Secession is necessary to free society.  Free society starts with mutual consent.  Mutual consent implies the option not to consent. “Freedom From” compliments “Freedom To”.

Secession is necessary to true social science:  We can best discover causal laws by testing theories with controlled experiments.  This is true of all science.  Controlled experiments require separate experimental groups, treated according to different theories and comparing the measured results with predictions.  In practice, human ecologies can form separate experimental groups only by upholding geographic boundaries that prevent cross-contamination between treatments – cross-contamination with its resulting confusion and confounding of results.  We can argue how best to achieve this in practice, but the principle of giving experimental evidence priority over any amount of argument, debate, deliberation, peer review or judicial proceeding stands as more self-evident than anything in the Declaration of Independence.

In a free scientific society, an individual is subject to treatment only after giving informed consent.

These two pillars of social good—truth and freedom—stand upon the foundation of secession. 

Tyranny of the majority, limited only by a vague laundry list of selectively enforced human rights—the sine qua non of “liberal democracy”—must submit to the right to secede or it violates truth and freedom, hence all social good.

Continued...

Posted by James Bowery on Saturday, July 4, 2009 at 05:10 AM in
Comments (10) | Tell-a-Friend

Italy challenges the EU Commission on migration

A fissure appears to be opening between the views of some national governments in Europe struggling with recession and those of the more detached and strategically-inclined EU Commission.  Among others, Greece, France, Spain and now Italy have adopted some strict measures to discourage immigration.  But Italy’s populist center-right coalition, which includes the Northern Leagues, has gone a good deal further than the others, even criminalising those who house illegals.  On Thursday the senate, Italy’s upper parliamentary chamber, endorsed a vote in May by the lower house.  Unmoved by the left’s inevitable comparison with Mussolini’s racial purity laws, and by criticism from human rights groups and the Vatican, the senate voted 157 in favour and 124 against to bring the package of measures into force.

They include:

1. Illegal immigration becomes a criminal offence punishable by a fine of between 5,000 and 10,000 euros and immediate expulsion.

2. Anyone caught housing an illegal immigrant could face jail.

3. Unarmed citizens patrols will assist the police by mounting patrols on the lookout for public order offences.

4. Parents will have to prove their legal status by presenting their passport or residency permit when they declare the birth of a child.

The European Commission, meanwhile, is looking for ways to strike at least some of these provisions down.  It has announced that it will examine the new law to determine whether it complies with EU norms.  “Automatic expulsion rules for entire categories are not acceptable,” it says.  The Commission is probably miffed because it has only recently opened the first of several African migration offices, this one in Bamoko, the capital of Mali.  The plan is to bring in 50,000,000 + Africans over the next few decades to counter the ageing European demographic.

If national governments will only now address the ageing issue, the Commission’s race-replacement scheme could be in terminal difficulty.

Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, July 3, 2009 at 11:46 PM in Immigration
Comments (17) | Tell-a-Friend

The English Defence League march in Birmingham, 4th July 2009

This is an outgrowth of the Luton anti-Islamist protest from two months back - itself a result of the al Muhajiroun protest in Luton during the homecoming parade of the Royal Anglian Regiment in March.

More details of the Birmingham protest here.

By way of some background on the general immigrant situation in Birmingham, the Ken Livingstone supporter and pudgy-faced Guardian blogger Simon Fletcher put up an anti-BNP piece today about the party’s claims of anti-white bias in the provision of council (or social) housing.  One commenter named zacsmith had the drop on him, however.  This was his comment:

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, July 1, 2009 at 03:37 PM in Activism
Comments (41) | Tell-a-Friend

Rapidly Changing Human Evolution.

Henry Harpending and Gregory Cochran’s recent book, The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution, puts to rest the Left’s anecdotal assertions that genes don’t matter and that evolution ceased prior to humans leaving Africa 50~100 thousand years ago. In addition, they expound on Kevin MacDonald’s work on the history of Jewish culture and traditions that created the eugenic program of the Ashkenazi Jews in the Diaspora. They also explain the correlation between the recessive genes that contribute to modern Ashkenazi Jews’ high intelligence and genetic disease—genes that were beneficial in the highly literate niche that Jews dominated for hundreds of years.

They assert, “Stephen Jay Gould’s position that 50,000 or 100,000 years is an ‘eye blink,’ far too short a time to see ‘anything in the way of evolutionary difference,’ is simply incorrect. We are surrounded by cases in which selection has caused big changes over shorter time spans, often far shorter; everything from the dog at your feet to corn on the cob is the product of recent evolution.” And, there is no difference between natural and artificial selection—they both change gene frequencies within populations under varying ecological conditions. The mechanisms are identical whether breeding dogs, humans, or urban rats.

They point out that “evolution has taken a different course in different populations. Over time, we have become more and more unlike one another as differences among populations have accumulated.” Humans have increasingly differentiated themselves into specialized ecological niches—from new cults to occupational specialization to radical differences in exposure to technology versus exposure to deprivation. Humans both within nations and between nations are exposed to ever increasing differences in how they go about conducting their lives, with genetic changes following closely behind.

Continued...

Posted by Matt Nuenke on Monday, June 29, 2009 at 11:36 AM in IQ and Heredity
Comments (92) | Tell-a-Friend

The Moral high ground?

by David Hamilton

Conservative philosopher Roger Scruton has written that “ an ideology needs an enemy”.  In the West that is us - “whites”.  The chosen method is to dehumanise the enemy so that it can be persecuted or even assassinated without conscience.  They think it will fool the public when they try to outlaw the BNP’s racial admission rules, despite leaving the various black and Asian groups to operate their own racial membership policies.

These comments show the Ideological Caste’s dehumanisation of its enemies in language they would otherwise eagerly attribute to Nazis:

Trevor Phillips: “The BNP should be treated as less than human”.
Nick Bourne - Welsh Tory MP: “The BNP are subhuman”

The voice of whites in Britain is the BNP and the whole establishment is conspiring to de-humanise them with a level of incitement that is unprecedented.  If this type of hate campaign was against another ethnic group they would be facing a seven year jail sentence.  The whole Establishment has shown itself to be the same type of hate-filled ideologues that dehumanised Jews in Nazi Germany.  It is an ideology of hate like those in Soviet Russia, Mao’s China and Cambodia against a particular group.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Saturday, June 27, 2009 at 11:24 PM in British Politics
Comments (102) | Tell-a-Friend

REAL NATIONALISM

REAL NATIONALISM

by Constantin von Hoffmeister

Part I

The human race is a construct. It is not real. Human population groups are too diverse to have any one destiny in common. The white race is a construct. It is not real. White peoples are too diverse to have any one destiny in common. Nations are the soil-based embodiments of ethnically homogeneous peoples. White nationalism is a globalization ideology and thus not real nationalism at all. Fascism and National Socialism were both imperialist ideologies. Real nationalism is the enemy of imperialism and globalization. Real nationalism is separatist and democratic. Real nationalism wants to break up large artificial structures (such as empires) and reestablish natural ethnic entities (such as nations).

Part II

The Inuit in Greenland do not need aid from the European Union. They do not need Danish overlords and colonizers. The Inuit in Greenland want to be free. Their poverty stems from alien management practices imposed on their traditional way of life. Their indigenous culture had sustained them for thousands of years until the artery of their social organism was clogged by Danish cupcakes and maidens with braided golden hair dancing on flying horses with swords and shields in their hands: HOORAY - Here come the Valkyries! Doom to let Dr. Doom in… He might shake his metal-gloved fist and rage and swear and holler. But all to no avail, the mud is here to stay, everybody will have to drag his weary feet through it. Dr. Doom in his Slavic country (Latveria) will think twice if invading and destroying will give him the bliss he so eagerly seeks. Meanwhile, the Inuit are demonstrating against another Danish dam project.

Continued...

Posted by Constantin von Hoffmeister on Thursday, June 25, 2009 at 11:32 AM in
Comments (42) | Tell-a-Friend

False identity

A few thoughts about an imaginary problem

“Identity” is not a word that need ever pass our lips - not if we have zero respect for the liberal analysis, and wish to be free of its formative power.  For this is a word of the left, and like all words of the left it pressages on us a modern conception of Man which is fatally light and relativistic.

How so?  Well, shouldn’t it be a grave and weighty responsibility for a man to define who and what he is?  After all, modernity places the highest possible value on the individual, denying all bonds, all blood their primacy.  To use the Schmittian formulation, “None but the individual shall dispose of the life of the individual.” Surely, then, that life should be sufficiently valued by its owner to imbue the exercise with a high seriousness and a desire for some specificity.  Yet in practice the reverse is the case.  We live in the Age of the Left.  It is an age when realization of the Self, once the preserve of the religious and Chivalric orders, has been democratized and, in democratization, has been relativised.  When the measure of a life is mere personal taste all claims are equal.  There is salience but there is no depth.  There is “progress” but there is no movement.  Something vital, something authentic and original has fallen out of the equation.

In the sociological sense what remains is the modern us and the meaning of us.  For well over a century nationalist and traditionalist thinkers have judged that meaning in historical terms and found it wanting.  The ineluctable conclusion is that we are moving away from our truth as men, and putting on the cloth of an increasingly artificial self.  And we are doing this, most of us, because we are ignorant of politics and of ourselves, and we are weak and suggestible.

Artificiality in the modern conception of Man (modern in the context of an industrialised and, later, consumerised society) is precisely a sign of lost being.  It seems improbable, somehow, that the men and women of pre-industrial European societies, filled as those societies were with brothers to the ox, with men listed in the Orange and the Blue, and their widows in the pews, and the widows of the sea, would have had any reference point at all to the narcissism of a self-ascribed “identity”.  Geoffrey Chaucer’s pilgrims assuredly did not define themselves according to their fascinations with the Self.  They were fixed by their relation to kin, to the soil and the seasons or the tides and the wind, to the economy as manor, town or village, to Nature and to God.  These were givers of riches aplenty for all but the high elites of the Court and Barony, of the Church, and of learning.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, June 23, 2009 at 11:54 PM in Political Philosophy
Comments (99) | Tell-a-Friend

Thoughts on the preface and introduction of The Triumph of the Therapeutic by Philip Rieff

by DanielJ

From the Preface to this work, Rieff quoting two historians’ summary of his work:

“If the dominant character type of the twentieth century is really what Rieff calls ‘psychological man,’ the consequences for western society are quite incalculable.”

This is certainly true. If man is a psychological creature than we must use the weapons of psychology to turn him to toward the defensive weaponry of Christianity, ethnic solidarity, epistemology, etc. Simply concentrating on Van Tillian presuppositionalism will do no good when men are no longer motivated by philosophies, but by psychologies.

From the Introduction:

Literature and sociology have long supplied eloquent and knowing professional mourners at the wake for Christian culture. After Matthew Arnold, much of modern poetry [he quotes Yeats in the very beginning of the Intoduction] constitutes an elegiac farewell ... to the religious culture of the West. After Auguste Comte, much of modern sociology has struggled for diagnostic ideas refined and yet wide enough to encompass the spectacle of a death so great in magnitude and subtlety. Now the dissolution of a unitary system of common belief, accompanied, as it must be, by a certain disorganization of personality, may have run its course.

Rieff seems to be stating in this passage that the central crisis of our time - this dissolution of personhood and entropy of personality - is a culture war where the combatants are fighting to “organize” (this has the faint smell of technocratic and bureaucratic totalitarianism parading itself as scientific management with disinterested and rationalized dispassionate concern only for the psychological well being of mankind) the human psyche.

He goes on to state that the:

...long period of deconversion, which first broke the surface of political history at the time of the French Revolution, appears all but ended.

and that:

several systems of belief (are) competing for primacy in the task of organizing personality in the West.

Hence, the “culture war.” The “cult” is the cult of personality.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Saturday, June 20, 2009 at 09:32 PM in Political Philosophy
Comments (60) | Tell-a-Friend

Mutiny on the Bounty

by The Narrator

There are various ways of describing and understanding the unfortunate turn many in Western Civilization have taken over the past century. Comparing events to “revolutions” and the course of specific nations to the Titanic striking the iceberg are common (engaged in by this writer as well). But every now and then a new perspective may help better see the possible causations as well as the potential remedies/outcomes to our plight.

“History repeats itself” we are told and sure enough that seems to most often be the case. More than that, specific historical incidents seem to foreshadow events on a greater scale and era.

Such an event is the Mutiny On The Bounty.  (I should state that I’m no expert on the subject and that my casual interest in it was sparked by viewing the 1984 film ’The Bounty’.)

That mutiny, wherein a group of men from a civilized Western nation, having temporarily grown accustomed to a leisurely life of hedonistic nihilism on a tropic Island, rebel against their commander when faced with returning to a orderly and disciplined, (Western) way of life, has a general theme which can be applied to our current situation.

Though it is common today to lay part of the blame for our slide into ruin on the influence of outside groups who, through media and finance, encourage activities that harm us, it is not quite telling the whole story, nor is it reflective of the less glamorous parts of Western history.  That that influence is there is undeniable. However when we look at the way Western Men, born and raised in a strong and potent Western nation at the height of its power, behaved on their own, far away from outside influence, over two hundred years ago, in an era that openly recognized racial and class differences, we see men who acted not much different than some men do today.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Saturday, June 20, 2009 at 04:13 PM in History
Comments (37) | Tell-a-Friend

When the doorbell rings

The Telegraph has reported on the demise of a popular and interesting blog, brought about without much principle by its competitor, The Times:

In April, an anonymous police blog written by a detective calling himself “NightJack” won the Orwell Prize for online political writing. And it deserved to, wrote one newspaper, “because it took you inside real life in a way you couldn’t go by yourself”.

But now you can’t go inside real life with NightJack. Visit the site, and you read: “The authors have deleted this blog. The content is no longer available.” This has been taken down in its entirety because the Lancashire detective lost a court case to stop his identity being revealed by The Times - the very paper that praised him to the skies when he won the Orwell Prize.

NightJack is Richard Horton, a detective of Lancashire Constabulary. Yesterday, he revealed how the paper had planned to end his anonymity. “One morning I heard a rumour that they had sent a photographer to my home. Later in the afternoon came the inevitable phone calls, first to me and then to Lancashire Constabulary asking for confirmation that I was the author of the NightJack blog.

Horton went to Court this week to try to preserve his right to anonymity.  The judge disagreed, citing the supremacy of public interest.  Precedence has been set, and no blogger in England and Wales is safe in his anonymity.

Horton’s blog is lost, but one of his more practical posts has been preserved in various corners of the web.  It is titled “A Survival Guide For Decent Folk”, the survival in question being that of the due process.  Here it is:-

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, June 18, 2009 at 11:18 PM in Oh Tempora, Oh Mores
Comments (12) | Tell-a-Friend

MODIFIED GERTRUDE STEIN

MODIFIED GERTRUDE STEIN

by Constantin von Hoffmeister


A race is a race is a race.

Posted by Constantin von Hoffmeister on Thursday, June 18, 2009 at 04:50 AM in
Comments (6) | Tell-a-Friend

Tales of south Belfast

The Establishment’s tale:-

The men, women and children - the youngest of whom was a five-day old baby girl - were evacuated from their homes in the Lisburn Road area of Belfast on Tuesday. They spent the night in the City Church, near Queen’s University, before being moved to a council leisure centre. Last night [WED] around 20 families were in temporary student lodgings arranged by the local authorities.

Racial attacks had been intensifying in the area for several weeks, and came to a head on Monday when youths targeted an anti-racism rally by hurling bottles and making Nazi salutes.

As Romanian families arrived at the leisure centre clutching their belongings, they told of the terrifying spate of attacks. One man said a 10-strong gang broke into his house and made threats to kill. “They made signs like they wanted to cut my brother’s baby’s throat. They said they wanted to kill us,” he said.

The blogger’s tale:-

And you will read that these immigrants are required to do the work that the lazy people of Belfast will not do and that again is a lie. Their women are ferried on mass into the City Centre every day, where they spend their time begging. And God only knows what their men do. But it is not work because there is hardly any work and daily there are reports of job losses throughout Northern Ireland.

No, these people are brought in to dilute and undermine the unity of the people of Northern Ireland, the same way that the colonisers are being used throughout the rest of the United Kingdom. To deny us the right to be ourselves.

The commenter’s tale:-

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, June 17, 2009 at 10:41 PM in Immigration
Comments (21) | Tell-a-Friend

European Heritage

Come to Second Life and search for “European Heritage”, or just come to Piano 127,126,23. It is an ecumenical nationalist site. 

Posted by Søren Renner on Wednesday, June 17, 2009 at 01:15 AM in
Comments (20) | Tell-a-Friend

Get Back Verse Contest

getback.majorityrights.com is now live with the Official Majority Rights Get Back Verse Contest!

This is in response to the need to reclaim British gift for song and verse, for the British, starting with a key point in British history when it diverged:

The Rivers of Blood Speech and the reaction by the Beatles to it.

Paul McCartney penned this demo-recorded verse to their #1 hit, ”Get Back”:

Meanwhile back at home too many Pakistanis
Living in a council flat
Candidate Macmillan, tell us what your plan is
Won’t you tell us where you’re at?

Get back. Get back.
Get back to where you once belonged.
Get back. Get back.
Get back to where you once belonged.

You never know when a new verse may appear!

Posted by James Bowery on Wednesday, June 17, 2009 at 01:04 AM in
Comments (9) | Tell-a-Friend

IMPERIVM EVROPA

From the author of CREDO – a book for the very few

IMPERIUM EVROPA

The Book that Changed the World

by Norman Lowell

NOW OUT!

Available at leading book shops everywhere.

Or may be ordered direct from:

amazon.com

Continued...

Posted by Constantin von Hoffmeister on Monday, June 15, 2009 at 04:42 PM in
Comments (4) | Tell-a-Friend

Paranoia at a neck-tie party

If you have twenty-five minutes to spare over the next couple of days, please take a look at this BBC i-player replay of yesterday morning’s The Big Questions.  I don’t watch much TV, and the Sunday religious hour is not required viewing.  But when I read Simon Darby’s blog this morning I had to take a look at the cause of his ire.

The Big Questions is a pretty poor quality studio-audience product.  It sits in the BBC’s Ethics and Religion genre, meaning “difficult issues” are supposed to be debated.  The debating point this time was: does the BNP have the right to be heard?  Apparently, by no means a no-brainer for the democratic and freedom-loving people of Birmingham.

We are all very used to the media nose-holding that goes on when the BNP is debated.  But the behaviour on display here, particularly from the three panellists and the host Nicky Campbell, goes far beyond that.  In fact, beyond anything I have seen before and into the realms of Salem.  Here is what Simon Darby had to say about it:-

Before I review today’s The Big Questions, which you can see by clicking on the image below, I want to tell you something that you will not know. Originally this debate had been set up behind my back with two local BNP councillors. Knowing that this was just going to be an ambush orchestrated by the wise-cracking wannabe left-wing comedian and TV presenter Nicky Campbell, I immediately pulled the plug on it.

Not that our two guys they had lined up would have been a push over, it simply wasn’t fair to put them through what was tantamount to a criminal trial. Talking to the two girls from the show, who I will not name, even at a late stage they were begging me to go ahead with the original plan trying to convince me that the programme would need local politicians in order to work. However, I was adamant that if it was going ahead at all it would not be loaded against us and as a consequence Andrew [Brons] and Rev West found themselves in the hot seats.

Fittingly, on a day when the Sunday papers were quite literally dripping with hate, lies and hysteria towards the BNP, this programme, at least initially, typified the mood. I found myself at first angry, frustrated and towards the end enormously proud of our representatives. Throughout their childish, emotive and almost ritual baiting they kept their dignity and made their points concisely and articulately.

Hate, lies and, now, hysteria sums it up.  It all has the ring of a morbid psychological condition about it.  It is plain that for all who speak the BNP has been built up as some spectre of immanent evil.  Even with war psychosis at its height I doubt if my parents’ generation experienced such feelings about genuine National Socialists.  But these folks have lost all touch with reality.  One wonders in the case of the whites whether it is a consequence of sublimated anger, as David Hamilton maintains.  Are they merely striking out to ward off their own exposure?

The panellists, by the way, are Benjamin Zephaniah, a Rastafarian dub poet and, apparently, a great man, Louise Bagshawe, an author and Conservative Party candidate at the next election, and Jonathan Bartley, who runs the Ekklesia think tank and who is a pacifist and advocate for “the full participation of gay and lesbian people in the church as an outworking of the Christian gospel”.

Posted by Guessedworker on Monday, June 15, 2009 at 04:13 PM in Media
Comments (104) | Tell-a-Friend

When do we get back to 1983?

One is bound to ask who, in 2009, still doesn’t know that “diversity” “enriches” no one?  Who doesn’t know that blacks fail educationally a little too often, or that the danger of violence is always heightened amid black populations?  Who doesn’t know that Jews are powerful and extremely self-interested?

Well, officially everybody.  And after all, the official version is the only version that counts.

Officially, we live, all of us, in the land of the blind.  The great prepronderance of those around us accept that they are supposed to be blind, and fight off awkward enquiries with a mortified urgency.  But such willingness to put out one’s own eyes is based in fear, of course.  The most fearful are also the most sincerely convinced.  There are those who take as their own the descriptions of the world given them by others.  They believe truth to be lies, and the blindingly obvious to be immoral.  They are not free to think, for they do not begin thinking from the right, but from anything but the right.

Today, The Independent produced a hate-scribble titled “Racist rants of elected BNP man, Andrew Brons, revealed”.

In 1983, when he was in his late twenties, Andrew Brons edited the National Front’s general election manifesto that called for a global apartheid to prevent the “extinction” of whites everywhere.

The Let Britain Live! manifesto was prepared by the party’s policy department, chaired by Brons. It outlined a series of hugely controversial positions ...

These are the “hugely controversial positions” that Mr Brons and the NF advocated.

1. The NF rejects the whole concept of multiracialism.  The NF believes the gradual dismantlement of the apartheid system since the passing of the Race Relations Act in 1976 to be retrograde.  The alternative to apartheid, multiracialism, envisages an extinction of the White man.

2. The NF recognises inherent racial differences in Man.  The races of Man are profoundly unequal in their characteristics, potential and abilities.  Europeans have a greater cognitive ability than non-whites.

3. The UK has been swamped by racially incompatible Afro-Asians.

4. Black muggings of White people, especially elderly ladies, occurs regularly.

5. The eruptions in Bristol in 1980 and Brixton in 1981 were just two examples of the “cultural enrichment” promised to us by the multiracialists.

6. One ethnic, national and religious group whose power and influence has undoubtedly increased has been the Jews.

7. A number of predominantly Zionist organisations control government.

8. It can be no mere coincidence that the number of people of Jewish ethnic origin to be found in internationalist and multiracialist schools of thought and organisations of action is out of all proportion to their numbers in the population.

Shock horror, it’s all here.  The drastic effects of immigration on the native British, the issues of black violence and criminality, black IQ, the Israel lobby and the wider Jewish Question ... these are the holy of holies of thought police everywhere.  In a free land of free-speakers they should be the litmus test for the health of the polity.  But this ain’t a free land, and by finding Brons’ list “hugely controversial” in 1983 when it wasn’t, and when academic political correctness had not yet crossed the pond eastward from America, The Independent demonstrates the completeness of its slavery to the Lie Machine.

Yet despite all this, there is that feeling of fragility to the whole enterprise.  The moment when the image of a Marxised life arose in radical opposition to life itself was a long time ago now.  No one loves thought control.  Nothing so man-made and so damned offensive can last forever.  Official discourse is already vitiated and devalued.  It has become too embarrassing and too cognitively dissonant for politicians to “celebrate diversity”.  It is inevitable that, united in their inability to swallow the customary forms of lying and living in lying, people will rediscover their fearlessness and their freedom.

The only question is when.

Posted by Guessedworker on Monday, June 15, 2009 at 12:31 AM in Marxism & Culture War
Comments (43) | Tell-a-Friend

I have nothing to add to my statement.

We do not know to what extent our capacity to reason can, in the long run, take us beyond the conventional Darwinian constraints on the degree of altruism that a society may be able to foster. We are reasoning beings. In other works I have likened reason to an escalator, in that, once we start reasoning, we may be compelled to follow a chain of argument to a conclusion that we did not anticipate when we began. Reason provides us with the capacity to recognise that each of us is simply one being among others, all of whom have wants and needs that matter to them, as our needs and wants matter to us. Can that insight ever overcome the pull of other elements in our evolved nature that act against the idea of an impartial concern for all of our fellow humans, or, better still, for all sentient beings?....
...In his philosophical epic, The Phenomenology of Mind, Hegel portrayed the culmination of history as a state of Absolute Knowledge, in which Mind knows itself for what it is, and hence achieves its own freedom. We don’t have to buy Hegel’s metaphysics to see that something similar really has happened in the last fifty years. For the first time since life emerged from the primeval soup, there are beings who understand how they have come to be what they are. To those who fear adding to the power of government and the scientific establishment, this seems more of a danger than a source of freedom. In a more distant future that we can still barely glimpse, it may turn out to be the prerequisite for a new kind of freedom. ---- Peter Singer

The thrillride of Reason: an inescapable escalator!

Misled by such a proof of the power of reason, the demand for the extension of knowledge recognises no limits. The light dove, cleaving the air in her free flight, and feeling its resistance, might imagine that its flight would be still easier in empty space.  ---- Kant

The European Age of Enlightenment implanted in people a one-sided view of the aggression, a view from the victim’s point exclusively. The light side of that phenomenon, based on the will to the Absolute, to attaining the total character, to the maximum extension of a subject up to the sphere of the Divine, discontinued being understandable, concrete and ontologically rooted, and, consequently, was identified with the “survival”, with atavism, with inertial barbarism, with the temporal and in the main rectifiable defect of the civilization. Having lost its metaphysical legitimacy, the aggression became to be perceived as unlawful transgressing the integrity of what was proclaimed the supreme value in itself - a human individual, society, being etc. Hence follows all “natural right” tendency, which has been developed starting from the times of Rousseau. For the existential expansion discontinued being metaphysically justified, the victim put in its own claims to the “total security”, that is to the artificial and raised to the highest ethical imperative defense from aggression. The aggression was in fact outlawed. With this, in particular, the general “democratic” legal statue, which prohibits the propaganda of war, is connected.
It turned to be possible to change the cultural and social foundations of the society, whereas it was naturally beyond anyone’s powers to change the basic tendencies of both cosmos and human beings. Therefore the aggression never disappeared either from history, or from the everyday life, or from the wild nature. It just began to be perceived as the evil, as one limited being’s claim on utilizing another one, which arises spontaneously from time to time. ---- Dugin

Posted by Søren Renner on Friday, June 12, 2009 at 02:47 PM in
Comments (9) | Tell-a-Friend

MARGOLIS ‘NEO-NAZI’?

By Dr KR Bolton

Eric Margolis of Canada is one of the most experienced of journalists, with a rare insight into geo-politics. He is an opponent of US global adventurism, and writes for many reputable Canadian newspapers. He has been a lecturer in military history and is widely travelled, a real veteran in international journalism.

Margolis is not afraid to air controversial opinions, albeit ones backed up by deep insights, first-hand experiences, and perspectives of history normally lacking in journalism. On his blogsite Margolis tackled the question of World War II after the comments of Pres. Obama in France marking the Normandy invasion. Writing in a column for 8 June, Margolis states in part:

“METZ, FRANCE June 08, 2009

“President Barack Obama’s visit to Normandy to commemorate the 65th anniversary of D-Day makes us think about the entire course of World War II, and the lingering propaganda or myths that still becloud it …

“World War II was not a good and evil struggle between `western democracies’ and `totalitarian powers,’ as we are still wrongly taught.

“It was a world conflict over land and resources pitting the British Empire which controlled 25% of the entire globe, the French Empire, Dutch Empire, and Belgian Empire, and, later, the US imperium (Philippines, Pacific possessions, Cuba, Central America), against the Italian and Japanese empires.  The Soviet Union was an empire unto itself …”

When I wrote a few years back “An Open Letter to the War Generation” in response to an unsolicited letter that was sent to me, I expressed a largely cynical view of WWII, its origins, purposes and outcomes. Similar opinions have been expressed in addition to Margolis, by Pat Buchanan, and even by the pre-eminent WWII historian Prof. A J P Taylor in his “Origins of the Second World War”.

My “Open Letter” which was aimed at trying to get a veteran to THINK about how they’d been betrayed (in keeping with the opinions I used to hear from NZ vets who were the mainstay of the New Zealand Right when I was a lad first getting interested in politics) was taken up by Australian Dr Toben, an alleged ‘holocaust denier’, and placed at one time of his website for the Adelaide Institute. With much ado, several oddities from the Left, who have the ear of journalists in trying to carve a cheap and easy career for themselves as ‘anti-Nazi crusaders’, have paraded this article – which they never attempt to critique historically – as proof that I am a neo-Nazi etc. In particular Mat Henderson from Australia, whose favourite sport he states is ‘body surfing into fat kids and making them cry’, who has a phobia about ‘fat chicks’ (sic) and who had a really sicko fantasy about Alexander Downer that I’ll not describe here, has referred to this “Open Letter” as proof of my ‘neo-Nazism’. Another oddity, self-described ‘stupid drunk’ Trotskyite Dr Scott Hamilton of Auckland, who has graduated from smearing and threatening fellow communists with trying to establish a name for himself as an ‘expert’ on the pervasive neo-Nazi threat in NZ (like fellow sociologist Dr Paul Spoonley a few decades previously) has stated on such a basis that I work “closely with Toben” (sic); reminiscent of the semiliterate nonsense about me on Wikipedia, which among other things states that I am “a [sic’] associate of the Adelaide Institute.”

Are the likes of Mat Henderson, and Dr Scott Hamilton,– his having a doctorate perhaps again attesting to the poor standards of tertiary education? – now going to rant that Eric Margolis, whom I understand is of Jewish descent, is a ‘neo-Nazi’, a ‘holocaust denier’ etc.? Well, on second thoughts, yes… they probably would… but at least I’d be in good company.

Posted by Guest Blogger on Thursday, June 11, 2009 at 11:42 PM in Liberalism & the Left
Comments (7) | Tell-a-Friend

A New Song

Continued...

Posted by Søren Renner on Thursday, June 11, 2009 at 04:14 PM in
Comments (67) | Tell-a-Friend

Violence by proxy - the preferred politics of a cowardly Establishment

by David Hamilton

I wrote an article sixteen months ago on how the establishment dehumanises people who threaten their privileged lives.  The ruling ideological caste have no answer to our arguments. So they use not only character assassination but also encourage physical violence against their critics.  They do not like having their corruption exposed.

It is usually done indirectly so they can keep up the appearance of respectability.  But evil Peter Hain, who did so much to bring about famine and genocide in Zimbabwe and South Africa respectively, never apologizes.  He, presumably, is delighted with what his career of advocating confrontation has achieved.  He is trying to do the same here and make himself rich at the same time by corruptly trousering £130 grand:

“It is vital that everyone now isolates and confronts the BNP and works with United Against Fascism to defeat them.”

Everyone can see how it works.  He dehumanises Nick Griffin and his party by calling them “racists” and “fascists”.  The gang of Unite Against Fascism thugs attack their hate objects and get to feel perfectly fine about harming them?

The Mirror of 10/6/09 twisted the truth to present victims of politically motivated violence to be the perpetrators.  What sick, corrupt liars are their journos.

But minutes later they were sent packing by 60 placard-waving protesters chanting: “Nazi scum off our streets.”...then ... Protester Harry Dare was punched in the back by a fleeing far-right supporter. Mr Dare said: “I’m not seriously hurt but I was hit and it was unprovoked. I didn’’t use violence against them. I just told them they were fascists and we didn’t want them anywhere near Parliament.”

In fact, no demonstrators are allowed anywhere near Parliament.  On this occasion, though, the police stood over the road watching.  There is always a high visibility policing in and around Parliament Square, and many carry machine guns.  They’ve got High Definition CCTV cameras all over the streets that can tell the time on someone’s wristwatch.  This demo will have been recorded and monitored from many angles, and the Police nearby would have been immediately informed.  I suggest we all complain to the Metropolitan police.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Thursday, June 11, 2009 at 02:20 PM in British Politics
Comments (47) | Tell-a-Friend

The Specter of Genetic Communism

Racial cohesion is a result of different factors, important ones being similar physical appearance and behavioural patterns (whose aggregate phenotype is a ‘culture’ or ‘civilization’).  The difference in physical appearance between races is obvious and results in implicit negative attitudes towards racial others.  Aggregate behavioural differences can also be stark and are a major cause of the displacement of native Whites via ‘White Flight’.

One of the main weapons in the elite arsenal to weaken criticism of race-replacement has been the PC mythology on race:  that it doesn’t exist, that differences are only skin deep, that differences are the legacy of White racism, and corrective social programs can equalize achievement.  Although researchers have long ago taken the hammer to many of these idols, their worship in the popular press and political class continues.  The torrent of data coming from projects like HapMap, however, now portends a coming twilight.  Heretical musings bubble up in establishment organs like Slate and the NYT (though orthodoxy still prevails overwhelmingly).  Social programs, like No Child Left Behind, continue to fail.  The general avoidance or dismissal of heritable differences between human groups by the left (who do the elite’s ideological programming) is becoming less viable as a strategy for suppressing dissident views on race.

The crumbling of the dominant racial mythology and increasing racial tension undermine the legitimacy of Western elites who impose, or fail to prevent, race-replacement.  As Whites become increasingly displaced and dispossessed, their discontent weakens the foundations of the current political structure.

What is to be done? 

Continued...

Posted by Dasein on Wednesday, June 10, 2009 at 06:35 PM in
Comments (34) | Tell-a-Friend

Winner redux

An interesting debate has sprung up on the BNP election thread, And the winner is ....  I’ve moved the relavent comments here at the request of one of our esteemed commenters.

The debate was/is a response to the notion that the existential threat all European peoples face in the West today is completely new in historical terms, and calls forth new restorative ideas.  In an intellectually free and creative age ... an age not labouring under the weight of the 20th century ... radical thinkers would respond with towering expositions of the European life.  The existential threat would be countered with a flood of vivifying ideologies tailored to the times, and the best and most inspiring of them to all times.

The 20th century fascist ideologies would be properly understood as vigorous but really quite narrow responses to the threats of their time, enlivened in the case of the German model by some rough and ready social darwinism.  They would not be seen as a solution for all times, or for ours.  For now, the revolutionary wave which fascism resisted has washed over us, and the sickly decadence which National Socialism bled out of German society has penetrated us.  Those lines have been breached, and the battle has been carried forward to the final redoubt of our very existence.  A few decades from now we shall be on the Westwall and in Berlin.  We shall be on Senlac Field, and in Stalingrad ... everywhere that men have known their very being is on the line.

It is the clarification of that first verb “to be” which matters now.  Our people must know what it means to be “us” - as a part of subsistent Nature, as men and as Europeans.  They must know what is and is not true of us and in us, and they must know we have the right “to be” ... the right to live sovereign and free, and the right to live with ourselves and with no others, if that is what we choose.

That is my prescription.  It has, so far as I am aware, not been expounded in the past, probably because no man ever thought that we Europeans would ever find ourselves where we are today.  But here we are, nonetheless, and we have no time - none at all - to waste on philosophical distractions which answer the wrong question.

Below the fold are the comments from the “winner” thread.  I hope I’ve not left out any substantive ones.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, June 10, 2009 at 05:10 PM in Political Philosophy
Comments (37) | Tell-a-Friend