Category: Education

2015 of Indigenous European Creation

Posted by DanielS on Wednesday, December 31, 2014 at 07:19 AM in ActivismAwakeningsBusiness & IndustryEconomics & FinanceEducationEuropean cultureHomeschooling & Adult EducationPsychologyScience & TechnologySocial SciencesWhite Nationalism
Comments (20) | Tell-a-Friend

“The Necessary War” - a film by Max Hastings


As European(White) Nationalists, we all know that the wake of the World Wars has not birthed favorable circumstances for our people. Thus, we are decidedly less satisfied than Max Hastings that a marked separatism from Jewish power and influence was not achieved, its necessity not even understood; and along with that that a pervasive liberalism should have won-out as consequence, potentially auguring the final chapter for Europeans in entirety.

Was it “hubris” for Poland to want its nation back? I rather think not. It’s called ethno-nationalism and it is that which we should support as opposed to internationalism. Germany was still huge after Versailles. On the Polish border, all it had lost were Posen, Bromberg and Thorn. Danzig became neutral. The Max Hastings account introduces yet more discussion of Versailles to make it more understandable as an effort at justice, as it always appeared when looking at the territorial divisions. However, there have been a couple of parties who want me to run strong anti-Polish propaganda.

The large problem with that is that for those of us who view White Nationalist media as our veritable news source now (finding other, anti-White media wholly intolerable), a hypotrophied unanimity with Nazism and its antecedent regime’s military campaigns is what we get: for whatever reasons, but probably because America is so German- American that a “by-golly, Hitler was absolutely right!” perspective is all too convenient (and the most popular and economically supported of any WN perspective) in the wake of Jewish and Neo-liberal destruction; and all the more motivated with guilt trips of World War II being most pressing upon them; their having least perspective on anything but a direct desire to throw guilt trips off as entire fabrication: nuances of perspective and history are cast aside, and ultimately, the unfortunate difficulty they have in seeing our family relations and the more relative and complex justice of the circumstance seeds potential inter-European conflict, if not war. Seeds sown oblivious to the fact that we do not care to lay guilt trips upon them, certainly not subsequent generations, they go ahead and try to lay guilt trips upon us for events before our fathers lives even. Just as they want it understood that they and their forefathers were not ex-nihilo evil, but had reasons for their wars, so too those of “Allied” descent wish to claim the same.

Yes, there were corrupt forces manipulating the circumstances, but there were also justly reasoned motives. The circumstances were a great deal more complicated and justified from an Allied perspective than The Hitler contingent of WN will ever admit. That’s a problem if you want to treat WN as your media. Because Nazi Germany and Kaiser Germany were not pure and sheer victims, as the salient contingent of WN wish to claim. But so long as their childish and Jewish style of argumentation is what is being served in WN discourse, I am left no choice but to balance things off in the service of truth. There are several sites out there for those who want to take a “Hitler only good everyone else bad” perspective. You will not hear that the German regimes did have choices: Polish, Belarusian, Ukrainian and other Nationalisms, even the British, of course, could have been aligned, willing and able to fight Soviet incursions (had done so already in some instances).

Until there are other, or more, WN sites which care for the truth and represent events in the context of their nuance and balance, I must continue to highlight discussions such as that from Max Hastings. In fact, there is much there that one would never hear and learn about if the now standard WN position on several sites - “Germany’s war efforts only good, their people only victims” -  were the only perspective heard; and there is a great deal of intimidation that it be the only perspective heard in WN, to the point where the opposite of PC is in effect, to where it is a veritable taboo to say anything negative about Nazi Germany and its predecessors and anything good about the Allies and their predecessors. In truth, of course, there are many things for Germans to be proud of, and some things to not be so proud of. For some reason, that is too complex a fact for some to cope with. Those of us who are sick of that childish unanimity might find Max Hastings discussion refreshing and informative.

There are thoughts on responsibility in World War I which echo very much that of WWII. Thoughts on Versailles foreign to WN discourse. And of course the great taboo in WN, to suggest that a German military could have done anything worth resisting. It was of course noble to burn the library of Leuven (they just had to do that, didn’t they?); to do whatever I am not allowed to speak about to Belgian civilians there, in Dinant and elsewhere, to French and other civilians; in Kalisz as well. No, Germany was always a perfect nation, nobody can say otherwise; if you want to blame anybody, conveniently blame Poland as Hitler and Goebbels suggested, or as Friedrich the Great might have proposed of his then vanquished neighbor.


Posted by DanielS on Wednesday, December 17, 2014 at 03:57 AM in British PoliticsEducationEuropean NationalismPolitical analysisRevisionismThe American rightThe Proposition NationU.S. PoliticsWhite Genocide: EuropeWhite Nationalism
Comments (18) | Tell-a-Friend

Are there explicit liberals with implicit sympathy up that path?


While defending our ghetto square and the merits of strengthening our grass roots community by preaching there to its choir, deepening our understanding and resolve, it seems that at this point Majority Rights could also do well with forays to visit those down some side streets - to pursue interviews not only with those who are most aligned with our views, but also to follow a path of those who might be slightly off - i.e. slightly antagonistic to our views in a somewhat liberal direction, at least explicitly, while having some implicit sympathy through connection to our square, our cause; such that MR’s platform might bring-out that connection with their underlying fairness in concern for our people and our kinds. The more public, known or respectable the person, perhaps the better. They might come to us with an intent to criticize us or save face in cover inasmuch – fine. Perhaps we can stand corrected. That’s not so much the problem as coming-up with good candidates for this kind of discussion/debate, those who may be lurking in what are the shadowy side-streets for us. Therefore the reason for this post is to ask for suggestions as to fairly prominent/respectable liberals, etc. Those fairly askance of our views, but not so antagonistic as to be futile to hope to engage. Rather to pursue those who might be ripe to debate GW or another MR representative, to at least hear-us-out. We might see where the dimly lit path takes us…


Posted by DanielS on Thursday, November 6, 2014 at 06:10 AM in ActivismAwakeningsBritish PoliticsConservatismEducationFeminismLibertarianismMR RadioPolitical PhilosophyPopular CultureRace realismSocial liberalismSocial SciencesWhite Genocide ProjectWhite Nationalism
Comments (11) | Tell-a-Friend

A hermeneuticist confronts a sortocracer with a provocative issue

Challenge or corrective process to Enlightenment puritanism, depending on perspective

[Note: Søren chided me for not proofreading this sufficiently; and he was right. There was a typo in the very title and an uncouth repetition of the word “suggests” in the same sentence in the second paragraph. It’s fixed now]

There is a provocation from the other direction as well. You see, this hermeneuticist naturally wants different nations to have different, sovereign ways, and for there to be a variety of ways among the nations, including individuals who may believe themselves to be descended from god, as they see fit. So, the question, “do you accept the prerogative to exclude you?” is only mildly insulting in that it proposes the necessity to enforce something that I am advocating with all my might, in line with, and by my very natural preferences.

And it is not to be capricious or to look for serpentine ways for an inroad into a foreign culture, but rather to point-out a loophole in this Enlightenment model of “sortocracy” - the a-historical linearity of modernity -  which indicates that consideration be given to the possibility that it might indeed, be enhanced by some consideration of the hermeneutic turn. That loophole of a-historicity/historicity and the necessity of narrative coherence may be used in a positive or negative way.

Hermeneutics was, after all, conceived for friendly purposes, to protect our people from the arbitrary ravages of a-historical scientism. And typically, abused by Jewish interests.


Posted by DanielS on Thursday, October 2, 2014 at 04:56 AM in ActivismEducationSocial ConservatismSocial SciencesWhite Nationalism
Comments (17) | Tell-a-Friend

Gregory Bateson on Pathology - Context and Relation

“I don’t have to tell you about the tyranny of patterns - that is the rubric under which we meet. What you may not know is that you have to accept them.”                     
                                              - Gregory Bateson, Paradigmatic Conservatism.

“When you breach a holistic structure, and say, or do without saying, I’m only going to attend to this end of a relationship - I’m going to study the role of the doctor - role - r-o-l-e”..[or in our case, the role of Jews, one other race, or our own people] ..“now a role is a half-assed relationship, you know. It’s one end of a relationship. And you cannot study one end of a relationship and make any sense. What you will make is disaster.”

Grantchester, said to have world’s highest concentration of Nobel Prize winners, most of these presumably being current or retired academics from the nearby Cambridge.

“The healthy system, dreamed above, may be compared to an acrobat on a high wire. To maintain the ongoing truth of his basic premise (“I am on the wire”), he must be free to move from one position of instability to another; certain variables such as the position of his arms and the rate of movement of his arms, have great flexibility, which he uses to maintain the stability of other more fundamental and general characteristics. If his arms are fixed or paralyzed (isolated from communication), he must fall.

In this connection it is interesting to consider the ecology of our legal system. For obvious reasons, it is difficult to control by law those ethical and abstract principles upon which the social system depends. Indeed, historically, The United States was founded upon the premise of freedom of religion and freedom of thought - - the separation of Church and State being the classic example.

On the other hand, it is rather easy to write laws which will fix the more episodic and superficial details of human behavior. In other words, as our acrobat is progressively limited in his arm movement but is given free permission to fall off the wire.

Note, in passing, that the analogy of the acrobat can be apropos at a higher level. During the period when the acrobat is learning to move his arms in an appropriate way, it is necessary to have a safety net under him, i.e., precisely to give him freedom to fall off the wire. Freedom and flexibility in regard-to the most basic variables may be necessary during the process of learning and creating a new system by social change:

These parades of order and disorder the ecological analyst must weigh.

It is at least arguable that the trend of social change in the last one hundred years, especially in The USA, has been toward an inappropriate distribution of flexibility among variables of civilization. Those variables which should be flexible have been pegged, while those which should be comparatively steady, changing only slowly, have been cast loose.

Even so, the law is surely not the appropriate method for stabilizing the fundamental variables. This should be done by the process of education and character formation - those parts of our system which are currently and expectably undergoing maximum perturbation.” Steps, p.503


Posted by DanielS on Wednesday, August 20, 2014 at 05:42 PM in ActivismAnthropologyAnti-racism and white genocideConservatismEducationEnvironmentalism & Global WarmingEthnicity and Ethnic Genetic InterestsGenetics & Human Bio-DiversityGlobalisationWhite Nationalism
Comments (4) | Tell-a-Friend

You and I in Identity and Agency Creation


For those who might be put-off, initially or even ultimately, by the subject matter discussed here, I would refer to that old adage, that “if all you know well is one thing, then you really don’t even know that very well.”

Part 3 of the analysis of

John Shotter’s “Social Accountability and the Social Construction of ‘You”


Posted by DanielS on Tuesday, January 14, 2014 at 09:15 AM in ActivismAwakeningsEducationEuropean cultureEuropean NationalismFree SpeechPolitical PhilosophyPopular CulturePsychologyScience & TechnologySocial ConservatismSocial liberalismSocial SciencesThe Ontology ProjectWhite Nationalism
Comments (2) | Tell-a-Friend

Negotiating Problems of Conventional and Non-Standard Grammar of European Identity

The most fundamental questions of who we are and how we might organize in our defense has a cogent, preliminary answer outlined by the Euro-DNA Nation 

We organize our identity as advocates of our people, who are of indigenous European descent, for the maintenance of our distinct genus on the whole and in the maintenance of our distinct species as well.

The very act of participating in the Euro-DNA Nation establishes a degree of merit to individuals as worthy members from the onset: This person is willing to undertake a minimal act in essential distinction of themselves and their group in flight or fight for the defense of European types.

There are additional qualities that need to be drawn-out by means of criteria other than genetics, of course. For example, Bowery might seek demonstrations of particular skills to confirm the type that he is looking for in his particular community. Lister would be correct to look for additional criteria beyond genetics and so on. These particular qualitative concerns are provided for in the Euro-DNA Nation as well.

We may hypothesize and verify that we do have a definition of White/European Nationalisms which can move easily in consensus, neither yielding to slobs or snobs.

Although there is some confusion over what constitutes White/European Nationalism by way of slobs and snobs, there is a de facto consensus that all people of indigenous European parentage, including Russians, are valid members. With that, there is a normal provision that the various kinds of Europeans ought to be able to maintain their distinct demographics and not have them blended away, not even with other European types. This normal provision protects against the slobs, those who cannot see the depth and importance of European differences from one another and in some of their slovenly cases, not even seeing difference from non-Europeans. It also protects against snobbish definitions of White, which would deny the overwhelming Europeanness or the value of some European kinds; in this case again, they are not seeing or acknowledging a difference that makes a difference from non-Europeans. Their concerns that some patterns among those others which are unlike theirs and not distinctly European might damage their kind if integrated, are alleviated by the human ecological accountability of the particular national and subnational bounds.

Thus, by maintaining national, regional and communal differences and values we may handle concerns of the snobs and the slobs. The snobs, those who do not really care for certain native Europeans, not recognizing them as a part of “us”, may be placated by the fact that borders with these groups that they do not particularly care for are maintained. They have the means to stem limitless blending away. Therefore, they do not need to throw these people overboard along with the non-Europeans. On the other hand, the slobs, people who have a tendency to be lax in recognizing the differences between Europeans or even worse, from non-Europeans, are, by the means of these national, regional and communal accountabilities, also prevented from going too far.

This framework allows for more and less pure alike, it maintains both genus and species of Europeans and thus provides a crucial basis that in theory might serve organizational grounds for our identity, its defense and expanse, even, into new territories.



Posted by DanielS on Saturday, January 4, 2014 at 07:47 PM in ActivismAnthropologyDemographicsEducationEthnicity and Ethnic Genetic InterestsEuropean NationalismGenetics & Human Bio-DiversityLinguisticsPsychologySocial SciencesThe Ontology ProjectWhite Nationalism
Comments (5) | Tell-a-Friend

JFK murder 50th anniversary: Part 6

Every man, woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut at any moment by accident, or miscalculation, or by madness. The weapons of war must be abolished before they abolish us.

—President John F. Kennedy at the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 25, 1961.

Let’s start with acknowledged instances of the use of nuclear weapons and some officially unacknowledged ones.


Posted by R-news on Sunday, December 8, 2013 at 03:29 PM in BooksEducationGlobal ElitismHistoryMediaMilitary MattersPolitical analysisScience & TechnologyThat Question AgainU.S. PoliticsWar on TerrorWorld Affairs
Comments (2) | Tell-a-Friend

JFK murder 50th anniversary: Part 5

According to Salvador Astucia, the singlemost important reason behind the assassination of JFK was JFK’s attempt to establish détente with the Soviet Union. Let’s see why this was a big issue.


Posted by R-news on Wednesday, November 27, 2013 at 01:54 PM in BooksEconomics & FinanceEducationGlobal ElitismHistoryMediaMilitary MattersPolitical analysisThat Question AgainU.S. PoliticsWorld Affairs
Comments (7) | Tell-a-Friend

JFK murder 50th anniversary: Part 4

J.P. Mroz has written a three-part essay titled Will the Real Wikipedia Please Stand Up?:

The essay is related to the futility of trying to correct blatant disinformation on Wikipedia pages regarding the JFK assassination. What is the “real Wikipedia” according to Mroz? It’s simply what Wikipedia claims to be: a wiki edited by the general public, and one that maintains a neutral viewpoint. Mroz’s problems at Wikipedia certainly haven’t stemmed from his being in the minority. In the U.S., surveys have shown that two-thirds to three-fourths of the population doesn’t buy the lone assassin/Oswald claim. So how does one explain Wikipedia “neutrality”?


Posted by R-news on Saturday, November 23, 2013 at 03:57 PM in BooksEducationGlobal ElitismHistoryMediaPolitical analysisThat Question AgainU.S. PoliticsWorld Affairs
Comments (4) | Tell-a-Friend

JFK murder 50th anniversary: Part 3

The previous parts established that JFK was killed by at least three hitmen: Lucien Sarti and the other two likely François Chiappe and Jean-Paul Angeletti. Hired guns are mercenaries, and have no personal stake in the matter. This part addresses the people who hired these hitmen.

The following factors would’ve motivated the murder of JFK:


Posted by R-news on Friday, November 22, 2013 at 11:28 AM in BooksEducationGlobal ElitismHistoryMediaPolitical analysisThat Question AgainU.S. PoliticsWorld Affairs
Comments (3) | Tell-a-Friend

JFK murder 50th anniversary: Part 2

This part addresses the assassins of JFK.

JFK’s would-be assassination was revealed a month before his murder. The revealer was U.S. army cryptographer Eugene B. Dinkin. An early source of this information is Bloody Treason by Noel Twyman, and it’s mentioned in LBJ, the Mastermind of the JFK Assassination by Phillip Nelson. The following excerpts from Nelson’s book are found on pages 360-362:

Exactly one month before JFK was assassinated, a cryptographic code operator working for the U.S. Army Ordinance [sic] in Metz, France, tried to alert his superiors—all the way up to Robert F. Kennedy—that John F. Kennedy would be assassinated in November, in Texas. An FBI report dated April 9, 1964, confirmed that Eugene B. Dinkin, entrusted with the military’s highest Crypto clearance, predicted “that a conspiracy was in the making for the ‘military’ of the United States, perhaps combined with an ‘ultra right wing economic group’.” He discovered the plot as he routinely processed messages between the plotters (i.e., Bill Harvey and/or Guy Bannister [sic] and QJ/WIN, a hit man of French origin, associated with the Antoine Guerini Mob headquartered in Marseilles, France. A number of known hit men were part of this gang, some known variously as Carlos Rigal, Victor Michael Mertz, Michel Roux, Lucien Sarti, or Jean Soutre).

Read the rest in an overview by David Martin:

What happened to Dinkin? From Phillip Nelson we have:


Posted by R-news on Thursday, November 21, 2013 at 02:28 PM in BooksEducationGlobal ElitismHistoryMediaPolitical analysisThat Question AgainU.S. PoliticsWorld Affairs
Comments (0) | Tell-a-Friend

JFK murder 50th anniversary: Part 1

The 50th anniversary of JFK’s murder is on Nov. 22, 2013. Some believe that before 9/11, the JFK murder was the greatest game-changing event in the century that has passed. I don’t know whether this assertion is correct, but the event had major significance, and it’s time to take a look at the JFK murder.

Part 1 addresses whether the official story about who killed JFK is correct.


Posted by R-news on Wednesday, November 20, 2013 at 02:01 PM in BooksEducationGlobal ElitismHistoryMediaPolitical analysisThat Question AgainU.S. PoliticsWorld Affairs
Comments (21) | Tell-a-Friend

Free speech and open discussion issues

It’s been said that the halls of academia echo with the chorus of freedom of speech, but the most vociferous members of this chorus often do everything within their power to suppress it! I know of no better example than this of the uselessness of explicitly endorsing support for free speech; behavior, not what one superficially endorses, matters.

Assuming one’s inclined toward respecting freedom of speech, how does one accommodate those hostile to free speech? Suppressing the hostiles is a form of suppression of free speech, but one must suppress the hostiles in order to freely discuss the things the hostiles want suppressed. An open discussion can’t be productive if the hostiles barge in with obfuscation, lies, distortions, noise, nonsense, straw men, trolling, guilt-by-association arguments, discrediting the opponent by making assumptions and then critiquing the assumptions, exposing false information by fellow-hostiles, false dichotomies, deflecting attention from the perpetrators, directing animosity toward the victims and other foul techniques.

Getting rid of the hostiles is an easy matter if the discussion is taking place among a non-proselytising group. The hostiles can complain all they want about suppression of free speech, but the group can keep them out without explanation and without apology.

But the solution to having a productive discussion with hostiles lurking about isn’t easy when the discussion group seeks to bring naive individuals and fence sitters into the fold. Let’s look at a specific issue, the discussion of who did 9/11.


Posted by J Richards on Thursday, February 9, 2012 at 12:49 AM in 9/11ActivismBlogs & BloggingEducationThat Question AgainThread Wars
Comments (217) | Tell-a-Friend

Re: The New American Divide, by Charles Murray

[submission by Genotype]

Murray’s thesis is higher cognitive abilities lead to greater economic productivity and thus higher salaries. This is merely an update to Ayn Rand‘s update to Horatio Alger’s “rags to riches” legends.

Murray and his jewish employers at AEI have two transparent goals:

1.Describe what anyone with an IQ > 90 can see has happened and continues to happen economically.

2.Gain control of the discourse by eliminating all references to “The Other” from the universe of permitted explanations for #1.

Re: What the Top 1% of Earners Majored In

The undergrad degree data don’t support Murray’s proposed explanation for the Great Divide. Undergrad science and engineering majors that might lead to advanced science degrees are grossly underrepresented in the 1% group. They are so underrepresented that this data alone falsifies Murray’s primary explanation.

“Biology” obviously serves as a proxy for “pre-med.” Humanities majors of the kind that comprise “pre-law” curriculums are heavily over-represented. History, “economics,” and political science are obvious pre-law programs. What to make of zoology and physiology, except failure to make the cut for “pre-med”? Note that mathematics and physics are on the bottom.  Computer science and mechanical/electrical/civil engineering didn’t make the list.

Posted by R-news on Saturday, January 28, 2012 at 06:59 PM in Blogs & BloggingEconomics & FinanceEducationGlobal ElitismPolitical analysisSocial SciencesThat Question Again
Comments (22) | Tell-a-Friend

The Relevance of Ethnocentrism

Previously it was shown that intelligence was of practically no relevance to explaining spectacular Jewish success (control of the mainstream media, ZOG, etc.). An alternative proposed was ethnocentrism. This can be examined, too.

The National Opinion Research Center (NORC), at the University of Chicago, has conducted an annual General Social Survey (GSS) of a random, representative sample of Americans from 1972 onward.

In 1996 and 2004, it asked respondents to answer how close they felt to their racial or ethnic group [variable coded as ETHCLOSE]. The 4 possible responses were: very close, close, not very close, not close at all. Assigning these responses values of 4, 3, 2, 1, respectively, Ron Guhname provided the following averages:

Table 1. ETHCLOSE values
Orthodox Jew (3.86), Conservative Jew (3.71), black (3.53), Norwegian (3.36), All Jews (3.31), Mexican (3.25), Italian (3.20), Irish (3.19), Reform Jew (3.15), American average (3.15), French (3.11), Polish (3.04), English/Welsh (3.02), German (3.01), Scottish (3.00), Other Jew (2.92).

ETHCLOSE captures the core of ethnocentrism and will have to do in the absence of better data on representative samples. Jews, on average, are more ethnocentric than whites. Now let’s look at the proportions among whites, by year:

Table 2. ETHCLOSE answers for whites (percentages)
1996: very close (33.9), close (41.2), not very close (18.9), not close at all (6.0)
2004: very close (39.5), close (36.3), not very close (19.6), not close at all (4.7)
Average: very close (36.5), close (38.9), not very close (19.2), not close at all (5.4)

In the data, Jews are coded as white. Assume that all Jews who say they’re not very close to Jews are lying, in reality very close to their group. This gives a population having a size of about 3.3% of the white population that is very close to its ethnic/racial group, whereas at least 30% of whites are very close to their ethnic/racial grouping. In other words, the number of ethnocentric whites considerably exceeds the number of ethnocentric Jews. We’re dealing with some crudeness, but in spite of making some assumptions that favor those who explain spectacular Jewish success in terms of ethnocentrism, we have to conclude that this couldn’t possibly be an explanation.


Posted by J Richards on Tuesday, January 24, 2012 at 01:59 AM in EducationEuropean NationalismSocial SciencesThat Question AgainWhite Nationalism
Comments (39) | Tell-a-Friend

A journey home to a foreign land

Yesterday I had to drive my daughter the forty miles or so to her university halls in central London.  The journey took me through the southern outskirts of the London I used to know, and where I spent twenty of my first twenty-one years, and on through the dark heart of Africa.  It’s a journey I made in September too - for the same purpose - and, as then, I arrived at the river in a state of deep misgiving, even though I knew in my mind what I would find.

But it’s when one encounters Africa and Asia in person in the places one knew intimately as a child that the term “race-replacement” is revealed in its starkest and most uncompromising reality.  My secondary modern school had over six hundred white-skinned pupils between the ages of twelve and sixteen.  There were a handful of Jews among them, who I did not notice or pay attention to.  But there were no Africans or Asians at any time while I was there.  In six years of representative football, cricket and athletics matches with the other five secondary moderns in the district I came across one black lad.  My old stamping ground looks to be 25 to 30% vibrant now, though it’s much more than that, of course, as one travels northward up the London Road.

There is, though, something very evident that no one in the mainstream speaks about, and that’s the de facto racial segregation that forces itself onto one’s consciousness as the ribbons of shops and shoppers go by.  White couples, white friends, white families walk together.  They do not mix with other races.  Asians do the same.  Blacks do the same.  The In-Betweens who, in South London, are overwhelmingly the products of black male “cross cultural fertilisation”, would seem to disappear into the black groups.

There were vanishingly few multiracial groups visible on both journeys.  I don’t doubt that where social mixing across the races takes place it is negotiated without too much in the way of problems.  But a preference for social mixing, if it is there at all, is manifestly avoided when people go outdoors!  The anti-racist strategy, exercised as it is by the presumption, itself racist, of an original sin of white skin, appears to have failed - if, of course, we accept that its goal was panmixia rather than white suppression.

If it was just designed for suppression, it’s been a startling success:


Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, January 4, 2011 at 08:06 PM in Education
Comments (72) | Tell-a-Friend

Do-gooder Bill Gates tries to solve the education dilemma.

Along with international humanitarian aid, Bill Gates (through the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation) is attempting to solve the problem with education in the United States. It is well known that the United States lags far behind other advanced nations in terms of education, and the causes of that failure just keeps getting redefined and reworked, with no real progress in understanding why. Of course, the cause is rather simple but is unacceptable when the country is committed to the egalitarian religion—our students are innately less intelligent than students in other advanced countries.

The year 1965 was a big year for civil rights and for opening up immigration. Since then, there has been a keen interest in closing the achievement gap between Blacks and Whites, and to a lesser extent between Whites and Hispanics. So while millions of low achieving Amerindians from Mexico started flooding the country, educational achievement has declined over time to the consternation of educators, government and the business community.


Posted by Matt Nuenke on Tuesday, August 24, 2010 at 12:28 PM in Education
Comments (5) | Tell-a-Friend

How to make educational policy

Here is the scarcely punctuated and poorly expressed blurb to a book titled What Shall We Tell the Children, written by Dr Stuart J. Foster.  It was published in 2006.

The pages of this book illustrate that as instruments of socialization and sites of ideological discourse textbooks are powerful artefacts in introducing young people to a specific historical, cultural and socioeconomic order. Crucially, exploring the social construction of school textbooks and the messages they impart provides an important context from within which to critically investigate the dynamics underlying the cultural politics of education and the social movements that form it and which are formed by it. The school curriculum is essentially the knowledge system of a society incorporating its values and its dominant ideology. The curriculum is not “our knowledge” born of a broad hegemonic consensus, rather it is a battleground in which cultural authority and the right to define what is labelled legitimate knowledge is fought over. As each chapter in this book illustrates curriculum as theory and practice has never been, and can never be, divorced from the ethical, economic, political, and cultural conflicts of society which impact so deeply upon it. We cannot escape the clear implication that questions about what knowledge is of most worth and about how it should be organized and taught are problematic, contentious and very serious.

There is something deeply offensive about the knowledge of the workings of the mind claimed by these educationalist creatures.  Everything is somebody’s myth, they say.  It’s all relative.  It’s all about power ... all about politics.  The only question is whether we are serious about building a better, more tolerant, more equal world.  Etc, etc.

I’m glad I’m not a “senior lecturer in History in Education” like Dr Foster.  I can cling to the fond belief that the point of educating children is to equip them with the capacity to think for themselves all life long.  But Dr Foster very specifically does NOT share that belief.  In his mean little world, students are no more than human blotting-paper - except, of course, those like his own student self who possess the powers to freely discriminate for the marxian concept of Man.  Gods in a postmodern system that makes the rest of us less than human, they are the final word in hypocrisy.

Now I’ve got that off my chest, I will explain.


Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, November 12, 2008 at 07:52 PM in Education
Comments (4) | Tell-a-Friend

Ethnic cleansing back on the agenda at University of California

By Stanley Womack,

Ever since Proposition 209, the anti-race-preference initiative, was passed by California voters in 1996, various state and local government agencies have sought a means to save race-based government programs.

The opening, true words of an NRO article written in May 2004 by Lance T. Izumi & Sharon Browne (both energetic opponents of affirmative action and, in Browne’s case, a successful litigant).

Well, all those disappointed state and local government agencies need pine after the old days no more.  The San Jose Mercury News reports:-

Students recruit minorities to UC in ways institution can’t

By Lisa M. Krieger

California law bans the state’s public universities from recruiting students based on race.

But it can’t stop student volunteers.

Call it the outsourcing of affirmative action. Stepping into jobs made off-limits to university officials by Proposition 209 - the 1996 California ballot proposition that prohibited public schools from targeting students based on race, sex, or ethnicity - students are reaching back into their own communities to boost diversity on campus.

“We feel an obligation to help open the door to allow for more of our brothers and sisters to enter,” said Fuifuilupe Niumeitolu, a Tongan student at the University of California-Berkeley who is a member of the student group Pacific Islanders Higher Education Recruitment Program. “It is a labor of love, rooted in creating social change.”

The passage of Proposition 209 hit UC-Berkeley’s racial and ethnic communities hard. The number of incoming freshmen from under-represented minorities groups - African-American, Latino, Native American and Pacific Islander - shrank by half.

The numbers are just now beginning to recover. But the campus is still far from reflecting the state’s diversity. Although about 47 percent of public high school graduates in California are members of underrepresented minorities, they make up just 25 percent of UC’s incoming freshman class. At UC-Berkeley, the system’s most elite campus, there are only 15.7 percent.

Under-represented minorities groups.  That’s a new phrase, even from Lisa Krieger, who we at RD judge to be one of, if not the, most consistent purveyer of anti-white American hate-journalism at San Jose Mercury News.  What it signals is a new wedge for ethnic cleansing.


Posted by Guest Blogger on Thursday, August 7, 2008 at 07:01 PM in Education
Comments (4) | Tell-a-Friend

Misology in America Part 4 - Gender

Misology in America Part 4 - Gender
By Robert E. Reis

Misology is the hatred of objective knowledge gained by the scrupulous use of the scientific method when it contradicts the political goals, ideology or religious faith of the misologists.

Misologists dominate the discussion of public policies in several areas in the modern world.

In the United States misologists predominate in the media, the universities, the schools, and among the elected politicians and the clergy.

Part One presented evidence that misologists dominate the public discussion of the distribution of the general mental ability factor or IQ in various identifiable human genetic clusterings.

Part Two presented evidence that misologists dominate the public discussion of the health hazards of smoking tobacco.

Part Three documented the stranglehold misologists hold on the public discussion of homosexuality.

This essay will evaluate the evidence for the beliefs that mental ability is equally distributed among men and women and that male oppression is the sole explanation of the failure of women to succeed in many fields in proportion to their numbers.


Posted by Robert Reis on Friday, March 21, 2008 at 09:16 AM in Education
Comments (14) | Tell-a-Friend

Beyond political correctness.  Beyond even whiteness studies.  UPDATED 02.10.07

“The white majority has rights, damn you.”

That’s my short response to all the activists in academia who are guiding the process of white annihilation, physical and moral.  We know the nature of these creatures, and their politics.  We know their terms: if we do not accept to self-annihilate as “supremacists”, as “the privileged”, as “oppressors” but, instead and simply as the people of the West, insist upon our free life, our nature, our rights, our interests, then, automatically, these “educators”, these human dross, label us “haters”.  They allow no resting place to us.  The venomous, reptilian energy of these people knows no stop, nor anything but the prosecution of its own special hatreds (pdf):-

Definitions and Descriptions of Racism

WHITE SUPREMACY: White supremacy is an historically based, institutionally perpetuated system of oppression of continents, nations and peoples of colour by white peoples and nations of the European continent; for the purpose of maintaining and defending a system of wealth, power and privilege.

WHITE (as in “white people”): The term white, referring to people, was created by Virginia slaveowners and colonial rulers in the 17th century.  It replaced terms like Christian and Englishman (sic) to distinguish European colonists from Africans and indigenous peoples.  European colonial powers established White as a legal concept after Bacon’s rebellion in 1676 during which indentured servants of European and African descent had united against the colonial elite.  The legal basis of white separated the servant class on the basis of skin color and continental origin.  The creation of “white” meant giving privileges to some, while denying them to others with the justification of biological and social inferiority.

WHITE PRIVILEGE: A privilege is a right, favour, advantage, immunity specially granted to one individual or group. and withheld from another

White privilege is an historically based, institutionally perpetuated system of: (1) preferential prejudice for or treatment for white people based solely on the colour of their skin color and/or ancestral origin from Europe; and (2) exemption from racial and/or national oppression based on skin colour and/or ancestral origin from Africa, Asia, the Americas and the Arab world.

And two pages on, to put the knife in:-

A RACIST: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system.  The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality.  By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination.

REVERSE RACISM: A term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege. Those in denial use the term reverse racism to refer to hostile behavior by people of color toward whites, and to affirmative action policies, which allegedly give ‘preferential treatment’ to people of color over whites. In the U.S., there is no such thing as ‘reverse racism.’

A NON-RACIST: A non-term. The term was created by whites to deny responsibility for systemic racism, to maintain an aura of innocence in the face of racial oppression, and to shift responsibility for that oppression from whites to people of color (called “blaming the victim”). Responsibility for perpetuating and legitimizing a racist system rests both on those who actively maintain it, and on those who refuse to challenge it. Silence is consent.

And on page 8, to close every escape route:-


Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, November 1, 2007 at 06:53 PM in Education
Comments (31) | Tell-a-Friend

The QCA are humble men, with a lot to be humble about

Britain’s World War II prime minister Winston Churchill has been cut from a list of key historical figures recommended for teaching in English secondary schools, a government agency says.

The radical overhaul of the school curriculum for 11- to 14-year-olds is designed to bring secondary education up to date and allow teachers more flexibility in the subjects they teach, the Government said.

But although Adolf Hitler, Mahatma Gandhi, Joseph Stalin and Martin Luther King have also been dropped from the detailed guidance accompanying the curriculum, Sir Winston’s exclusion is likely to leave traditionalists aghast.

There’s no suggestion that WW2 as a whole is being dropped from the curriculum, but it does seem a bit difficult to teach it without reference to three of the conflict’s most crucial leaders. Will they say that Britain wanted to appease Germany, and then all of a sudden had a feat of schizophrenia and decided to make war on it? Or will internal politics still be discussed, albeit with Churchill’s name being scrupulously avoided, like the nitty gritty in a prep school sex education class?

Or…or…will it be all about the Holocaust and the 20m…10m…certainly, definitely 6m (or we’ll extradite you to Austria and lock you up for suspected group libel). And the lamps made from Jewish skin, and the incinerators, and all the other relics of essential activities the Germans obviously prioritised, above getting some labour out of their prisoners, whilst fighting a modern war against larger and better financed opponents. But here I am, trying to apply reason to the Nazis’ actions. Don’t I realise the whole Nazi hierarchy was stark, raving mad?!

It’ easy enough to see what the matter, from the point of view of leftie educationalists, with Churchill was. He spoilt the morality story that is the Holocaust. He was a Euro who mustered the resistance to Hitler, suggesting that Jews owe us much to Euros in gratitude as we to them in compensation. No Euro can be shown so much as sheltering Jews, lest we unleash A Second Hitler.

I suppose from now on Jews will be presented as saving themselves. Maybe the role of the three Israelis and one Israeli dog who enlisted will be emphasised (better ignore those nasty Nazi-supporting Zionists - oh, I know, call them British instead). Or maybe we’ll get educational videos like The Great Escape (from Auschwitz). Modern teens barely know what century WW2 was in, so why shouldn’t they swallow this.

Regardless of how it is played, Churchill’s attempts to unite his country against the Nazis will be all but forgotten. Maybe some stray puff of collective guilt for the Nazi crimes will even attach itself to us. Some gratitude.

Posted by Alex Zeka on Sunday, July 15, 2007 at 05:19 PM in EducationMarxism & Culture War
Comments (22) | Tell-a-Friend

A quick review of The Shame of the Nation: The Restoration of Apartheid Schooling in America

Kozol doesn’t explain his role very well, but it seems he is a freelance researcher into minority schools and an apologist for minority student failures. He relies primarily on narrative to try to show that minority schools are underserved by society, but a careful reading just reinforces that minorities are innately ill-equipped to compete in modern society.

Kozol laments the resegregation of schools after a couple of decades of trying to use busing to integrate schools. Integration however failed to improve the academic performance of minorities (Blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans). It seems that parents still have an interest in living among people like themselves, and will relocate to communities where their children can go to school with those like them—with a challenging academic program and a safer environment.


Posted by Matt Nuenke on Friday, May 11, 2007 at 05:34 PM in Education
Comments (10) | Tell-a-Friend

Never mind the Fundies, get the English

From the Daily Mail today:-

Schools with mainly white pupils will be forced to send their children to mix with other races and religions.

A legal duty for schools to promote community relations comes into force in September.

Government guidelines to help them comply could require staff to take children on visits to multi-ethnic schools, stage joint plays and sporting events or twin with other schools.

Ministers said some suburban teenagers had never met a Muslim or Hindu and needed more contact.

Ofsted, the schools watchdog, will be given the power to force schools to comply. Those who do not risk being consigned to a failing list.

Teachers’ leaders said the guidelines were heavy-handed and unnecessary.

The advice says schools should “give their pupils the opportunity to mix with and learn with” pupils from other ethnic, religious and class backgrounds.

Lessons in all subjects should help to teach children tolerance and break down prejudice.

Schools must encourage pupils to strike up e-mail friendships with children at schools with a different racial or religious mix. They should also consider inviting imams and vicars to talk.

... One in five schoolchildren is from an ethnic minority, official figures show. Two per cent of secondary schools and 5 per cent of primary schools in England have no ethnic minority pupils.

Alan Johnson brought in the requirement for schools to “promote community cohesion” after abandoning plans for admissions quotas for faith schools.

The Education Secretary wanted all faith schools to reserve a quarter of places for non-believers but changed the plans after opposition led by the Catholic Church.

Instead, he said schools should be required to demonstrate they are improving community relations.

So the prime-mover of this deeply unwelcome proposal is The Rt Hon Alan Johnson MP, who was appointed Secretary of State for Education and Skills in May 2006.  Here is his ministerial team, among them Jim Knight, who seems to be connected with this particular proposal.

The political provenance of this initiative is the failed attempt to legislate powers for local councils to make new faith schools reserve a quarter of places for children outside the religion.

Johnson defended that attempt by declaring, “There must be a balance between preserving the special quality of faith schools and building greater community cohesion and understanding between different cultures.  By opening up a proportion of places to children of different faiths where local communities wish this, we will help create a system where all faith schools play a full part in the education of local children.”

The principle involved in this seemed clear at the time, even if it was not directly enunciated by ministers for fear of inflaming Pakistan in the North.  Islamic schools narrow their pupils’ understanding of the majority way of life.  Experience of the Kufr and the Kufr’s faith might tell little Moslem mites not only something about the England in which they were domiciling, but about themselves, their teachers and even some of the Suraw.

Now, it was not a particularly good proposal.  Natural balkanisation is better.  And the Bishops took it as an attack by secular leftists on faith schools per se, which is certainly not what Johnson said.  But the implicit focus seemed to me to be in the right place for once.

The new proposal, however, is quite different.  Now we are not talking any more, even implicitly, about challenging Islamic fundamentalism.  It’s the English instinct to separate that ministers find offensive.  The old, self-hating leftist twitch is back.

Well, in my unending quest to be charitable to politicians I persuaded a certain John Standing (who, you will understand, is someone extremely well-known to me but, strangely, to no other living being) to e-mail Lucky Jim the Schools Minister and his Tory Shadow, Nick Gibb MP.  Nothing too complicated.  I don’t want to tax their limited intellectual resources:-


Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, May 8, 2007 at 05:34 PM in Education
Comments (12) | Tell-a-Friend

image of the day

Existential Issues

White Genocide Project

Of note

Majority Radio

Recent Comments

Diversity comes home commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 4' on 05/22/15, 12:55 PM. (go) (view)

Seek to prevent Asians from discriminating commented in entry 'Anti-Racism is a Jewish Construct' on 05/22/15, 09:46 AM. (go) (view)

jrackell commented in entry 'Anti-Racism is a Jewish Construct' on 05/21/15, 05:33 PM. (go) (view)

Tom commented in entry 'MR Radio: Dr Tomislav Sunic returns to talk to GW and DanielS' on 05/21/15, 04:16 PM. (go) (view)

Black commented in entry 'Hermeneutics Circles Back to The Passions of Captain Chaos' on 05/21/15, 03:14 PM. (go) (view)

Dedmon's passion = 50 years commented in entry 'Hermeneutics Circles Back to The Passions of Captain Chaos' on 05/21/15, 03:34 AM. (go) (view)

Passions as guide to the authentic commented in entry 'Hermeneutics Circles Back to The Passions of Captain Chaos' on 05/21/15, 01:03 AM. (go) (view)

Anti-racism is a Jewish construct commented in entry 'Yes, The White Race IS ..A Social Construct (Contrary To Jewish And Right-Wing Denial)' on 05/21/15, 12:14 AM. (go) (view)

Prostitutes of the Chosen / not their Choice commented in entry 'Individualism's Wake: The Abyss - some favorites of Dr. Lister' on 05/20/15, 11:35 PM. (go) (view)

melvin polatnick commented in entry 'Individualism's Wake: The Abyss - some favorites of Dr. Lister' on 05/20/15, 07:37 PM. (go) (view)

melvin polatnick commented in entry 'Race in humans: A reply to the "Statement on Race" by the American Anthropological Association (AAA)' on 05/20/15, 07:27 PM. (go) (view)

untested rape kits - thousands of serial rapists commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on 05/20/15, 03:56 PM. (go) (view)

WWS no judge of Tan's epistemological merit commented in entry 'Yes, The White Race IS ..A Social Construct (Contrary To Jewish And Right-Wing Denial)' on 05/20/15, 01:16 PM. (go) (view)

Atzmon promotes liberalism/ kisses right-wing ass commented in entry 'Is UKIP controlled opposition or genuine Nationalism?' on 05/20/15, 11:53 AM. (go) (view)

this will be the next black riot commented in entry 'Prof.MacDonald: Psychological Mechanism of White Dispossession' on 05/20/15, 10:41 AM. (go) (view)

DanielS commented in entry 'Picking up the British electoral pieces' on 05/20/15, 06:47 AM. (go) (view)

neil vodavzny commented in entry 'Picking up the British electoral pieces' on 05/20/15, 05:55 AM. (go) (view)

Jewish manichean trickery, rule changes commented in entry 'MR Radio: Prof. MacDonald in conversation with GW and DanielS' on 05/20/15, 02:24 AM. (go) (view)

a la la la la la la la la la commented in entry 'MR Radio: Prof. MacDonald in conversation with GW and DanielS' on 05/19/15, 05:32 PM. (go) (view)

Lindtner + Humphreys commented in entry 'Picking up the British electoral pieces' on 05/19/15, 12:11 PM. (go) (view)

melpeexxx commented in entry 'MR Radio: Prof. MacDonald in conversation with GW and DanielS' on 05/19/15, 12:05 PM. (go) (view)

DanielS commented in entry 'Picking up the British electoral pieces' on 05/19/15, 11:15 AM. (go) (view)

neil vodavzny commented in entry 'Picking up the British electoral pieces' on 05/19/15, 09:58 AM. (go) (view)

Anarchy and the Mulatto BLOB order commented in entry 'Picking up the British electoral pieces' on 05/19/15, 05:55 AM. (go) (view)

neil vodavzny commented in entry 'Picking up the British electoral pieces' on 05/19/15, 05:23 AM. (go) (view)

No worry about immigration if Yellowstone blows commented in entry 'MajorityRadio: Susan Lindauer talks with Daniel and GW' on 05/19/15, 03:49 AM. (go) (view)

Hess report: Bye bye Nashville commented in entry 'MR Radio: Prof. MacDonald in conversation with GW and DanielS' on 05/19/15, 01:11 AM. (go) (view)

The Bible The Devil's Book commented in entry 'Majority Radio: Dr Christian Lindtner speaks to DanielS and GW' on 05/19/15, 12:36 AM. (go) (view)

Is UKIP controlled opposition? commented in entry 'MR Radio: Prof. MacDonald in conversation with GW and DanielS' on 05/18/15, 03:38 PM. (go) (view)

Anarchy and anti-nationalism are suspicious commented in entry 'Picking up the British electoral pieces' on 05/18/15, 12:40 PM. (go) (view)

neil vodavzny commented in entry 'Picking up the British electoral pieces' on 05/18/15, 10:00 AM. (go) (view)

UKIP and South Africa commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 05/18/15, 03:07 AM. (go) (view)

Raging Bull commented in entry 'MR Radio: Prof. MacDonald in conversation with GW and DanielS' on 05/18/15, 01:15 AM. (go) (view)

Captainchaos commented in entry 'MR Radio: Prof. MacDonald in conversation with GW and DanielS' on 05/17/15, 09:04 PM. (go) (view)

MacDonald commented in entry 'MR Radio: Prof. MacDonald in conversation with GW and DanielS' on 05/17/15, 05:54 PM. (go) (view)

General News

Science News

All Categories

The Writers

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages.


Endorsement not implied.

Anti-White Media


Controlled Opposition





Historical Re-Evaluation




Nationalist Political Parties


Whites in Africa