policeman’s lot indeed, is not a happy one. No doubt, the elites have got it all figured out with heavily armed rapid response forces being flown in from who knows where? This is an area (civil unrest) that I’ve been interested in for a while now, so many questions, so much conjecture, all to be rolled out in the non too distant future. Hence my visits to Ruralshire. I think it might be a good place to have the face hard pressed against the window, maybe get to gauge the temperature out there, like it or not, those guys will be in a unique position, whether they are aware of it or not. I’ve asked a few times now is the Internet is making a difference and if it is at what level and in what way? I answer my own question by looking at the voting numbers and note who they vote for, it hardly seems the Internet is influencing the masses. If it is the establishment who is feeling the heat from the blogosphere, then in what way are they responding? GW is right, the elites can no longer write their stuff unchallenged and retire to the bar with their mates, it’s as Corporal Jones says, ‘they don’t like it up’em Mr Mainwaring, they don’t like it up’em.’ The BDF BNP forum. http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/bnp/ One of the current threads under discussion is ‘How can we more effective?’ and has extended to over 50 pages. GW has been heroically battling it out from the beginning (25.01.2011) not to mention his gritty determination in the marathon sessions on the Telegraph’s blog comment section of late. If there was a blogger of the year contest he would get my nomination and that’s no error - as Shorty Blake would say. This comment started out as a brief reply to Lurker. 17
Posted by Leon Haller on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 22:17 | # Leon, didn’t you used to get in trouble over at Chronicles in the comments, years ago? I recently resubscribed to it, and I think I’ve figured out what Dr. Fleming desires: an aristocracy (ideally) or monarchy that rules over a multi-ethnic area within the US. Nationalism he fears would lead to dual-morality, e.g. a nation-state seeking to expand for Lebensraum. According to a recent article of his, nationalism inevitably leads to empire… How that’s so: your guess is as good as mine. I’ve read him for years, and I still can’t fully grasp his positions. It very much seems to me that nationalism is the most poweful force that could resist empire… I’m certainly not of his view… What sort of rulers would we have to put up with to manage us? The proper rulers ought to be from one’s own stock. It’s funny, I found vindication for my views within the Greek texts he recommends. Anyway, he’s a brilliant thinker despite the otherworldly stance, which might apply to the Balkans and other parts of Europe but not the US. (Frank) ————- Frank, Yes, I was banned there, and many other places. What is telling is that I am not nearly as extreme as many racialists, including here at MR, where I am probably on the “left” because I defend both capitalism and Christianity. But Fleming et al could not deal with me precisely because I force them (and their readers, who often were in agreement with me) to confront both the racial implications of their own views, as well as the effects race has on the nation and civilization they claim to wish to preserve. They have utterly no answer to my firmly but politely stated arguments, so they (esp Fleming) mischaracterize my positions, and then refuse to post my replies (mostly, though, they are content with banning me, under whatever name I use to post). Basically, they are cowards (I happen to know for a personal fact that Sam Francis thought so, too). At some level they know that every aspect of society and civilization that they claim to cherish is, to varying extents, threatened by multiracialism, but they willfully refuse to draw the correct conclusions - either in theory (that whites, including Middle Americans, would be better off in segregated ethnostates), or in practice (that it is perfectly natural and ethical for whites, who founded and built America, to practice a nationalist politics - as minorities do under the guise of “liberalism” - in defense of our interests, property and way of life). They would much rather crankily discuss pragmatically useless conservative (and increasingly Christian theological) arcana, than actually attempt to formulate a race-realistic conservative politics for Middle American survival. Let me put it this way: between race and religion as the two possible central organizing principles for an American Right (some would argue that liberty is a third, though I disagree, for reasons too involved to discuss here) they will always prefer religion, no matter how inapposite it might be both to particular issues, and general strategy. And note: this statement should not be taken as contradictory to my own belief in the central importance to saving white/Western civilization of developing a white nationalism that is theologically compatible with Christianity. White Americans - to save traditional America - need to organize themselves collectively as whites, not as Christians, which is and will continue to be a waste of time. But our racial politics should be conducted within the bounds of Christian natural law. I believe there is no theological incompatibility between Christianity properly understood and a defensive white racial politics devoted to preventing our further racial dispossession and ultimate extinction. This is the intellectual area I am studying in depth, and which I intend to write about formally in the future (after I am finished with my studies and research). I think Fleming knows I’m right, which is why he is so defensive towards me. He would pretend not to notice me if asked, but the truth is evident from whom he chooses to ban. As best as I could determine, all those he blocked except me were either impolite, or overly tendentious or distracting. I expressed myself well, and was always intellectually serious (until after a certain point I got sick of having elegantly written posts, usually more insightful than what the main writers had written, summarily deleted). Fleming, an ex-civil rights marcher, never forget, just can’t handle the Hard Right. It was rumored he hated Sam Francis (Sam merely thought Fleming ridiculous), but as Sam was by light years the best writer at Chronicles (the “star” of the magazine, as another of the long-time contributors whom Fleming has chased away has described him after his death), he couldn’t very well ban him, too! As to Fleming’s “brilliance”, I dissent. He is a very impressively learned man (his sub-editors are much less so), especially in his wonderful knowledge of languages, and obviously highly intelligent. His writing style is adequate, but hardly sparkles. But a “brilliant thinker”? I don’t think so. I’ve been reading his magazine for two decades, and I’ve read one of his books (someday I will read The Morality of Everyday Life, which sounds like it could be very important). He has a lot of good insights, but I would hardly call him a profound or even systematic thinker, except in comparison to the shallow fools who write for the broader conservative movement. 18
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 22:28 | # Harry, It was all standard boilerplate. There were two main comments and extentions, separated by several hours. I’ve found the second, which I put up to get the issue on the front of the thread again. This was it:
There followed a long chain of responses, mostly in favour, during which my comments were attacked by the moderator. I am sorry to say I gave way to ANGRY CAPITALS again in re-posting everything. But at least it all stayed up the second time. 19
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 22:38 | # SK, I notice you have dumped Bob Whitaker’s wisdom here (“Everybody says there is this race problem”), and no doubt elsewhere. The message is fine. But may I suggest that you shape the opening to the particular thread you are posting on. That will stop it from looking like the cut and paste job it is, and heighten its effect a good deal I would say. Just a thought. 20
Posted by Jimmy Marr on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:08 | # GW is, and has been doing an admirable job. Forgive me for expanding the theme of this thread, but I’ve just had something of an upsetting experience, and could benefit from a few words of advice. In recent months I’ve developed the habit of taking my wife out cafe a couple of times a week for coffee. We were in the cafe today when a gentleman approached me, and said “There’s a rumor going around that you are a Nazi. Is it true?” I was noncommittal in my response. I basically said I wasn’t aware of any viable political party in the United States that could rightfully be described as National Socialist , but if there was I’d probably be a member of it. He then advised me that the cafe was a preferred place for anarchists, and that my visits there were attracting attention, and becoming a source of irritation to them. I replied that I saw that as a good thing, and hoped we could establish common ground through open discussion. He then said that “racism” wasn’t going to play out very well in that venue. I replied that I thought the days of anti-White racism were coming to an end and could no longer occupy the moral high ground in pubic discourse. The general vibe is that there are a growing number of people among that cafe’s clientele, including some employees, who know about my past activities and hate me for what they think they I represent. The further intimation suggests that I’ve been warned of the potential for violence if I continue visiting the establishment. If I report this to the police, they will undoubtedly follow up with an investigation and the animosity will be increased, and my status as persona non grata will grow. If I don’t report it, and there is eventual trouble, that may not play out well either.
21
Posted by Louis Calabro on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:16 | # Contra Costa Times, 2/14/11 ” Surge of Indian nationals cross illegally into the US….Thousands have come….”
22
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:29 | # Jimmy, Seems to me that you handle yourself pretty well, Jimmy. I wonder if there are any anarchists who would have approved of the actions of Herschel Grynszpan, the young Jew whose murder of a German Embassy official in 1938 sparked Kystallnacht. When he was in custody he told French Police:
23
Posted by Revolution Harry on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:45 | # Thanks for the reply GW. I applaud your efforts but I do feel that more needs to be put into rebutting the specific claims made by Hannan. This is a very important weapon that is used against the English and being able to defuse it effectively would be invaluable. Tony Shell of This is Our Land (see Our Actual Identity) has made an admirable effort but I think it could be improved on. Maybe you could start a thread and then collate the results into a reasonably short but even more effective reply to the likes of Hannan and the many others like him. I may approach the issues of mass immigration and multiculturism differently to you but we do have similar aims in that we wish to preserve the English and British as a people. I’d certainly find a document along the lines I’ve described very useful in my own efforts. 24
Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 00:31 | # Mr. Marr, It appears to be time to find another coffee shop. However, if you wish to pursue it, speak to the owner. Relay the story exactly as you have done. Ask if the clientele/employees speak for him/her. Ask if it is his desire that you not frequent the store, and if that is the case, you will respect his to right to free association. If you are denied access to the establishment, then report it to the police in case you are confronted away from the coffee shop because at that point you will have nothing to lose. It’s not that the cops will help you much but at least the incident is on file. 25
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 00:43 | # That’s a fine site, Harry. An unusual mixture of romanticism and legalism. I’ve admired it before, and find little - a little - to take issue with. What we do on newspaper threads and here at MR, and all across the radical right and nationalist blogosphere, is quite different, obviously. But there isn’t one way or even a best way to do it. We all need to do something - at least one positive action - every day. Concerning short replies to critics, we ran a brief series of posts under the title Snappy Refutations not very long ago, and there is some good stuff on the threads there. The race faq also has some good material in it. It’s there, for the most part, if one takes the trouble to look. 26
Posted by Ivan on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 01:34 | #
Do not let them intimidate you. Worst comes to worst, they will beat you up a bit, but if you behave in the calm and reasonable manner, showing clearly you are not there to provoke them, just like you did behave on that encounter, the chances for that happening are very slim. Even if they lose their cool and go for a violence, then (1) you won; (2) you’ll learn about yourself things you could never have learned by arguing with James Bowery at Majorityrights, or any other way, for that matter. If you are afraid, then ... well, I suggest you invite the theoretician of the single combat to the death teaching with you on the next visit to that cafe, and see how he handles himself. 27
Posted by Jimmy Marr on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 01:55 | #
I’ve decided to take Leon Haller in as a silent partner in the acquisition of my own cafe in an appropriately themed building. renneR will flip burgers, as Bowery, disguised as a waitress, maintains security. Ivan will be in charge public relations. 29
Posted by Englander on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 02:06 | # Re. Guessedworker’s battle words pasted @9:28PM: Masterful stuff. It’s hard to imagine that kind of writing not penetrating the minds of most remaining normal Englishman. (The majority in other words). I have been following your activities at the telegraph and you’re doing a great job. I hope you can provide links to any and all major efforts that you make, as they are both inspiring and educational, and the tone of the responses is interesting to keep tabs on. 30
Posted by Jimmy Marr on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 02:08 | # Ivan, Can you double as a talent scout for this enterprise. That guy would make an excellent backup “waitress”. 31
Posted by Ivan on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 02:41 | # No need for White Castle on the bank of bayou 32
Posted by Occasional Reader of MR on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 02:57 | # Tip1: Post the odd link to other websites/blogs every now and then (with a small quote so the clicker knows what to expect). Before I was “converted” to the “MajorityRights position”, I was the sort who only ever frequented the mainstream blogs such as the BBC. It was people who posted links to right wing blogs in the comments section who expanded my horizons and lessened the mainstream grip on my mind. They set me off on a journey of discovery that has led me to sites like this. Tip2: 1. Some practice so offensive that it can scarcely be discussed in public is advocated by a RESPECTED expert in a RESPECTED forum. This process is all the more insidious because the change in attitude occurs in the subconscious; thus, many persons are not even aware their attitudes have been changed. 33
Posted by Cpt. Swindle on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 03:27 | # These are excellent points raised in this article. I will be forwarding this. You make a great point that the racist left has been allowed through a psychological deception aimed at undermining and eventually eliminating the white race a false sense of superiority with their famed “diversity is good from a distance” view points. Any white morons who assume that by promoting any other race over their own is a positive thing need to wake the hell up and return their bubbly naive thoughts to a reality concerned with the survival and advancement of the society they were allowed to flourish in. Diversity is not good and it does not work. Certain races are not and will never be our genetic equals (at everything, everyone has their advantages some are faster then others and will always probably be.). The western European peoples and nations states deserve a homeland and nation state where their genetic advancement and interests assume priority over “liberal bullshit”, that is always proved wrong under every absolute circumstance. How many white groups in Mexico do you think brazenly are allowed to walk around calling themselves “the race” defaming the very civilization that supports them? It has gotten ridiculous enough to the point that any white person who doesn’t see the true agenda is just plainly and simply a goddamn fool. Yet even those pathetic leftist sheeples deserve a right to pursue a positive existence surrounded by the peoples where their health and wellbeing assume preference to some Somali bushmen who shits in the street who will never contribute anything healthy or positive to ANY REAL CIVILIZATION. We bring these dirt bags into our countries so they can defame us, call us racists, and ultimately take over where the moors left off in 15th century Spain. If/or/and when a European country finally finds itself a political minority it is deservedly doomed and the zionists can then make a toast that they have finally destroyed a white homeland. However I think the tide is returning in our favor rational racism is reasserting its genetic right to exist and we will get through this as a people better then ever. It will get nasty now that most of our countries have immigrant levels higher then 30% but we will eventually do them all a favor and send them home with a little education and perspective to better their own peoples and societies. What do I know I have always been a bit of an optimist. 34
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 03:46 | # In recent months I’ve developed the habit of taking my wife out cafe a couple of times a week for coffee. We were in the cafe today when a gentleman approached me, and said “There’s a rumor going around that you are a Nazi. Is it true?” I was noncommittal in my response. I basically said I wasn’t aware of any viable political party in the United States that could rightfully be described as National Socialist , but if there was I’d probably be a member of it. He then advised me that the cafe was a preferred place for anarchists, and that my visits there were attracting attention, and becoming a source of irritation to them. (Jimmy Marr) —- Do you have any like-minded associates you could encourage to visit this cafe periodically? You’re not in Southern CA by chance? I’m not a Nazi, but I hate aggressive anti-Nazis. I’m an anti-anti-Nazi. Screw them! That said, I must counsel prudence - unless the thought of being attacked and therefore generating a measure of publicity for the white cause actually appeals to you. This is why I so oppose Nazism as a tactical matter. Let’s say a bunch of leftist hooligans attacked you. If you proudly admit your Nazi leanings, any PR benefit will be lessened or eliminated. Even if one is a Nazi, it is tactically more advantageous to deny it. From your own perspective, have you ever heard a Jew admit to being a Jewish supremacist? Ever?! They even try to whitewash Zionism, flailing about rhetorically in endless attempts to deny its Jewish supremacist essence. When people accuse me of racism, I always flip the matter around to a discussion of racial justice for whites (which our cause is), coupled with discussions of racial imperialism (eg, immigration), individual rights, especially to property (and thus against coercive racial integration, as with “civil rights”), as well as scientific and sociological truth about racial differences. The purpose is not to appeal to the brainwashed or psychologically defective white anti-racist (which represents a genetic strain within our race which cannot be overcome through ratiocination or argument), but to awaken more ignorant or neutral whites. Trying to justify being a “good Nazi”, in an age of excessive white universalism, is well-nigh impossible. To reiterate (and I shall keep doing so until the truth sinks in!): we are dying as a race for ethical reasons. However much there may be particular sinister interests pushing race-replacement, whether for ethnic or economic reasons, the white majorities do not rebel primarily for ethical reasons, because they think that a robust defense of the white race - which obviously would include and advocate the coercive measures (eg, mandatory expatriation of legally resident nonwhites) necessary to ensure our survival - is unethical. If not, why else does the race-replacement regime persist? Selfish short-term economic interests? Nonsense! Most whites have never fallen for the canard about immigrants being good for the economy - and certainly not now, when there is widespread public knowledge of the costs of immigration. Some pugnacious asshole asks you if you’re a Nazi, say, “No, but I believe in the survival of my race and nation. YOU GOTTA PROBLEM WITH THAT?!” 35
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 03:54 | # Posted by Desmond Jones on February 14, 2011, 11:31 PM | # It appears to be time to find another coffee shop. However, if you wish to pursue it, speak to the owner. Relay the story exactly as you have done. Ask if the clientele/employees speak for him/her. Ask if it is his desire that you not frequent the store, and if that is the case, you will respect his to right to free association. If you are denied access to the establishment, then report it to the police in case you are confronted away from the coffee shop because at that point you will have nothing to lose. It’s not that the cops will help you much but at least the incident is on file. This is a wise comment. I would add that reporting the (call it a) threat, and having it on police file, will go some way to exonerating you (ie, by helping establish a self-defense defense) should you injure someone in the course of any physical altercation. Our shitty liberal country has a huge bias against property, and in favor of “judgment-proof” dirtbags. Anarchists usually have no property, and so don’t have to worry about losing it by law. God, I hate the Left! Don’t worry, my book on Racial Ethics will have an extensive chapter on retributive policies, including for political crimes against our race. 36
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 04:23 | # The survival of the white race is, for me, synonymous with the survival of the best of humanity. We are our own justification. Just thought that needed to be said. 37
Posted by Jimmy Marr on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 04:29 | # I think, if I go to that cafe again I’ll take my MacBook with me and see if I can disarm my critics with humor: 38
Posted by Ivan on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 04:36 | #
I am sure Jimmy feels much better now. That might not help him to overcome his cowardice, but he can sleep well now in full confidence that Leon’s book will make it unnecessary to stand up for his manhood.
This is an unwise comment on a bad advise of a coward to a fake Nazi. 39
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 04:52 | # Ivan, Aren’t you Islamic? What are you doing here? You are not a man of the West (perhaps not any kind of man). 40
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 04:56 | # On the subject of threads, yes, it is vital to post often as time allows, esp if you are a quick writer. I just posted this on yahoo after an article about the new Obama budget: Obama is doing everything wrong (even assuming he is not a white-hating America hater, which I think both he and his wife are). Our economic problems are mostly self-inflicted (by liberals, and do-nothing “conservatives”). We need massive changes: stop nonwhite immigration first and foremost, then start ramping up capitalism through total deregulation, ending corporate taxation (but also bailouts), privatization of all non-military hard assets, like airports and buildings, and massive budget cuts to social(ist) spending. We can solve our problems, and come out fine. But only if we recognize that liberals did this to us - they created the violent, impoverished, ‘diverse’, cesspool America. The answer is to return to the wisdom of our ancestors, with one exception. We must exterminate criminals routinely and en masse, stop importing nonwhite immigrants (1.6 million every year, at a time of 20% real unemployment, too!!!), radically downsize government, and return to the morals and outlooks, especially on race, of our ancestors who built America. The exception is that we need taxpayer supported eugenics applied to the dysgenic, welfare receiving underclass, to undo the monster that liberal wealth redistribution has created (ie, minority birthrates would have been much lower over the past half-century if liberals hadn’t stolen so much tax money from whites, and given it to nonwhites, especially the most inferior and economically useless among them). Unless we do these things, civilization is as doomed here as it was in the “new” (ie crappy) South Africa, the Rainbow S—-hole where whites are robbed and raped and murdered every minute. 41
Posted by Ivan on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 05:36 | #
Using humor is not a bad idea, but I would strongly recommend you not taking your MacBook with you. Humor is easy, you don’t need a borrowed humor. Just say what comes naturally to your mind in the exact format it came to you, and people will think that you are joking. Let me give you an example. The other day I, among a group of others, was waiting in the lobby for the elevator (for GW and other Brits: elevator means lift). When the elevator ultimately arrived, it was almost full. Almost everybody in the waiting group has decided to wait for another elevator. I and couple of others were sure that we couldn’t possibly wait, so we forced ourselves into the cabin. Than it suddenly occurred to me: How would we decide whom to get rid first were the cabin to stop due to overload, and voiced my concern immediately looking straight into the eyes of the fat guy next to me without blinking. The fat guy was still digesting my question, while ladies were very fast to respond. One of them said: I think ladies should stay, to which I have objected instantaneously: As a gentleman, I could not allow that to happen - ladies always first. People thought I was joking, but I never joke - I am I serious man. 42
Posted by Ivan on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 05:54 | #
Yes, Leon, I am Islamic. Here where? In the West? I live in the West. I give good advice on how to behave like a man when people ask for it. I teach Western men good morals, reason, and mathematics. I also answer questions, including the stupid ones, when in a good mood. 43
Posted by Guest Lurker on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 06:42 | # Ivan wrote:
Who said he was a coward? And why would you impute this, unless you’re deliberately trying to be insulting? 44
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 06:46 | # Ron Unz gets taken to the woodshed at Mangan’s:
45
Posted by Ivan on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 08:13 | #
I said he was a coward. The word ‘impute’ means to accuse somebody in something which is not true. I am not accusing him of something that might be true or otherwise. I am not accusing him, period. When I say: Jimmy is a coward , I am simply making a statement, which is true without reasonable doubt, based solely on what he said. And the reason I made that statement wasn’t because I was deliberately trying to be insulting, as you seem to impute, but because I was trying to be helpful to him in overcoming his cowardice by shaming him. Please don’t impute now that I am deliberately trying to be patronizing. I am simply trying to answer your question as precisely and honestly as I possible can. P.S. It might help to clarify matters if I make another true statement: I felt many times in my life, and still do, that my behavior on this or that occasion was cowardly. 46
Posted by Mappy on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 08:43 | #
Your religion’s full of cowards who cannot take any kind of criticism, and so respond by making death threats and killing who they can’t intimidate into silence. Since Islam is nothing if not a vehicle for Arab supremacy, you are either a hopelessly deluded White, or you went to the wrong message board. In either case, you are trolling. 47
Posted by Guest Lurker on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 09:52 | #
There is nothing in what he said about his exchange with the other patron that would support your unqualified remark. Quite the contrary. He held his own in the exchange with the other patron. As to rationally weighing his options, knowing full well that his further patronization of the cafe might very well instigate an incident where both he and his wife are overwhelmed by a pack of anarchists lying in wait, where the police later would be likely to side with the offenders against the evil “Nazis”, Jimmy’s qualms are indicative of the presence of prudent deliberation, not the absence of courage. Your remark remains an unwarranted attack. 48
Posted by john fitzgerald on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 12:19 | # Jim, maybe the best thing to do is the most difficult - that is to say nothing. Here’s what happened to Jim Goad: 49
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:04 | #
Jimmy, I’d answer that question this way: Didn’t Hitler hate joos? I don’t hate joos per se, so I must not be a Nazi. However, I do hate white libtards and wiggers. Meaning: I hate white people who like or have a preference for niggers. (I’d probably use the word “blacks” instead of niggers for civility purposes only.) Then I’d ask him which category he fits into. 1) A wigger? 2) A white libtard? or 3) A normal person? I know it’s crude and rude, but, afterall, we DO live in a crude and rude world. PS NEVER ADMIT IN PUBLIC YOU ARE A NAZI - EVEN IF YOU ARE ONE !!! THAT’S TANTAMOUNT TO SOCIAL SUICIDE! If your reputation is one of a nazi, try to modify it to be one of a lovable racist. Things will work out much better for you that way. 50
Posted by calvin on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:46 | # “I’ve already explained why I fundamentally reject your definition of Britishness, and why I am glad we define nationality in civic rather than ethnic terms. The more one thinks about your arbitrary cut-off point, the sillier it is. Why include the Dutch who came over with William III? Or the Hugueonots? Or the Flemish weavers? Or the Normans? Or the Danes? Or the Saxons? Or the Romans?” Danny Hannan “Nationality” is only a valid definition in discussions about nation states, and since in the time of the Normans, the Danes, the Saxons, nd the Romans, Britain was a collective of tribal kingdoms, any argument based on movements of peoples into the territory which subsequently became the nation state of Great Britain is risibly invalid. This is only a toe tip into Hannan’s idiocy as it relates to these particular groups. Danny fails to make any distinction between their historical status as marauding, rapacious invaders and the present status of the many peoples swarming to our island as (supposed) “invited” guests, so we may as well add the Spanish armada and the Nazis to Hannan’s little list of peoples who should not fall outwith the scope of his “arbitrary cut-off point”. Imbecile! With regard to the later groups mentioned by Hannan, the Dutch, the Flemish and the Huguenots, it is also laughably absurd to imply that these groups entered the UK under the same political strictures that should apply in a modern democratic state (the guiding principle, of course, being that policy must essentially seek to conform to the will of the majority of the population of the governed). All of these groups came here in a time of the dominance of elites under the sheltering wing of aristocrats, whose depth care for the well being of the population of England, never mind its opinion, was subsequently exposed in the satanic child labour mills, and mines and poorhouses of merry England during the industrial revolution. A revolution impeled by a labour surplus created by the theft of the very land itself under the infamous enclosure laws. In brief, Hannan validates his view of “Britishness” by reference to the behaviour of historical elites who put four year old British children to work in mines. This would be a fine enough opinion if Hannan openly professed to be a modern feudal who, like the liberal left, asserted a moral superiority of ideology that abrogated the wishes of the unwashed majority, to the same extent that superiority of blood trumped the rights of subject inferiors in medieval time. Danny pretends to be a “libertarian”. One can only laugh! Having no desire for a cherry-picking ride in Daniel Hannan’s time machine, my opinion can only remain that, although politicians cannot be restricted abosulutely by populists beliefs and that politicians have the right to make mistakes, the sustained cross-party policy of mass-immigration into this country that has taken place over the period since the end of WWII, and has taken place consistently aginst the wishes of the majority population, is an act of criminal treason against the British people, that must be reversed in order to uphold the principles of democracy. The same principles of democracy that Tony Blair and David Cameron try to “uphold” by murdering hundreds of thousands of Muslims in foreign countries, and indeed wish to further “uphold” by incinerating, delimbing, blinding and disabling hundreds more defencless civilians in Iran. There is no statute of limitations on ownership, and this country belongs to the the descendants of its pre-WWII population, and will do so forever. Whether we can take it back or not. 51
Posted by Foundation on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:51 | # Dear cotewood, Like Englander I made my way here after reading your exchange with Daniel Hannan. I then realised you were Guessdworker, from Majorityrights.com I first came here about a year ago and this is my first post. Nothing elaborate, my only interest is the survival of my kinfolk. The name Foundation I take from the Anglo-Saxon Foundation, of which I am a member. We have links with The Steadfast Trust, a charitable organisation exclusively for the English, especially the children of the English: the next generation. We are also home to the English Shieldwall, activists who will evolve into a militia or fyrd should things get nasty; as I’m sure they will one day. Other links are with our cousins in Northern Europe where the ancient roots go deep and friendship is natural. GW, your defence of Englisc identity will not be forgotten. hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað Thank you. 52
Posted by sk on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 19:59 | # Guestworker, Good point,on Feb14. I’m not very skilled, but I’ll try. 53
Posted by Frank on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 20:07 | # Allegorically speaking: If someone asks if you’re a Know Nothing, tell them you Know Nothing! 54
Posted by Jimmy Marr on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 20:40 | # In looking back at the cafe exchange in which I was asked, apropos of nothing, if I was a Nazi, I might have done well to shift the focus of the discussion away from ideology and on to empirical terms by responding with the question: “What is a Nazi without the Holocaust?” At least at that point, if my interrogator had any true interest in discussion, we would have had some access to verifiable, (and non-verifiable) facts and allegations. 55
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 20:58 | # Foundation. Thank you. I know your work. It is valuable. I have a particular reason for opening a conversation with you guys. I’ll be in touch. 56
Posted by ben tillman on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:23 | # I believe there is no theological incompatibility between Christianity properly understood and a defensive white racial politics devoted to preventing our further racial dispossession and ultimate extinction. Quite to the contrary, acquiescence in such dispossession and extinction amounts to a heresy. It is a rejection of the Jesus-as-Savior principle to require that the White Race also lay down its life to save the world. 57
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:35 | # I think you are right, ben. The messiac’s final acts are the declaration of precisely this. Abrahamicism is more unified than Christians - the orginally sinful goyim striving for a place in “heaven” - know. 58
Posted by Ivan on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:36 | # Jimmy, If you are simply looking for an advice how to handle questions like the one you have been asked (There’s a rumor going around that you are a Nazi. Is it true?), it is very simple. You, or anybody else for that matter, cannot be a Nazi. A Nazi is a member of a National Socialist Party of Germany. The party does not exist any more - one cannot be a member of a party that does not exist. One can be a Nazi sympathizer to one degree or another. If the person confronting you is interested of your opinion of the Nazi movement originated and led by Hitler, you will get an excellent opportunity to express your views on this important subject, and you should be able to explain in concise and short sound bytes what you do like about the Nazi ideology and what you don’t. It is not complicated, just like with humor, be open, straight, honest, and modest. One more thing. Americans are physical cowards, whoever they might be: anarchists, communists, or fascists. Don’t be afraid that an American will assault you physically in a coffee shop. In my almost twenty years of living in the United States, I have seen only two real-life physical fist fights. In one case, two black ladies were fighting over a black man; I was the participant in the other one. 59
Posted by Wandrin on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:57 | # SK
Don’t be disheartened. GW likes debate whereas Bob’s thing is designed to be anti-debate. It’s designed to give people an easy to use weapon that is equivalent to giving the opposition a verbal punch in the face. It’s particular well suited to places where people haven’t woken up yet. Personally, given that the other side are verbally very skilled i think only the very best word-jugglers should debate while the rest of us should use Bob-style verbal punch-in-the-face arguments - or continually repeated statements. So don’t change, just recognize that it suits some places better than others. 60
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:46 | # One more thing. Americans are physical cowards, whoever they might be: anarchists, communists, or fascists. Don’t be afraid that an American will assault you physically in a coffee shop. In my almost twenty years of living in the United States, I have seen only two real-life physical fist fights. In one case, two black ladies were fighting over a black man; I was the participant in the other one.
I think “Ivan” spends too much time among white liberals in some university town. Or maybe he’s based out here in Hollywood. 61
Posted by Jimmy Marr on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:58 | # This video link doesn’t really belong here, but I think some of you might find it interesting. The best part, in my opinion, appears between 2 and 4 minutes, and deals with the development and promotion of televised team sports as a vehicle for misdirecting the normal, healthy, tribal instincts of males. 62
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:59 | # Wandrin, You debate as well anyone. Your modesty is noted. I don’t mean to place SK in a difficult position. I do think a bit of “environmental fitness” would help the material he’s using, but any commitment he makes to our cause is only ever good. More power to him. 64
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 23:01 | # Having a quick lunch at my desk, I see calvin’s comment above. There are some important elements in it, as well as I think a measure of confusion. I’m busy the rest of today, and tomorrow until the evening; anyone else want to take a turn at deconstructing it? It would be a heuristically useful exercise for ethnonationalists. 65
Posted by Bill on Wed, 16 Feb 2011 00:12 | # Return of the Camp of the Saints. GalliaWatch.
In English http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/this_thread_business/#comments My emphasis. 67
Posted by Wandrin on Wed, 16 Feb 2011 01:56 | # GW,
Yeah i know. Horses for courses. 68
Posted by Armor on Wed, 16 Feb 2011 02:18 | # Bill: “Jean Raspail, author of The Camp of the Saints” I like an image Raspail has been using of late. His words: I don’t know if the phrase “a country of hermit crabs” works very well in English. Otherwise, it is a good description of what Western countries are turning into. 69
Posted by Lurker on Wed, 16 Feb 2011 04:32 | # Those Telegraph threads are horribly set up. I made a few comments, I clicked on my name there to be told that I hadnt in fact made any comments, even though Id come directly from one. If you click on anyone’s name it only tells you which thread they have left a comment on, it cant list their actual comments - hopeless. What would be handy if we had a permanent section here, in the menu, where we could leave urls of threads we were involved in and then anyone fancying joining in would know where to go. 70
Posted by Jimmy Marr on Wed, 16 Feb 2011 05:17 | #
That would be really handy. Then we could go somewhere else and fight with each other! 71
Posted by Selous Scout on Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:20 | # I’m not sure about this. I don’t think it’s half as difficult to remove the unwanted from our countries as some make out. It might take a few years and require some blood, sweat and tears, but still… How does “Get the f*ck out of my country or I’ll shoot you and your family!” work in context? Quite well I’d imagine. Not to mention the immigration restrictionism, punitive legislation, and punitive taxation preceding such a situation. 72
Posted by Graham_Lister on Thu, 17 Feb 2011 01:11 | # Did anyone else see the BBC documentary “Geert Wilders: Europe’s Most Dangerous Man?” Did not know just how in hock to Israeli/Jewish interests he is. What a digusting uber-Zionist he is. 73
Posted by Jimmy Marr on Thu, 17 Feb 2011 01:41 | # Harold Covington talks about Muslims vis a vis American White Nationalism: http://northwestfront.org/2011/02/radio-free-northwest-february-17th-2011/ 74
Posted by Ivan on Thu, 17 Feb 2011 05:10 | # Harold Covington is a scum bag and a lier, but at least he is not stupid enough to fall for jewish ploys to put whites and muslims at each other throats. He is a perfect specimen of the phenomenon in white nationalist movement Dr Pierce dubbed ‘Hobbyism’: http://noncounterproductive.blogspot.com/2010/10/perils-of-hobbyism-by-dr-william-l.html At the very first shot I made at Sir Harold couple months ago, he came across as a dishonest and little man he is. I posted the following comment to his podcast of Dec 23, 2010 where he was addressing a rumor that he was jewish (personally, I don’t think he is smart enough to be suspected of being jewish): Dear Mr. Covington, I have seen your picture somewhere on the Internet - a big guy with beard. Admittedly, it’s hard to discern a jewish trace in your appearance. That’s why the details of your family tree, you have presented so eloquently in this podcast, almost completely convinced me that you are not jewish at all. The only thing still puzzles me is the following train of thought. We know for a fact that nobody can beat jews in the art of lying. And you seem pretty good at lying - how come? Is it just you are more British than American: We know that the Brits are pretty good fibbers too, right? For example, soap made out of jewish fat, lampshades made of jewish skin, etc were propaganda ploys against the Nazis the British came up with, not the jews. Merry Christmas. To my surprise, he published my comment. My surprise was short lived though: After reading my comment, I have discovered that big bad Harold not just circumcised my comment - he literally castrated it. You can verify the validity of my accusation of Harold’s vandalism towards my original comment by comparing it to the butchered version of it: http://northwestfront.org/2010/12/radio-free-northwest-december-23rd-2010/#comments I would grant Mr Covington the credit he deserves for the breadth of his factual knowledge though. Hell, he knows even of Tscherim Soobzokov, the Circassian community leader in New Jersey who was murdered by the Jewish Defense League. If I may resort to an analogy: Mr Covington is not a well from which one can draw a fresh and resuscitating artesian water - he is rather a puddle with not so clean rain water covering a vast area. You never know what you’ll get from that puddle. He is also very good at fast and smooth, deep throat talking with absolutely no pause whatsoever to let his listeners to reflect a little bit on what the hell this arrogant, tough guy is talking about. Well, our time is up now. So, that’s it for this week’s edition. This is not Harold Covington, and I’ll see you next week. Until then: Sasha and de Bum - Freedom ? 75
Posted by Ivan on Thu, 17 Feb 2011 07:24 | #
Yes, siree, he is. It shouldn’t be too difficult now to extrapolate that revelation to Herr Thilo Sarrazin. Beware of Islam bashing politician - a sure sign of a stooge groomed by the slick fellow behind the curtain. 76
Posted by ScotchFiend on Fri, 18 Feb 2011 11:17 | # Great post and activist work! Educating and deprogramming the vast majority of our people is one of our most vital missions. What do you all think of the term “non-White supremacist” (and Jewish supremacist when apropos)? One reason it seems a bit more exact to me than “left-racist” is that in ORCS (“Our” Repressive “Civil” Society), pretty much the full list of loathsome anti-White policies and double standards are not only held by the left, but the middle and “right” too (except for some paleo-conservatives and those further to their right). Admittedly, calling it left-racist is probably accurate in that what was a far-leftist, Jewish supremacist set of doctrines has slowly infiltrated practically all mainstream organizations, but many of the brainwashed parroting these doctrines don’t recognize that or see themselves as leftist. In an American context the totally bought-and-paid-for, false opposition Republican party fulsomely gushes this crap constantly and enthusiastically acts as politically correct commissars, as do right Libertarians and many others thought of as Conservatives, like various religious groups and the patriot movement. In Britain I believe only parties like the National Front and the BNP openly support Whites. The UKIP doesn’t, do they? Obviously the traitors in the Conservative party don’t either. Basically only the “far Right” is opposed to the oppressive, anti-White program , at least openly, proudly and with clear reasoning and principles. I also believe widespread use of “non-White supremacist” can help us deconstruct the massive lies around the widely used but usually false “white supremacist”. Many pro-Whites have no desire to dominate or harm non-Whites; just the goal of emancipating at least some good fraction of our people (in an American context) from the hateful, lying, virulently anti-White system that dominates our people and steadily engineers our genocide. One of our greatest opportunities is to build cognitive dissonance resulting from the massive and brazen lies, hypocrisy and double standards that all align against Whites and only Whites. We can awaken the brainwashed to the shocking magnitude of their comprehensive conditioning, which can spiral outward, gaining mass, providing feedback that continually strengthens our people and draws more energy into the just cause of our liberation. Nothing like an enraged former dupe newly initiated in the shocking, deep truths to passionately join our struggle to save our people. I’m working on a couple of posts that I hope will complement some of the work done by MR folks and others like Jamie Kelso with his recent experience at CPAC 2011 that was uploaded to youtube (“Jamie Kelso at CPAC” with a duplicate under White Nationalist Recruiter Rebuffed At CPAC 2011). I’ll post a comment when they’re done and can copy them on MR if desired. 77
Posted by ScotchFiend on Fri, 18 Feb 2011 20:50 | # To build on my previous comment. I’ve also discussed this issue a bit over at Vanishing American in this comment. We can wield a variety of terms along with elaborations on their meanings to build cognitive dissonance among the brainwashed and ultimately to deconstruct the racist, anti-White lexicon, eventually leading to the dissipation of its current sacred power. Racism, privilege and supremacism are three such terms applied very dishonestly only against Whites. For example, “left racism” is a novel use of “racism” that as used, explained and documented, will raise awareness about racism used by the left which currently claims control of the definition of racism and exempts themselves and their clients from any possibility of this “mortal sin”. Other variations that seem useful include: anti-White racist, non-White racist, Jewish racist, Black racist, etc. and the corresponding racism terms. For example, “anti-White racist” means a “someone holding racist views against Whites” and can apply to non-Whites but also to White dupes or sellouts, while “non-White racist” would only apply to non-Whites. A term like “Jewish racist” is a bit vague without clarification or context while terms like “anti-White Jewish supremacist” is more precise if a bit unwieldy. Ultimately I think the value of the correctness and precision is better than trying to create short but vague terms. Other variations would include terms like “White-hating XXX supremacist” and many others. We want to encourage our people to invent and use a large variety of terms that explore these concepts creatively, wittily and that fit elegantly into the context of their discourse. e.g. “... and those Blacks that want to lord over Whites…” or “... powerful Jewish supremacists keeping our people in a mental prison…”. When our people really internalize the concepts, logic, truth and fairness on a wide scale, they can translate this into their own linguistic inventiveness and begin embedding it more frequently in those parts of everyday life and conversation touching on larger political issues and current events. All the other magical terms need the same treatment and heavy promotion through all means of influence. We have the advantage that truth is on our side even though we have limited power right now. White privilege needs to be countered by Jewish privilege, anti-White privilege, non-White privilege, Black privilege, Leftist privilege, etc. Likewise for variations on {Jewish, anti-White, non-White, Black, Leftist, etc} x {supremacism, supremacist}. In a similar way much of leftist theory and jargon can be adapted and applied right back at them: power, power structure, class, colonialism, etc. It is delusional to claim Whites are ruthlessly oppressing the Other from a position of tremendous power when we can’t even openly advocate for ourselves or challenge our own dispossession and genocide without being slandered as a “white supremacist”. These terms must constantly challenged. Their insistence on dishonestly attacking Whites and creating conditions for our genocide against their massive body of thought used to protect non-Whites from genuine White supremacism, racism, colonialism, cultural hegemony in past centuries, also leads to the necessity of separation from non-Whites and the removal from power over us of these fully conscious, intentional, genocidal maniacs. We can spread the defensive notions of White Separatism and Nationalism in the White diaspora context with White homeland preservation the goal in a European context. We can righteously defend ourselves by hoisting the left on its own petard. Let’s consider some concrete examples from the Jamie Kelso video mentioned in the previous comment. I don’t want folks to interpret this analysis as criticism of Jamie Kelso (see my VA comment above for my larger disclaimer). The goal is to help empower our people by making our rhetoric more effective. Several times during the video the guy with facial hair in the style of San Francisco gay biker dudes in movies like Police Academy, loudly called Jamie Kelso a racist with Jamie ignoring his slur. We mustn’t let these slanders go unchallenged! This provides a direct opening to ask some rhetorical questions that explore the current false and hateful meaning and use of this term. We can directly ask gay biker dude why he’s calling us racists and ask him to define the term. Pretty much no matter what the response is, the net result is that racist is a loaded, catch-22 term that embeds a huge set of double standards that are only applied to Whites. We can raise cognitive-dissonance-rich points about double standard after double standard. Everybody except Whites: 1) can and do celebrate their heritage, 2) be enraged about any attempt to genocide their people, 3) directly and openly advocate for their interests, 4) preserve the racial and ethnic integrity of their homelands, and many, many more examples. Everybody but Whites is actually subsidized using resources mostly extracted from Whites to do these things! Whites who try these things are cast out of “respectable” society, sometimes receive death threats that are ignored by the authorities, etc. Another example. When Jamie gave some examples of positive rhetoric about Whites and why they should reproduce to preserve our people, our totally brainwashed bien pensants, reflexively ritually denounced such quaint, retrograde notions and boasted of their disdain at any concern about whether their descendants become non-White. This provides a perfect opportunity to confront the deeply internalized anti-White double standards. We can ask them why only Whites are expected to extravagantly denounce their identity, heritage, existence as a group and any concern for the future of “their people” (I’m ironically quoting this because the brainwashed Whites are supposed to be repulsed by the notion that the even exist as a people and certainly they shouldn’t think of them as “their” people. “their” people are only the human “race” [sic, species]). Do Blacks think they don’t really exist as a group? Would they be indifferent the loss of Africa to their race by massive waves of Chinese immigration: e.g. 250 million Chinese coming in, taking charge, and bonking like bunnies? Do blacks have pride in their race and heritage? How about Jews? Asians? The key is to point out to the brainwashed how nobody else engages in this orgy of self-abnegation and hatred! Everybody else pretty much does the opposite. Can they see the huge double standards and contradictions? Can they admit these huge double standards publicly? What does it say about the real power structures when they fear for their careers if they admit these points? Doesn’t this blatant unfairness tug at their conscience? At their sense of balance? Who are the true haters and racists? Are they proud of being programmed to respond robotically? And as the Valley Girl air head noted, they believe they are superior because they’ve transcended their White heritage. But really ONLY THEY have been conditioned to believe such universalism and idealism, including manipulation of their hunger for status and acceptance and a powerful system of carrots and sticks to encourage their submission to this Orwellian order. How did they become so heavily conditioned? Why is such conditioning so pervasive? Whose interests are served? Who did it? Who really has the power? Who can’t be criticized? Obviously this gets into the Jewish Question and we can only expect to make so much progress in one session, but it’s vitally important to bring this pervasive conditioning into their conscious awareness and create cognitive dissonance so they can begin fitting the pieces together in their mind slowly, hopefully sometimes laying awake at night or bolting awake from restless sleep as a pang of conscience tears into to their consciousness. We should toss out at least a few points touching on the Jewish Question with their rampant power and supremacism even though we must significantly withhold the full truth in the interests of rhetorical effectiveness in this moment. Any “outrage” directed at our few points of criticism is an opportunity to explore how the expectation that they are never to be criticized, particularly for their concrete actions that harm others, is a direct example of supremacism. One of our main jobs is to provide lots of resources for our people to draw on as they make their journey from brainwashed true believing dupes to awareness and truth. In fact I believe our cause can be persuasive to other non-White peoples in promoting a new order of “international nationalism” that respects the dignity, autonomy and non-exploitation of all peoples. We reject the current Jewish-supremacist and White traitor led globalist, imperialist order in favor of the American founding fathers’ vision of seeking to be friends to all, enemies to none with mutually beneficial, non-exploitative trade and non-coercion, except for genuine self-defense. The White world can leave the non-White world alone to pursue its own destiny and culture except where we mutually agree on beneficial interaction. See David Duke’s videos for an effective presentation of these ideas. 78
Posted by ScotchFiend on Fri, 18 Feb 2011 23:00 | # The White world can leave the non-White world alone to pursue its own destiny and culture except where we mutually agree on beneficial interaction. I should add for clarity that I believe some parts of our White people are insane true-believers and some of our current territories, particularly in the Diaspora, are probably beyond saving. I don’t expect us to impose our view on everyone, but likewise, we must refuse to accept the imposition of their genocidal views on us. Some parts of the White world will likely trend towards a Brazil-like outcome or worse. Our goal is to divorce ourselves from the insane multicultural experiment forcibly being imposed on all our people everywhere without consent. I considered these topics a while back here. 79
Posted by anon on Sat, 19 Feb 2011 00:35 | # Scotchfiend, We can wield a variety of terms along with elaborations on their meanings to build cognitive dissonance among the brainwashed and ultimately to deconstruct the racist, anti-White lexicon, eventually leading to the dissipation of its current sacred power. Bloody well said. I should doubt it will come to all that, but you’ve really nailed one little thing with which we all ought to be experimenting. 80
Posted by Sam Davidson on Sat, 19 Feb 2011 03:59 | #
If there are neo-Conservatives and paleo-Conservatives… Can there be neo-Nazis and paleo-Nazis? “The Alfred Rosenberg Club” - We advocate for a return to the traditions of limited dictatorship, anti-Judaism, and racial isolationism. Maybe Pat Buchanan and Richard Spencer can be speakers at our next conference. 81
Posted by Leon Haller on Sat, 19 Feb 2011 13:25 | # Richard Spencer banned me from takimag for my WN. Why would we ever want him for anything? He is not learned, not elite educated, not a good writer, and not very intelligent. 82
Posted by Hamish on Sat, 19 Feb 2011 19:25 | #
Misspells a lot of words too. Still, his Russian girlfriend (ex-girlfriend?) is hot. 83
Posted by Leon Haller on Sun, 20 Feb 2011 13:37 | # So was my Russian ex. But a greedy bitch, too. I grew up knowing some genuine elderly White Russians (ie, persons who had fled the Bolsheviks). They were persons of elegance and very fine moral character. I’m sad that today’s Russians are all so deracinated and dispossessed of their beautiful traditional Christian/national culture. The Russian today has no sense of his/her ancient past, and gives a shit about nothing and nobody. They are hard people, and their rootless, immoral character is putting the very future existence of Russia in grave doubt. Western whites are deracinated, and dispossessed of their pasts, too. But at least they are nice to be around. 86
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 26 Aug 2012 07:14 | # Absolutely. That is the most free-speaking thread on the JQ, among other things, that I have ever seen. Quite staggering, really, and it’snot for trying on the part of the Hasbarim to call the tune. Thy just don’t have the word-power. 87
Posted by Lurker on Sun, 26 Aug 2012 15:39 | # All my comments seemed to have been zapped now. Ah well! Though our hasbaRAT pals have theirs still up. I’d like to think the irony of that - regarding their claims of poor, powerless jews - is not lost on some readers. 88
Posted by Lurker on Sun, 26 Aug 2012 16:26 | # Sadly 1963dalek seems to barred from further posting, time to wheel out a new identity. 89
Posted by Lurker on Sun, 26 Aug 2012 17:27 | # Seems that a new guy called 1963_Dalek is now active. 90
Posted by Bill on Sun, 26 Aug 2012 19:48 | # Went the day well? I’ve been socked in most of this sunny day by grand-kids so I’ve been whiling away the time over at the Lurker linked Telegraph thread. At the same time I called in at VoR and was prompted to compose a post which I might follow after this comment. The day went well, you’ve been kept busy and have been profitable. I like the tactic of verifiable quotes. Hmmm! There’s been the usual mix. I always get the impression that the more hysterical ones are simply scared of what they are denying. It’s that cognitive dissonance thingy. The more scared the sillier the childish insults fly. It really is pathetic, and yet sad in a way. There is a complete unawareness among some who think because they parrot the usual uni indoctrination they will get a free pass. Narni-narni-nah-nah, it’s my ball. I try and fathom out what the online media’s blog policy is, I assume they are co-ordinated in some way but cannot see any pattern. Do they have any autonomy in this regard? I’ll finish off with the same old question. Is the blogosphere making a difference? Oh to be a fly on the wall when TPTB discuss these things. 91
Posted by Lurker on Sun, 26 Aug 2012 19:54 | #
Im pretty certain its the clever ones who resort to the most childish abuse, they cant engage, they can feel the abyss looking into them. The slower ones try and fight it out, form arguments, which they find they cant win because all they have is the rusty, malfunctioning weapons they have been handed during their indoctrination. 92
Posted by Bill on Sun, 26 Aug 2012 20:07 | # Went the day well. Over at VoR Auster has an article asking the question, Why whites are so passive in the face of racial homicide One commenter Robert B opines.
These circumstances are reflected here in Britain almost as a daily occurrence, but no one here in Britain it appears is asking similar questions. Although the reply (inasmuch as above) is applicable here also, (and throughout all white lands) I feel we all know the question goes much further than simply one of non white crime on whites. It applies to every damn thing that’s going on. I’ve spent most of a sunny day (socked in by grand-kids) tracking a thread in the Telegraph,entitled ‘Radical Islam revives an ancient hatred’ (H/T Lurker) Interestingly, this article has amassed some 3000 comments in fairly short order. When reading through such threads, I am constantly reminded of a recurring question that has stayed with me ever since setting out on my quest, and that is I find it more perplexing as time goes on, though admitting still, that breakthrough at street level is as far away as ever. The question for me is, (and I’ve said this many, many times) how have our ruling class been persuaded to abandon its tribe? Ok I know about the Frankfurt school and the long march, the new left and the new right, the ‘60s counter culture, the lefts cosying up to Islam and much more, but I still can’t get my head around what I see as treachery on an industrial scale. How is it done? The name of the game is to get rid of us, the reasons being as many as there are factions involved, but why our elites think they’ll survive and come out the other side eludes me. Many moons ago I asked here what is the end game? The consensus reply was the goal of all the factions was the West’ demise, and when I asked what was to replace it the answer was there was no plan B. Overtime, this appears not to be the case, there are visions being espoused of a different future world. Back to the Telegraph threads. Our media, (both print and visual) by and large persuade the masses that they (media) are neutral in all of this and are just reporting events as they are, how they get away with not explaining why these things are happening is mind blowing. Furthermore, how come the public also never point these things out and ask the question why? I thought the elephant in the room (a term) once oft heard had gone away, while all the time it has been ever present. Why do the Telegraph publish more open comments than the Mail? The Mail has no problem reporting anything and everything that sends their readers into apoplexy, but they, (Mail) never ever offer any explanation as to why these things are happening. Nothing to do with us gov we only report it. The BBC likewise, though they place their own slant on things be it positive or negative, which increases disorientation even more. These unfolding events are gripping to the blogosphere, the ebb and flow of the threads I find fascinating. More and more are becoming consciously aware as the openness of comments become more explicit, alas this only applies to the blogaratti, to those on the beach who are still soporific in their deckchairs, they are still unaware of the advancing tide. 93
Posted by Lurker on Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:05 | # Another fascinating thread at the DT. A mixed bag of YKW, their trolls and unthinking ‘conservatives’ & left/liberals desperately trying to wrest control or sabotage the conversation while our comrades do their best: 94
Posted by Lurker on Sat, 15 Sep 2012 04:41 | # Major thread here: the-islamist-rioters-should-learn-to-see-the-funny-side YKW and their useful idiots out in force by the looks of it, maybe more than Ive ever seen on the DT before. 95
Posted by Lurker on Mon, 28 Jan 2013 01:11 | # Classic holocaust themed punch-up at the Daily Telegraph: Post a comment:
Next entry: Thread Wars
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) Patriotic Alternative given the black spot by Guessedworker on Thursday, 14 March 2024 17:14. (View) On Spengler and the inevitable by Guessedworker on Wednesday, 21 February 2024 17:33. (View) Twilight for the gods of complacency? by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 02 January 2024 10:22. (View) — NEWS — Moscow’s Bataclan by Guessedworker on Friday, 22 March 2024 22:22. (View) Soren Renner Is Dead by James Bowery on Thursday, 21 March 2024 13:50. (View) Collett sets the record straight by Guessedworker on Thursday, 14 March 2024 17:41. (View) Commentsweremight commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Tue, 23 Apr 2024 04:24. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Mon, 22 Apr 2024 22:54. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:12. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Mon, 22 Apr 2024 14:44. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Mon, 22 Apr 2024 12:34. (View) weremight commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Mon, 22 Apr 2024 06:42. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 23:27. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 23:01. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 22:52. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 22:23. (View) Anon commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 20:07. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 19:39. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 17:38. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 15:20. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 15:01. (View) Anon commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 13:31. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 12:52. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 09:21. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 05:25. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sat, 20 Apr 2024 23:49. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sat, 20 Apr 2024 23:37. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sat, 20 Apr 2024 23:24. (View) Anon commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sat, 20 Apr 2024 21:38. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sat, 20 Apr 2024 20:16. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sat, 20 Apr 2024 18:19. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:43. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:16. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:33. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:42. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:38. (View) |
Posted by Frank on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 02:45 | #
Stalking the Wild Taboo