Political Biology

You’ve heard of political science, sociobiology, political economy, etc.  You may even have heard of “biopolitics”.  But what you probably haven’t heard of is “political biology” as an academic discipline unifying political science with biology.  This would be strange indeed—given that the origin of political science was in the theoretic implications of human nature as explored by Hobbes, Locke and Hume, among many others—were it not for our familiarity with The Culture of Critique.  There are, after all, only about 1300 web search hits for “political biology” of which nearly 400 are references to the Third Reich.

So, here we are, centuries after the foundation of political science, searching for grounding in something other than sophistry due to the forces of political biology.  Imagine a pathogen that managed to preferentially infect the brains of medical researchers such as Lister or Pasteur.  Such is our misfortune.

Even the few furtive attempts to recover some sapience such as sociobiology have been cursed by the advent of political substitutes such as evolutionary psychology which place even social interactions at arms length and political movements further yet from well-founded thought.

So it comes as some relief when political scientists such as Frank Salter foray into the enormous gaping hole in our thoughts to fill in a tiny conceptual outline or two.

Could it be that a recent (2005) paper, BIOLOGY & POLITICAL SCIENCE.  FOUNDATIONAL ISSUES OF POLITICAL BIOLOGY by Mircea BOARI Department of Political Science, University of Bucharest will ..provide more healing of our intelligence, so wounded by the Jewish intellectual movements of the 20th century?

A few excerpts follow…

Continued...

Posted by James Bowery on Wednesday, January 7, 2009 at 05:54 AM in
Comments (7) | Tell-a-Friend

Diamed, Devil’s advocate.  Or how to be fair to opposing points of view.

By Diamed

There is a minor sub-set of people I talk to who know all the facts about racial IQ gaps, differential fertility rates, criminal propensities, immigration levels, the whole shebang – and yet, because they do not think racially, they are not in the least concerned about the future.

Could it actually be that they are right? Here are a few arguments that seem to support them.

A) The economy can only support so many unskilled workers. Once business- and economy-fixated people notice their quality of life going down and make the connection to unskilled immigrants ... once they start going unemployed, facing sky-rocketing taxes or property values, over-crowded roads, etc, then, regardless of their own race, they’ll decide that immigration must stop.

Even assuming businesses will continue to import Third Worlders so long as it makes them a profit (albeit at the expense of the country at large) that is still a finite number. At some point every possible job dumb people can do will be filled, and it would not profit the business to hire any more. This still leaves a large segment of the population that can live off the 100 IQ and up niche jobs. The economy can’t replace all whites, so whites will still do just fine under this new population mix.

B) By failing to deliver the very progress it touts, liberalism - the age of pity and excuses and handouts for minorities - is losing sway. Home-schooling and private schooling is up, people are skeptical about global warming, practically every state in the US has concealed carry laws now, a “three strikes and you’re out”, get-tough approach on crime, and state after state is banning affirmative action. With good laws, whites can live around bad races because the latter are kept under control.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Wednesday, January 7, 2009 at 12:21 AM in No particular place to go
Comments (28) | Tell-a-Friend

Drew Fraser at Inverell 2008

“What I do want to talk about is, essentially, the Anglo-Saxon identity crises, the source of Anglophobia, the sort of spiritual disorder that I believe Anglo-Saxons are suffering from. What I want to start with is the nature of the disorder, move on to talk about the deep roots of the disorder, and then conclude by discussing a possible remedy for it.

First of all, the source of the nature of this crises seems to me is in the official description called constitutional patriotism, or civic nationalism, which translates in real terms into the idolatrous worship of the state and the corporate system - in practical terms.”

So began a speech by Prof Andrew Fraser given last March at the Inverell Forum, Australia’s famously incorrect annual celebration of dissident opinion and free speech.  The Forum organisers produce DVDs of each of the speeches, and it is thanks to MR reader John Fitzgerald that the Fraser speech is now in transcribed form and I can quote from it.

In the first part of the speech, Fraser traces the roots of white racial consciousness through the period of slave-owning in the American South, the development of white skin privilege and white equality, and the emergence in the North of the fundamentals of modern human rights.

“In Australia,” he asks, “how can you run an immigration policy on the basis of discrimination between white and non-white, especially once you start to play around with the notion of white, because white is not synonymous with Anglo-Saxon.  Afterwards you get massive numbers of Italians, Greeks and Lebanese Christians.  Are they white?  Just where is the boundary of whiteness?  So then it became human-ness that really counts.  And so you have what came to be known as the non-discriminatory immigration policy.”

Now, Fraser had begun by using the term “spiritual disorder”, so it should be no surprise that from here on the speech focuses heavily on the, as he sees it, broad failure of Christianity in the crisis of Anglo-Saxon identity.  “It’s a mistake,” he tells us, “to do what a lot of people on the right would do; blame it all on the Frankfurt School, or the Jews or, as I hear here, the Illuminate.” Fraser roots the entire process in the Papal revolution which confined the action of kings to the secular world.  “The world becomes flattened, “he says, “God is a being, we are beings, he is an infinite being, we are finite beings ...  In that kind of context God, because he’s infinite, becomes very remote and only accessible to us through his will.”

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, January 4, 2009 at 11:05 PM in Christianity
Comments (88) | Tell-a-Friend

Saturday Riddle Classic

I am portly.

I am double knit.

What am I?

(hint below)

Continued...

Posted by Søren Renner on Saturday, January 3, 2009 at 05:13 PM in
Comments (18) | Tell-a-Friend

Black Oak

Black Oak Media, based in Cherry Valley, IL, is a worthy example of cultural dissidence which has been publishing quarterly since winter 2007.  In the editors’ own words:-

Black Oak Media is the spearhead of a direct assault on innocuous, monolithic consumer culture, and represents an atavism of a primal, human-centered worldview that unapologetically embraces all ranges of emotion and experience.

We are beyond Left and Right.  We stand against Nihilism and the corruption, pollution, decadence, and fragility of the modern world.  We stand for the farmers, artisans, small businesses, artists, entertainers, entrepreneurs, and hard working men and women that once made this country great.

We believe that folk culture must replace “popular culture,” since popular culture is no longer produced by the common people but produced for us―brightly packaged and neatly trimmed―by elites who live over a thousand miles away from their constituents.

Life isn’t an airbrushed model on a glossy magazine cover.  Los Angeles and New York City do not represent our culture.  Here at Black Oak Media, we believe that the people who live in “Middle America” have something to contribute.  Our culture is not something that is marketed to the public from distant boardrooms; it is the artistic expression of our hopes, dreams, and fears. It is something meaningful that does not ride waves of trends or conform to market interests.

Black Oak Magazine is published on-line and can be downloaded for free.  The Winter 2009 edition (pdf) features a four-page interview with Tom Sunic.

Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, January 2, 2009 at 09:21 AM in Media
Comments (69) | Tell-a-Friend

Ten wishes for an all-American New Year

1. That the off-script longeurs and foot-in-mouth bloomers we expect from president Obama waste no time in coming, and quickly sour his honeymoon with the white American voter.

2. That “change” is quickly revealed to mean blacks being “served” by white volunteerism in various forms, with whites supposedly gaining from “seeing through their own prejudice”.  And no, it doesn’t fly.  Not for an instant.

3. That white America will begin to suspect that mainstream political America as a whole has no use for it whatsoever beyond its votes and taxes, and its “contribution” to the ethnic spoils system.

4. That the economic rigours of the year ahead cause many more white Americans to question the value of the neoliberal system, of the banking system, of fiat money.

5. That Hollywood can’t make a buck out of its anti-white “entertainment”.

6. That the falling value of university endowments cuts into the best efforts of university faculty to damage and discriminate against White students.

7. That when white Americans think of Israel they remember the Gaza Strip, not “America’s best little buddy”.

8. That when White Nationalists speak of racial politics they remember they are being heard by intelligent and discerning fellow whites.

9. That more White Nationalists will reject the anti-political notion that all they need is less Jewish power and more white racial consciousness.

10. That White Nationalists will discover that freedom and justice, as much as love, are theirs, and theirs alone, to espouse.

Happy New Year to you all.

Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, January 1, 2009 at 12:56 AM in U.S. Politics
Comments (18) | Tell-a-Friend

How to save the world without harming a single hair on anyone’s head

By Diamed

As a moral principle, it is fatuous to say nothing can be done if it means having to hurt someone.  This objection is ridiculous - when the benefit outweighs the cost there is no reason not to hurt someone.  That’s the way the world works right now.  However, potential racists, especially women, may find this moral hold-up simply overpowering.  They would like things to be different, they would like everything we promise, but they’d rather all lay down and die … they’d rather close their eyes and wish all their worries away, than harm a single other person.

As a thought experiment, couldn’t we at least try to soothe these people and coddle their ridiculously oversensitive moral compasses?  If we could save the whole world without harming a single person, surely then they would start helping us and join in the salvation and survival of our own people?  The people who are largely their friends, lovers, fellow-believers at church, classmates, family, and the progenitors of their culture?  Even in this soon-to-be-majority minority America, whites will mostly stick to themselves, and de facto segregation is present everywhere.  Whites want what we have to offer.  They guiltily indulge in the joys of monoracialism and monoculturalism, keeping it secret from everyone how comfortable and happy they feel in the company of their own.  Overly effeminate, or simply raised with the ridiculous squeamishness of the modern world, their objection isn’t our ends but our means.  For those of us who realize the ends justify the means, this is just nonsense.  For those who don’t, it is a brick wall they cannot cross.

Let’s take this in context.  As we speak, 40,000 Americans die each year to car accidents.  Americans as a collective have agreed that the death of 40,000 Americans, many of them children or teenagers just starting the brightness of their lives, are worth sacrificing each year to the convenience of being able to drive everywhere.

The economy would be hampered without trucks and cars carrying large loads to places quickly, and each year, therefore, we sacrifice 40,000 virgins to the dark car god in the sky.  Whether people consciously or unconsciously decide their deaths are “worth it”, their blood is on our hands.  Under a different social system not a single one of them would have to die.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Tuesday, December 30, 2008 at 09:49 PM in White Nationalism
Comments (40) | Tell-a-Friend

Davey Jones vs Woodrow Wilson

Secret of the Lusitania: Arms find challenges Allied claims it was solely a passenger ship

Her sinking with the loss of almost 1,200 lives caused such outrage that it propelled the U.S. into the First World War.

But now divers have revealed a dark secret about the cargo carried by the Lusitania on its final journey in May 1915.

Munitions they found in the hold suggest that the Germans had been right all along in claiming the ship was carrying war materials and was a legitimate military target.

1) Woodrow Wilson cons his way to the Democratic nomination.
2) A ‘lone nut’ sparks WW I.
3) Most of the royal houses of Europe go the way of the dodo.
4) Gears are set in motion for Zionism.
5) Trotsky starts the pattern of mass murders in the Soviet Union leading to the Holomodor in 1932.
...

I think I better stop there because truth is no defense.

Posted by James Bowery on Tuesday, December 30, 2008 at 02:26 AM in
Comments (33) | Tell-a-Friend

Britain, centre of world terrorism

By David Hamilton

If anything defeats common sense it is trying to understand how the “Establishment”, the “elites,” apprehend the world around them.  They really seem to believe that somehow out of this ghastly racial chaos a sweet multi-racial harmony will emerge.

It is a neo-Marxist view that after chaos or breakdown there will come not the workers’ paradise of previous Marxist fantasies, but a multi-racial utopia.  Margaret Hodge, then Employment Minister, made a similar point two years ago when she acknowledged problems in her Barking constituency, then added it will be alright when we become a multi racial-society … as if this would appear by magic.  In practice though, they are destroying innocent people’s lives but don’t care because it makes them feel morally superior over those who do suffer..

On BBC Radio 4’s Moral Maze in August 2007 the multi-racialist panel talked and talked about an ideal future … but never faced what is happening in the world around them.  In Alien Nation journalist and economist Peter Brimelow, described these people as “immigration enthusiasts” - like religious enthusiasts the emotion is more important than thinking rationally.  They almost have an orgasm when talking about asylum seekers or granting amnesties.

They do not take human nature into account when discussing race-relations as they do when running their personal life, and can only deal with reality by pretending that ethnics are assimilating or have given up their identities and traditional loyalties. If they do discuss events they employ a little verbal sophistry to avoid the stark reality. Con Coughlin, daily Telegraph columnist and author of books on the Middle East and terrorism wrote on 16 December 2008, of “young Britons” attacking their own country:-

Every month, thousands of young British Muslims travel to Pakistan on holiday to visit family and friends...it is an opportunity to celebrate important religious festivals, such as the Eid feast ... or simply to spend time in the country of their own or their family’s origin.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Tuesday, December 30, 2008 at 12:36 AM in Islam & Islamification
Comments (14) | Tell-a-Friend

Collective Wisdom

By The Narrator

The following is a “meat and potatoes” type of list illustrating some basic concepts and counterpoints to arguments we commonly see.

We’ve all had experiences linguistically dueling with others, so, by all means, add your own talking points to the list.

1. Don‘t waste your time converting atheists.

It has been said that C.S. Lewis’s classic Christian Apologetic, ‘Mere Christianity’ never converted a true atheist but convinced a multitude of agnostics to finally come off of the fence into the believer’s camp. In regards to the issues surrounding race there are similar divisions of people. Those being, True Believes (us), Racial Agnostics and Racial Atheists.  And as with Lewis’s work being most effective at moving the agnostics, likewise we should concentrate our efforts and arguments towards the Racial Agnostics instead of Racial Atheists, who are likely to reject Racialism no matter how compelling the facts presented.

You can generally distinguish between the two through basic conversation.

2. Basic facts.

Most people have no idea about the demographic predicament the White race is in. So tell them that Whites today are in fact no more than around 13% of the world’s population and dropping fast. And what that means is that minorities (non-Whites) are nearly 90% of the worlds population and growing.  Who is the minority here?

Now if they reply with, “Yeah but non-Whites are a minority in The West (or specific countries therein),” you can point out that that argument is simply compartmentalizing the issue.  Two can play that game.  Blacks are a minority in the United States … yeah, and ... Whites are a minority in the Americas.  Hispanics are a minority in America …. yeah, and … Whites are a minority in Chicago, New York, etc …

And often along the same lines we hear that, “It’s an ever-changing world.”

Well, no.  New Technological toys aside, large swaths of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the middle-east (where the majority of humans live) have seen very little to no change in the last one hundred years (or more).  Only in The West is the ever-changing world, ever-changing.  Other areas have been able to integrate new technologies into theirsocieties without much alteration to their day-to-day lives.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Sunday, December 28, 2008 at 12:37 PM in Activism
Comments (89) | Tell-a-Friend

To do what we must to remain who we are

There may be in the cup
A spider steep’d, and one may drink, depart,
And yet partake no venom, for his knowledge
Is not infected: but if one present
The abhorr’d ingredient to his eye, make known
How he hath drunk, he cracks his gorge, his sides,
With violent hefts. I have drunk,
and seen the spider.

A Winter’s Tale, Act 2. Scene 1, speech of Leontes, King of Sicilia

For reasons of familiarity, where a single national model has had to be used for discussion here I have used a post-Britain England - a nation freed from the British yoke, and contemplating anew the grounds for citizenship.  But this essay is about the ethics of the preservation of all the peoples native to Western Europe.  If a white ethno-state ever solidifies in the North American continent it would be adaptable to that too. 

It is an essay of three parts.  The first explores the preservation of our ethnic being as the principle upon which citizenship qualification must rest.  The second is about the rights of the collective over those of the individual. The last is about the primacy of justice for all the wrongs done to us these last six decades over justice for all those who find themselves nationless through no fault of their own.

Jus sanguinis endogamous

Ethnic cleansing, forced removals, racial purity, the one drop rule ... these are some of the names that have been given to that spider in the cup.  Some are more vexing than others ... vexing, that is, to one steeped only in the morals and sensibilities of the liberalism that has gripped the West since the end of World War Two.  But any thinking nationalist who is seriously intent on confronting the issue of blood, soil and citizenship in a post-liberal age must arm himself with an ethical counterweight to these morals and sensibilities - one that licences the survival of his people.

The legal basis for citizenship of a modern Western nation tends to be drawn as widely as possible.  Birth to at least one citizen by blood (Jus sanguinis), birth within the borders of the nation (Jus solis), and naturalization are usually all thrown into the mix.  As a crowd-puller, it works only too well.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Saturday, December 27, 2008 at 04:35 PM in No particular place to go
Comments (48) | Tell-a-Friend

La Griffe on the math sex gap

An email arrived in my inbox today from that indefatigable chercheur de la vérité, he of the lion’s claw.  It announced a new addition to his website, titled The Math Sex Gap revisited: a Theory of Everyone.  It features Prodigy eviscerating two papers that have appeared in 2008, both of which found cultural bias to be the cause of the gap, then introducing his own Theory of Everyone which accounts for race, culture and geography.  Culture, you ask?  Only this much:-

We should all be grateful for the thought of La Griffe and all his like.  Without their contribution there would be no counter-argument besides commonsense to those who do their best to undermine intellectual salience for no better reason than it is white and male.  Or as Prodigy says to his feminist audience, “I always enjoy visiting La La Land where a gap-free society defines the goal of human striving.”

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, December 24, 2008 at 05:36 PM in Psychology
Comments (23) | Tell-a-Friend

The Liberals are right - we should abolish race after all

By Diamed

Suppose everything you say is true. Do you take satisfaction in it being true? Does it make you happy? Or do you wish it weren’t true and wish it could be some other way?

This is an interesting question, which gets down to the nub of why, exactly, are we crusaders for the race.

My response to this question is I wish what I believed weren’t the case, and that it could be some other way. I have been forced into my beliefs by necessity, resisting the implications mightily as I’m dragged through goalpost after goalpost.

There’s plenty of room for condemning evil in this world, without having to go around looking for categorical foes who we can smash with unrelenting fury, all the way down to the infants in their cradles. However if we spare an entire city of evil-doers because ten innocent nice infants are crawling around in it, it is our innocents, our good people, our women and children who are ravished and pursued with unrelenting fury. In a struggle for survival that has reached the highest pitch, we don’t have the luxury to sort out the good from the bad. Life must come first, justice later. Do I want it to be this way? Am I glad that I can smash infants in cradles and still be moral? That I could bayonet a pregnant woman and still be moral? I’m not glad about it. And yet there it is.

Am I glad that I have 140 IQ and am living in a world average IQ of 90 or so? That a greater IQ gap exists between me and africans than africans and dogs? Not really. Am I glad that life is easier for me, that I can do things others can’t, that ultimately all wealth, power, prestige, and even good health and long life belong as a birthright to me and not to anyone else due to a different arrangement of genes? Not really. The things I love most in life, I wish everyone could have. It takes nothing from me if another person reads the same book as me, listens to the same song, or admires the same mountains. I miss the lost camaraderie. I don’t have any special need to rule others, the only particular benefit is more leisure time. Machines could serve that role much better. I’d rather the world were much, much smarter. I feel like then we could sit down and reason issues out like civilized men. I feel like we could all understand reality a little better, and treat each other better, and treat ourselves better. I’m not happy that nature has dropped the ball and populated the earth with mostly primitive savages and that there is nothing I can do to make them smarter or better (once they are born) because it’s all genetic. How could I be?

The same on a larger scale. Am I glad whites are the best at everything and no one equals us, am I glad the rest of the world is largely a sanctum for the BEAST, a ravening satanic force that unmakes everything it touches and specializes in every living being carrying as much suffering, starvation, disease, stupidity, cruelty, hopelessness and helplessness as it can? No, I’m not glad. I wish all races were free of the horrible fatse they bring upon themselves. I wish they were free of the genes that make them that way. I wish they had the genes that make us like who we are. That’s why I wish the whole world were populated with whites, with genes like ours, so that sort of suffering, that level of misfortune, can’t happen again.

And of course, I am not happy with whites either. It seems to me, we would all be happier if we were elves. Am I happy that there are no elves in the universe to supplant us at the top of the totem pole? Am I glad we have unchallenged mastery of the earth because we are the only half-sane gene combination on earth? No, it’s rather sad. If only elves existed, such flawed, truly wretched beings as the white race would no longer have to carry the burden of our existence. I’ve lived long enough to see that everything about humans, including whites, is so full of evil, that I could wish anyone, anywhere, to replace us, if only they could do better. The cheating, the vulgarity, the needless anger and conflict, the lying, the fickleness, the selfishness, the hypocrisy … how could I be happy that we, we flawed vessels, are the best? Who could be?

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Monday, December 22, 2008 at 11:09 PM in Eugenics
Comments (151) | Tell-a-Friend

Who’s behind the global financial crisis? The nose knows

Bernard Madoff, another fine member of the tribe and a former Nasdaq stock market chairman, confessed to swindling U.S. $50 billion. But the confession is very strange. One would expect Madoff to claim innocence and take the next flight to Tel Aviv, but he pleaded guilty!

A closer examination reveals the whole affair to be yet another swindle by Jews. Madoff is alleged to have defrauded many financial institutions. Easily half of the investors that he defrauded are professional financial institutions, usually full of Jews. Nobody knows better about Jewish conniving, swindling and general criminality than the Jews themselves, yet the Jews let themselves become a victim of a ponzi scheme? How did the professional investment firms – Hedge funds, banks – not see through the swindle? Among the “big individual losers,” we see names like Holohoax propagandist Steven Spielberg and Master Holohoaxer Elie Wiesel (pronounced Weasel) Foundation for Humanity.

How did the defrauded professional companies authorize investments on the order of hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars without extensive internal checks and controls, involving multiple individuals at the highest levels of their institutions? The defrauded professional institutions could not possibly have failed to audit the investment profile of Madoff’s hedge fund over the past 3-5 years, specifically looking at Madoff’s assets, investment methods and how his fund obtained returns. There’s no way Madoff could have scammed the professionals. And how did Madoff manage to hide such massive swindling from US regulators, traders, accountants, other financial professionals, even his own senior employees for years? Another impossibility.

What’s going on is clear. If a hedge fund goes bust naturally, it’s the investors’ loss, but if it goes bust because of fraud, then the defrauded investors – which in our case are “defrauded investors” – will be able to claim compensation by law, which will be coming from the general public. The “victims” will also get to claim back some taxes on the lost money. Compensation has already been approved, in principle, by a judge, without an examination of the evidence and meticulous documentation of the fraud. After all, Madoff has pleaded guilty and there’s little need to document the fraud. And should anyone attempt to obtain, for the record, the minutiae of the alleged swindle, most of the financial records will be missing.

Here’s something interesting from the daily mail online

The Jews are trying to portray themselves as victims by claiming that there’s one Jewish criminal but lots of Jewish victims, including Jewish ‘welfare and charity’ institutions, i.e., Jewry is not behind this alleged swindle, and that the behavior of a single Jew has led to an explosion of ‘anti-Semitism’ online. I wonder what proportion of the ‘anti-Semitic’ goyim has realized the true nature of the swindle – as documented above – rather than bought into the claim that another Jew swindler was arrested after defrauding people of billions, including many Jews. As the Madoff “investigation” proceeds, expect to see more Jews pop up in the right places...Madoff’s attorney is Dan Horwitz, the Judge that set relaxed conditions for Madoff’s bail is Gabriel Gorenstein, etc.

Continued...

Posted by J Richards on Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 03:10 PM in Economics & Finance,  Global Elitism,  Jewish Diaspora,  Media,  That Question Again
Comments (73) | Tell-a-Friend

The horizontally totalitarian future-world

Last February, by way of an introduction, I put up a post about the great German jurist Carl Schmitt.  He is a highly useful guide to the ways of Power.  His elucidation of the theoretics of state power in extraordinary times established the framework employed by many, and probably most, thinkers in this, let’s say, increasingly topical field.  In particular, Schmitt’s concepts of the decision and the state of exception open up the operation of total power for examination like a dead butterfly on a display board.

As Tom Sunic wrote in Homo Americanus: child of the postmodern age:-

Carl Schmitt ... realized an age old truth; namely, political concepts acquire their true meanings only when the chief political actor, i.e. the state and its ruling class, find themselves in a sudden and unpredictable state of emergency. Then all former interpretations of “self-evident” truths become obsolete. One could witness that after the terrorist attack of 9/11 in America — an event that was never fully elucidated — the ruling class in America used that opportunity to redefine the legal meaning of the expressions “human rights” and “freedom of speech.” After all, is not the best way to curb real civic rights the adoption of abstract incantations, such as “human rights” and “democracy”?

What just about everyone with a triple-digit IQ understands is that the events of 11th September 2001 and the subsequent War on Terror have been ruthlessly exploited throughout the West to advance a profoundly undemocratic and disturbing domestic security agenda.  Whether a true state of exception ever existed is highly doubtful.  But Power decides what is moral and what is, in a vulgar sense, true.  It has decided that its officers shall usurp the legal code at will, and shall stipulate on their own authority the terms under which its citizens go about their business.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 02:22 AM in Political Philosophy
Comments (17) | Tell-a-Friend

What do I admire about Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Oman?

What do I admire about Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Oman?
By Robert Reis
In each of these countries the governments demonstrate more dedication to improving the wellbeing and protecting the interests of their citizens than is seen in countries like the United States of America.

Continued...

Posted by Robert Reis on Friday, December 19, 2008 at 06:06 AM in Immigration
Comments (42) | Tell-a-Friend

The Death of Midwestern Computing and What Might Have Been

I’ve uploaded a video blast-from-the-past showing one small example an analogue of Leif Erickson’s discovery of Vinland, or the Apollo Moon landings:  Midwest computer networking.

Click here to watch it.

As for what might have been: Imagine the Internet arriving in the home 15 years earlier than it did, completely bypassing Bill Gates and the standalone computer.  Imagine a Midwest able to retain its educated boomers who might have been able to afford families there.  Imagine independent engineering leadership breaking free from NASA’s stranglehold on industrialization of space, not in the 21st century, but in the 1980s.

As I previously wrote for VDARE:

A Reader Reminds Us That It Wasn’t Immigrants Who Invented The Computer Industry

Re: Norm Matloff’s Tamar Jacoby–”Silicon Valley Would Not Exist Without Immigration.” Wrong!
James Bowery email him wrote:

Matloff ignores the obvious fact that Silicon Valley would not exist without the Midwestern middle class WASPs. As Tom Wolfe documents in his Forbes article:, Robert Noyce and His Congregation,[August 25, 1997] virtually all of the essential inventions upon which Silicon Valley was founded were created by the much-derided, non-“vibrant”, “white-bread”, “middle class” of “fly-over country”.

Last month I asked the aging Bob Johnson—former CTO of Burroughs Corporation when it was a leading mainframe company in Minneapolis where he developed the magnetic ink you see on the bottom of your checks—what he thought caused the loss of the Midwestern high tech leadership to the coasts, and he said it was the financial dominance of the coasts.

That squares with what I observed while at Control Data Corporation/Cray Research, Inc.

The reason Bill Norris and Seymour Cray were able to start CDC thence Cray Research was because they violated SEC regs and went around selling stock at PTA meetings, making a lot of middle class people retire very comfortably. My late father bought some Cray stock early on which helped greatly with his retirement.

When I was at CDC in Arden Hills, MN attempting to deploy the mass market version of the PLATO network with Internet-like capabilities (the system that Ray Ozzie (Bill Gates’ replacement at Microsoft) cut his teeth on) in 1980 the primary resistance was from a middle management that, due to the financial press’ hostility toward Norris’s vision of a society disintermediated by computer networking, small high-tech farms and locally produced and consumed essentials—had itself grown hostile to Norris.

My proposed solution is simple to state but will perhaps require a war to institute:

Replace all taxes on economic activity with a tax on net-assets, assessed at their in-place liquidation value, at the risk free interest rate (which according to modern portfolio theory is the short-term US Treasury rate) so as to extract all economic rents from the private sector, and then, to prevent public sector rent-seeking in pork-barrel politics, disperse those funds evenly in a dividend to all citizens, as the beneficiaries of the land-trust called the United States.

That will not only stop the vicious centralization of power in the private and public sectors, but it will clarify the role of immigration—it is a dilution of the benefits intended for the Posterity of the Founders of the land trust called The United States of America.

James Bowery’s previous letter is here.

Posted by James Bowery on Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 08:23 PM in
Comments (8) | Tell-a-Friend

Black-white student room-shares raise some black student grades - whites get to be less prejudiced

So Natalie Shook, a young and not unattractive, not-Jewish psychologist at Ohio State University, specialises in ...

exploring prejudice reduction through intergroup contact. Specifically, I am interested in how automatically activated racial attitudes are affected by successful interracial relationships, and vice versa.

Natalie may or may not be room-sharing with her gris eminence, Russell Fazio, but she certainly likes to work with him.  His research ...

centers upon the study of attitudes. ... We have proposed a model of attitudes as associations in memory between the attitude object and one’s evaluation of the object. Our concern has been with the likelihood that such evaluations will be activated automatically from memory upon the individual’s encountering the attitude object. ... In particular, the research has focused upon (a) the influence that accessible attitudes have upon attention, categorization, judgment and, ultimately, behavior, and (b) the functional value of such attitudes. The implications of this view of attitudes are currently being examined in the domain of prejudice. The role of both automatic and more motivated, controlled processes, on race-related judgments and behavior are under investigation. We also are conducting research on the implicit development of attitudes via classical conditioning, attitude formation via exploratory behavior, and implicit measures of attitude.

So what these intellectual lovebirds are setting out to do is prove that white prejudice is learned and can be unlearned.  Their latest two papers, which relate to studies conducted in 2001 and 2002, are:-

Shook, N. J., & Fazio, R. H. (2008). Roommate relationships: A comparison of interracial and same-race living situations. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 11, 425-437.

Shook, N. J., & Fazio, R. H. (2008). Interracial roommate relationships: An experimental test of the contact hypothesis. Psychological Science, 19, 717-723.

However, ISO’s press office marketed the Shook-Fazio papers thus:-

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 12:04 AM in Psychology
Comments (23) | Tell-a-Friend

Seven Points of Agreement Between Individuals

1. Except in self defense or enforcement of this agreement, no one may willfully kill, disable, or permanently disfigure another. No one may secretly restrain another. No one who has reached the age capable of procreation may physically force upon another any offensive, sexually-oriented act; not engage in any offensive, sexually-oriented act with any person who has not reached the age capable of procreation even when no force is involved. An open (not secret) majority vote of all sovereigns assembled as set forth In 3 below shall be the effective determination as to whether the alleged act took place and whether the act was offensive and was sexually-oriented. Any degree of participation in group force that results in violation of this point of agreement regarding offensive, sexually-oriented acts makes every participant fully guilty of the result, along with the person actually performing the act.
2. No man shall force the act of procreation on a woman. Rape Is hereby defined as an act of procreation without the involved woman's deliberated consent. Any man who engages with a woman in an act of procreation without her formal, publicly-proclaimed deliberated consent may be found guilty of rape. In the absence of a formal public acceptance, the individual woman involved Is the sole judge of whether an act of procreation was rape. If a woman who has not made advance formal acceptance of a man prior to the act of procreation, formally accuses him of rape within three months after the alleged act, and if a majority of sovereigns assembled as set forth in 3 below vote that the man engaged in the act, then It shall invariably be construed as rape - even though it may clearly be shown that the woman Invited, or even persuaded, the man to engage In the act. A woman may revoke formal acceptance of a man at will by giving formal notice of such revocation.
3. Any individual, either sovereign or shielded, or any group of Individuals, may restrain persons suspected of breaking these agreements for a period of not to exceed fifteen days, conduct a trial for them at a specified, easily accessible place on a date, time, and place publicly and formally announced three days In advance, and penalize (in person or by proxy or proxies) those deemed guilty by an open (not secret) majority vote of all sovereigns at the trial who are permanent residents of the community. (The composition of "community" and the meaning of "permanent resident" is to be defined by those entering into this agreement.)
4. No one shall be required to give testimony at a trial but it Is agreed that one found guilty of perjury by formal trial, as set forth In 3 above, shall be subject to the penalty set forth In 7 below.
5. No additional agreements that give a group's decisions effective power over individuals shall be made. Any group of two or more individuals who make other agreements giving a group decision effective power over Individuals, or who fail to abide by these agreements, shall be deemed a conspiracy against Individual freedom. All acts against them by an Individual or a group of Individuals who have entered into this agreement shall be construed to be self-defense. — Further explanation: Anyone may bring interpersonal problems before a voluntarily convened formal open Forum structured after the manner of a traditional court of law. In such a Forum opinions regarding the interpersonal problems, and deliberated recommendations for settling differences, can be formally given, but such opinions and recommendations will not be binding on those Involved. Those who bring problems before the formal Forum may, if they choose, make personal agreements congruent with the Forum's recommendations after the recommendations have been made. Those found guilty of making agreements to be bound by the Forum's recommendations before the recommendations are made are guilty of making agreements giving a group decision effective power over individuals.
6. Any sovereign may challenge another sovereign to formal combat for any reason. The following are the conditions for such formal combat:

   a. All combat shall be one sovereign individual against one sovereign Individual. b. A challenger shall give formal public notice three days prior to combat and a formal public declaration of reasons therefor. c. There shall be at least a one year interval from the time one Is engaged in formal combat as the challenged before one may again be engaged as the challenged. d. Subject to the following provisions, the conditions of formal combat shall be established by a majority vote of all sovereigns of the community who assemble after three days public notice. The intent shall be to give challenger and challenged the equal opportunity they would have In Nature — if no human society existed. Terrain of the combat ground shall be varied and extensive enough to permit strategy and to give the physically weak the chance that Nature gives them. Combatants shall have equal weapons and clothing. Weapons shall be a sword or knife with a blade not to exceed 25 cm (approximately 10 inches) plus a 15 meter (approximately 50 feet) length of strong cordage. All previous agreements between challenger and challenged are automatically suspended during the period of formal combat. There shall be no rules within the combat ground. Challenged and challenger shall enter combat ground from opposite sides. No one but challenger and challenged shall be within the combat ground. No one shall attempt to aid, hinder or observe what happens. It Is intended that only one shall return alive from formal combat. When two return alive one shall forever be shielded by the other. The relationship must be announced jointly by them before they are permitted to leave the combat ground. Two are not permitted to return alive if one has been permanently disabled or disfigured by his opponent. e. No sovereign who has an unanswered challenge pending may leave the community, refuse combat, or relinquish one's sovereignty.

7. Guilt for breaking any point of this agreement shall be determined according to Item 3 above. The invariable penalty for anyone found guilty of breaking any point of this agreement shall be death within twenty-four hours.

Posted by James Bowery on Tuesday, December 16, 2008 at 06:00 PM in
Comments (17) | Tell-a-Friend

National Anarchism in the sun

My thanks to Welf Herfurth for circulating this link to a left-field but, for all that, pretty well-informed article on the European survivalist movement generally and on National Anarchism in particular.  It provides a topographic survey of several significant components of the nationalist scene not only in Europe but in America, and certainly told me a thing or two I did not know before.  I will reproduce it in full below the fold.

But, first, there is a caveat.  The site, PublicEye.org, is that of Political Research Associates which describes its mission as “Researching the Right for Progressive Changemakers”. 

As we know only too well, the left is obsessed with race.  It needs to believe that there is freedom - meaning racelessness for Europe’s peoples - and there is immoral, illegitimate, oppressive fascism.  There is nothing else, nothing in between.  The obvious absurdity of this position - one which it applies to no other people - is never explored.  For a “free” individual, the liberal-leftist is curiously disinterested in challenging his own inconsistencies and illogicalities.  That is something for others to do.

This uncomfortable position may go a long way to explaining why the left is so violent, emotionally and physically.  Well, there is a sense in which Roger S Griffin’s widely-accepted definition of fascism as “palingenetic ultranationalist populism” feeds that violence.  It can contribute to the transferability of the fascist meme. 

This little phrase has a certain Gott der Vater ring to it.  Its three elements are nicely interlocking.  The nation of the people (recast by Mussolini as the all-enveloping state) and the good of the people are served through renewal of their racial spirit.  And that’s … fascism!  But in his book simply titled Fascism Griffin amplifies this thesis thus:-

If fascism is defined in terms of a core ideology of ultra-nationalism that aspires to bring about the renewal of a nation’s entire political culture, then the picture changes. The features so firmly associated with it in the popular historical imagination cease to be definitional. Instead they can be seen as external and time-bound manifestations of the central ideological driving force that is its only permanent feature: the war against the decadence of society and the struggle for national rebirth.

The “features so firmly associated with it” include those stigmatised excesses I’ve mentioned before.  Freed from its “time-bound” goods of no currency today, this “fascism” takes on a very convenient elastic quality.  The writer of the article here, a man going under the soubriquet of Spencer Sunshine, can describe “reactionary counter culturalists” and BNP members as White Nationalists, and White Nationalists as “traditional fascists”.  There is no escape, and presto, he alone is a moral man.  Obviously.

Mind you, it’s a game two can play.  How about this as a core-definition of another extreme political philosophy?  Hyper-moral individualist elitism.

Now try this for size:-

If liberalism is defined in terms of a core ideology of hyper-individualism that aspires to re-engineer the West’s entire political culture, then the picture changes. Those features like political correctness and anti-racism that are so firmly associated with it in the popular imagination cease to be definitional. Instead they can be seen as alien and only recent perversions of the central ideological driving force that is its only permanent feature: the war against human nature.

The difference here is that I am not constructing an untruth about Spencer Sunshine’s peculiar politics.  That really is liberalism, folks.

Anyway, just remember that if you don’t meet the definition of fascism I’ve extrapolated from Griffin’s little phrase, complete with the upward striving spirit of race, the total state, the Volksgemeinschaft et al, you are not a fascist in any meaningful sense of the word.  You are not a fascist simply because Spencer Sunshine needs to say so.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Monday, December 15, 2008 at 01:12 AM in New Right
Comments (32) | Tell-a-Friend

Theory and practise in violent resistance

In 1993 the US Catholic Conference established the following formulation in respect to use of force and Just Cause:-

Force may be used only to correct a grave, public evil, ie, aggression or massive violation of the basic human rights of whole populations.

The most basic right of any human population is the right to exist.  This is what is denied European peoples throughout the West.  The Jew, the African, the Moslem of any race is accorded that here in Europe, but not the European.  We are just required, basically, to go away.  This is contrary to natural justice.

In any normal age, of course, a serious and ongoing threat to a people’s existence would be addressed immediately and with all due vigour by the properly constituted authority.  But throughout the West the properly constituted authorities are a principal party to the attack on the European people’s right to exist.  Ethically, a state of exception has been created by this flouting of natural justice.  This authority - this Establishment - has relinquished its claim to legitimacy.  Indeed, the Establishment now stands full-square in the firing line, along with all its servants in political and cultural life, and those elites whom its members themselves serve.

The right of self-defence adheres - the people may, by whatever means, constitute their own revolutionary authority to initiate and conduct the appropriate corrective and retributive actions.  These may vary from waves of street protest such as that seen in Greece over the last days to a full-scale waging of civil war.  Under the new state of exception, the precise nature of action is the decision of the revolutionary authority.

All this is pretty straightforward.  But then we come to consideration of the use of force against the biological weapon which the “authorities” deploy against us.  Is force ever justified directly against race-replacing populations which are not employing direct physical violence themselves?  Yes, I think, to the extent required to contain and resolve the existential threat they pose.  The very act of invading another’s living space is an aggression in itself.  To transverse from ethics to law for a moment, since the invading minorities freely respond to the Establishment’s invitation to come and, once here, are a willing beneficiary of its coercive policies of race legislation and anti-racist practise, they are accessories before and after the fact of Establishment treachery.  The ethical path is free from obstruction.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Saturday, December 13, 2008 at 04:27 PM in Political Philosophy
Comments (50) | Tell-a-Friend

Greeks.  But no political gifts just yet

I am not yet as convinced as Telegraph journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard that the West or, at least, the EU is entering upon some Kali Yuga style end-game of strife, discord, quarrel, and contention.  But his article in today’s Telegraph, titled Greek fighting: the eurozone’s weakest link starts to crack, makes a fair case for it.  It also provides as good an assessment of the situation in Greece as I have yet come across.

I won’t reproduce the whole piece here.  But I will copy the following passage, which concluded it:-

I am a little surpised that the riot phase of this long politico-economic drama known as EMU has kicked off so soon, and that it has done so first in Greece where the post-bubble hangover has barely begun.

The crisis is much further advanced in Spain, which is a year or two ahead of Greece in the crisis cycle.

My old job as Europe correspondent based in Brussels led me to spend a lot of time in cities that struck me as powder kegs - and indeed became powder kegs in the case of Rotterdam following the murder of Pim Fortyn, and Antwerp following the Muslim street riots (both of which I covered as a journalist). Lille, Strasbourg, Marseilles, Amsterdam, Brussels, all seemed inherently unstable, and I do not get the impression that the big cities of Spain and Italy are taking kindly to new immigrants.

The picture is going to get very ugly as Europe slides deeper into recession next year. The IMF expects Spain’s unemployment to reach 15pc. Immigrants are already being paid to leave the country. There will be riots in Spain too (there have been street skirmishes in Barcelona).

Hedge funds, bond vigilantes, and FX traders will be watching closely. In the end, a currency union is no stronger than the political will of the constituent states.

No doubt events will be ugly in Britain as well. My comments are not intended to suggest that British behaviour is better. Far from it. But I am certain that the British people still feel that the authorities who set economic policy are ultimately answerable to Parliament and to the democratic system.

Will the Greeks, the Spanish, the French feel that way about the European Central Bank and the Stability Pact when the chips are really down?

The Telegraph software appears to display only the first twenty of the comments.  There are, apparently, forty-two others on the thread that I cannot get to load on my browser.  However, those twenty are also worth a read.  There are more and more such eye-popping sentiments appearing on newspaper threads.  Dissent is becoming endemic, but it lacks focus ... political form.

What Evans-Pritchard’s piece really tells us is that we are embarking upon if not the revolutionary process exactly then, at the very least, a revolutionary preamble ... a lengthy period of reflection upon what it will really take to destroy the present system.  The “ugliness” to which Evans-Pritchard refers ... the riots, the cynicism, the street politics ... will not do it.  Its all about focus.  Without that, these convulsions will as likely operate as safety valves.

Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, December 11, 2008 at 12:31 AM in World Affairs
Comments (86) | Tell-a-Friend

Kucinich Is Not An Idiot

Rep. Dennis Kucinich is not an idiot.... well… not compared to the rest of Congress… which may be damning with faint praise, but he’s just introduced a piece of legislation that is worthy of consideration: 

HR 7260 Transparency in the Creation of Wealth Act of 2008 (Introduced in House)

By forcing the Fed to publish key data regarding distribution of net assets—as opposed to distribution of income—Kucinich’s bill attacks the primary con game played in political economy:

Taxing producers to pay for protection of owners in the name of “taxing the rich”.

It’s the kind of thing that routinely gets people assassinated if they get too close to accomplishing it.

Continued...

Posted by James Bowery on Tuesday, December 9, 2008 at 09:07 PM in
Comments (4) | Tell-a-Friend

An exercise in critique

An MR reader - I guess we can call him G de B - has mailed me with a collection of counter-arguments to, for the most part, a genetically-focussed Nordic racialism.  He requests a response with an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of these various arguments.  So I reproduce the mail in full here, duly formatted.  You will see that the sources are broad to say the least, ranging from Yockey to Kritarchy!  Much of it, though, just represents differing positions among nationalists.  G de B implies that these are intellectual problems for Nordicism in particular and white preservationism in general which he has not resolved to his own satisfaction.  I trust we will not experience too much difficulty in setting that right.
GW

Dear Sir,

I would like to draw your attention to the following observation from Tatu Vanhanen in: Ethnic Conflicts Explained by Ethnic Nepotism:

“Religion, culture, and language can be sources of conflict even if they do not reflect biological differences because the family/non-family distinction has spread to many different kinds of groupings: “Our tendency to favor kin over non-kin has extended to include large linguistic, national, racial, religious, and other ethnic groups.”

Take for example Northern Ireland. It’s a place where sectarian violence is commonplace, where warring factions look alike, are of the same race, speak the same language, often have the same last names; think of Irish Catholics and Irish Protestants. Or take Korea: North and South Koreans are of the same race. But economically, politically, and culturally, what a difference! Jews and Muslims are of the same race - they are both Semites!! Hundreds of examples can be given.

The question is then: will such a state of affairs not hinder your ideal of a homogeneous monoracial existence, which is - according to you – necessary for a continued Northern life?

Generally it is assumed that nationalism – in an ‘unnaturally’ way - divides races in general and Northern kind in particular. But according to Vanhanen it is not that ‘unnaturally’! If I am not mistaken, I belief that Rienzi also emphasizes the importance of nationality and he stresses the importance of ethnic racial preservation! According to him, ethnic groups (ethnies) as well as races, are real biological entities, related by common descent and genetic similarities. In Race is a Myth? The left distorts science for political purposes by Michael Rienzi I read that transplant donors and recipients often have to be matched not just for race but for close ethnicity within race, because inter-racial transplantations often fail.

Arthur Kemp in March of the Titans, claims that “all civilizations rise and fall according to their racial homogeneity and nothing else.  Indeed, “It has been suggested that if a group of Nordics were placed almost anywhere, in complete isolation, in a few generations they would produce a thriving civilization.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Monday, December 8, 2008 at 11:57 PM in White Nationalism
Comments (187) | Tell-a-Friend

CHEM Trust reports on male feminisation

CHEM Trust, a charity “with a mission to protect humans and wildlife from harmful chemicals” has issued its well-trailed report on the effects of man-made endocrine-disrupting, or “gender bending”, chemicals in the environment.

These are:-

… chemicals which block the male hormone androgen, the so-called anti-androgenic chemicals, can cause un-descended testes and can feminise males. Similarly, some sex hormone disrupting chemicals can mimic oestrogen, the female hormone, and also feminise males. Many man-made chemicals can block androgen action, and these include several pesticides and some phthalates, used in consumer products to make plastics flexible. Worryingly, a study of effluents from UK sewage works has found that around three-quarters of these discharges have considerable anti-androgenic activity, and investigations are underway to identify the chemicals to blame.

The four-part report is not confined or focussed upon the known effects of pollutants upon human males.  It reviews effects upon the males of all vertebrate life.  Nonetheless, the underlying concern is for our male offspring:-

Taken together, the effects seen in wildlife should raise concerns for contaminant induced genital disruption in human male infants. Indeed a condition called testicular dysgenesis syndrome, including birth defects of the penis of baby boys, cryptorchidism (undescended testes), reduced sperm production and testicular cancer, has been suggested, because there is evidence to indicate that these effects may be interlinked in causation (Skakkebaek et al.,2001; 2007; Sharpe and Skakkebaek,2008). Moreover, in many studies these disorders or demasculinization effects have been associated with exposure to certain contaminants or sex hormone.

All of the chemicals associated with these effects are to be found in the developed world.  They are generally less evident in the developing world.  Male children born to Third World migrants in the West are as at risk as those born to settled populations here.

In two days time the British government will oppose proposed new European controls on pesticides, many of which have been found to have “gender-bending” effects.  In total, there have been over 100,000 new chemicals introduced in recent years.  Ninety-nine per cent of them are not properly regulated, and eight-five per cent are devoid of accompanying safety information.

The full report, which follows studies in Italy and America, can be downloaded in pdf form here.

Posted by Guessedworker on Monday, December 8, 2008 at 01:36 PM in Science & Technology
Comments (10) | Tell-a-Friend