Category: History

The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3

In this third and penultimate part of my essay on the Rotherham Syndrome I am going to expand on the disconnection between philosophy (and philosophically-derived politics) and thinking that comes out of ethnic or racial conflict.  In particular, I will focus on the dynamics of absolutism and its ascription of human value.

A petty history

A few years ago I came across the story, I think in a television history, of the last civilian to be hanged in the Third Reich.  I don’t remember his name.  I cannot find a link to the story on-line, so I hope I have it right.  But my memory is that this unfortunate man was a resident of a small south-western German town which lay in the path of the advancing US Army.  I suppose it must have been early- to mid-April 1945.

The war was already lost, of course.  That knowledge had been building among the people since the defeat at Stalingrad and Goebbel’s Sportspalast Speech of 18 February 1943 (which changed the tone of the propaganda from a war of conquest to one of national survival).  The general thrall to a military dictator and the whole mesmerising, deceitful dream of German greatness and glory was dissolving in the acid of the military reality.  By April 1945, with the Allies fighting on German soil, the general will of German civilians would have been for the killing and destruction to be brought to an end, and for Germany to find its way into whatever future was available to it.  But the Allies were only interested in complete and unconditional surrender.  Every last German town would fall, this little one included.  This was not going to be where the Allies would first be held and then pushed back.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, April 8, 2015 at 11:35 AM in HistoryLiberalism & the LeftMarxism & Culture WarNational SocialismThat Question Again
Comments (26) | Tell-a-Friend

Wonderwall

Adventures of a racialist following trance and fate - to Sicily and Poland.
             
        banahcer4
Continuing to expound upon said adventures here and here.

It marked a difference of this group, an Amherst Alanon meeting of thirty or so, as I bluffed in the same way that I would, by standing up and pretending to shoot with my finger – Bang! Bang! Bang! But from this group ensconced at a church literally across the street from Emily Dickinson’s house – nothing. No reaction. They looked calmly upon me as only a harmless fool - A bullfrog on a lily pad. ..I’m nobody, who are you?

I foretold them the Sicilians would act differently.

More than a year later, it was August of 1996, when at a similarly conciliatory meeting of similarly normal people seated in the same circular formation, I stood up, raised my finger like a gun barrel and shouted Bang! Bang! Bang! aiming at the Sicilians in rapid turn around the room in Aci Creale to their immediate fright and panic. To them, it was quite possible that this would be a real gun.

I woke up late on a morning as it turned September to see an unusual funeral procession moving through Piazza Duomo. Two coffins were being moved.
                                                                          botta                                                                  santa
I saw the names of those who I would learn were Salvatore Botta 14 and Santa Puglisi 22, the nephew and niece of a rival mafioso. They were shot on August 27th while attending the funeral for Santa’s husband – who had also been shot..

Continued...

Posted by DanielS on Friday, February 20, 2015 at 01:05 PM in ArcheologyAwakeningsDemographicsEthnicity and Ethnic Genetic InterestsEuropean cultureEuropean NationalismHistoryWhite Nationalism
Comments (19) | Tell-a-Friend

A Request To Dr. Lindtner - To Build The Case Warranting Native European Defense

Despite The Guilt Trips of World War II (discussed below on the anniversary of Dresden)

parts 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Here is an interview request that I sent to Dr. Christian Lindtner on February 12th

Dear Dr. Lindtner,

As producer for Majorityrights.com, I am writing you to inquire as to the possibility of arranging for an interview.

Majority Rights takes a position (secular) regarding Christianity which very much respects your scholarly critique.

Nevertheless, while I am writing you at this email address, my inquiry actually has more to do with a hope to discuss appropriate response to the fall-out of World War II, facts and mythos.

Your videos discussing holocaust revisionism are the most credible on the topic that I have seen. I do not see it as necessary to go-over that same ground in exhaustive detail. My position is that subsequent generations of Germans and others are innocent and ought not have to continue to pay, irrespective of the facts of Nazi Germany.

I am not anti-German and I am assuming that neither are you, anti-German.

My question is, how do we assert our innocence, along with that of present day Germans, to warrant implementing our defense of our nations as the preserves of our native nationals? - particularly in light of, and despite, the holocaust?

I believe that despite the holocaust that Germany and Europe does not owe the world, Jews, or anybody, its destruction through immigration and assimilation.

This is different from what holocaust deniers, even revisionists, are saying. Committed revisionists and deniers seem to believe everything, all of our defensive warrant, hinges upon debunking the holocaust. It is perhaps easier for me to see that as not necessarily the case as my ancestors even, had even less in the way of historical responsibility. Nevertheless, revisionists seem to have an overwhelming desire to unburden us of guilt trips* for these events, for which no guilt ought to be assigned them - and as a result, it seems to me that they are making the cause for European national sovereignty more resisted and less trustworthy when, in fact, it is a fully legitimate cause and ought to be seen that way irrespective of the holocaust.

What I seek from you in an interview is to help build this case to establish the warrant of European nations to preserve their nations for their native kinds despite The World Wars, whatever the facts.

Please say that you will grant us the interview Dr. Lindtner. It can be very important to inter-European peace and survival.

R.S.V.P.
Daniel Sienkiewicz, Majority Rights.

............................................................................
Dr. Lindtner accepts an interview which should materialize around March 1.

Dear Daniel,

Thanks for your interesting mail.

I shall be happy to grant an interview about the matters mentioned by you.

You can expect me to speak freely of these and related issues.

Looking forward to hear from you!

Best wishes

...............................................................................

For those of you who take exception to my deferential use of the word “holocaust”, understand that by it I mean a name given to mass deaths of Jews in the world war, however they came about, irrespective of any obnoxious elevation of importance of Jewish deaths over European deaths - which Dr. Lindtner recognizes in his characterizing it, holocaustianity, as a religion.


* I understand that holocaust isn’t only an issue of guilt, it is the basis for enormous financial payments as well, but that is among issues that I am hoping for Dr. Lindtner to address - his assistance in building the case to Warrant native European national defense, viz. that we have paid enough for any claimed grievances and are innocent to defend ourselves as sovereign native European nations.

.....................................................................................................................................................................
Continued - viz., “Despite The Guilt Trips of World War II (discussed here on the anniversary of Dresden)”


From Colin Liddell’s Saturday, 14 February 2015 article on the Dresden holocaust - “BOMBING GERMANY, RUSSIA, AND AMERICA IN ONE NIGHT”

At the Yalta conference, just days before the Dresden firebombing..

Churchill was roughly shunted aside as the irrelevant leader of a morally and financially burnt-out husk by the two new superpowers. The clearest sign of this was the fate of Poland. This had been Britain’s declared reason for getting involved in the war, so the fate of Poland was a barometer of Britain’s position. At Yalta it was handed over to Stalin. Not only would the Soviet Union keep the territories seized from Poland in 1939, but the Lublin Government, set up and controlled by Stalin, would be placed in effective control of the country.

                                    polandsaved

And this comment on the article..

com contrarian
“Let’s face it the period from about 1936-1945 was full of cock-ups on both sides, and only Franco came out of it with any credibility. Hitler shouldn’t have invaded the Soviet Union and shouldn’t have declared war on the US. Stalin shouldn’t have left his country so open to invasion. Mussolini should have stayed out altogether (Italy had half its merchant marine impounded before it even had the chance to fire a shot). Britain shouldn’t have tried to save Poland (when it had no power to do so) and shouldn’t have sent weapons to Greek communists.

From a particularist/nationalist perspective it’s best to write it off as a painful learning experience and get on with nationalism 2.0.”


Provoked this response from me:

I keep hearing these retarded arguments that the Nazis shouldn’t have invaded Russia and that Britain should’ve let Nazi Germany do as it liked with Poland. If 20/20 hindsight is exercised, then it should be said that Hitler shouldn’t have invaded Poland.

The next argument, also retardedly Buchananesque, is that Poland was betrayed to the umpteenth degree anyway and therefore Germany invading was of no matter.

But even under Soviet control, Poland retained a semblance of national boundaries, more importantly from its point of view, its language and more importantly still, its native genetic homogeneity. Horrible as Soviet control was, neither Poland’s boundaries, language nor genetics were in Hitler’s plans.

The holocaust of the peoples of Dresden is horrible. It is an unspeakable loss of European genetic treasure. As were all the European deaths of World War II - a war unnecessarily fought as a 1) conventional military war and unnecessarily 2) inter-European as it largely was, pitting R1b against R1a - both frames, conventional militarism and anti-Polinism/anti-Slav, were Hitler’s/Friedrich The Great’s.

If you want to use 20/20 hindsight to re-frame World War II and what should not have been done, take it to herr E1B1B1 Hitler.

Don’t kid yourself.

Look at how sick and enraged that Europeans were of ANOTHER World War, which Hitler and his worldview had some small part in initiating, a worldview that had the thin pretense of warrant to take lands and displace peoples up to the Urals on the basis of three and a half small cites being given to Poland by Versailles, a world view that had the design of removing your nation newly established after a bitter ordeal and fight of 123 years, and the realization of his plans of smashing it, taking it away again, killing your father, wife, your daughter, your brother, and you too, charged with an imperson- al mission of bombing a precious German city, might just allow yourself to do that.

A habit, custom, and world view following the line of Friedrich the Great, based on inter-European militarism and a friend enemy distinction of Germanics/Slavs is what should be rejected with 20/20 hindsight - not that Roosevelt and Churchill shouldn’t have gotten into the war, but that Hitler shouldn’t have ordered it in that way.

And don’t kid yourself either - if you know that a European nation like his has plans to take your nation and eliminate you (that was basically known) and some Jew points a gun at that European guy looking to kill you, what are you going to say? No, Mr. Jew, don’t shoot at this guy looking to kill me?

If you want to exercise 20/20 hindsight, for all the European deaths, where it should not have started, the epistemological blunder was with herr E1B1B1 Hitler’s world view and actions thereupon. And if you want to keep Europeans hating and fighting each other, just keep promoting the “innocence” of his worldview and the “supreme and singular guilt” of the Allied leaders.

...............................................................................................

Continued...

Posted by DanielS on Sunday, February 15, 2015 at 12:38 AM in Anti-racism and white genocideFar RightHistoryMarxism & Culture WarNational SocialismRevisionismThat Question AgainWhite Nationalism
Comments (8) | Tell-a-Friend

Objectivism, Subjectivism, Relativism and Vico’s place in the turn

    neopolis
        Toward a relative social and less sheerly objective view of our peoples
        – i.e., in terms of our interests. 2,450 words

For those intelligent minds inquiring without the better of academia’s time tested structures in the humanities, but only proceeding of their will to make their way through erudition from their standpoint, their penchant in Western advocacy would have us return to modernity (were it possible) and objectivism.

To the academically inexperienced and untrained advocate of Western interests there are two grand disadvantages.

First, he is not appraised of the sublime workings and analyses of these scholarly apparati as they might be applied in our interests; and secondly, what he does know and hear about them tends to be vast perversions of the notions as passed through Jewish academia and media.

The well meaning Westerner thus sets about to cure us of all this hogwash, and would unbeknownst return us to obsolete tenets of modernity and objectivism - precursors to the very afflictions to our homeostasis that he seeks to cure, such as liberalism.

To him, “objectivism” is good. “Relativism” is bad.

He does not sufficiently appreciate that the analytic framework of objectivism, relativism and subjectivism is not inherently antagonistic to Western interests. The same would apply to a myriad of terms and concepts that have been misapplied against European interests and rather stupidly taken by White Nationalists as such - inherently bad or wrong. It is a temptation and an easy mistake, but a bad mistake – as these are deliberate traps set against European interests unbeknownst to those without a privileged vantage on the working of Jewish academics over these scholarly apparati.

Let me address just objectivism and relativism briefly.

Critique of objectivism ranges from what would correctly be seen as the most brazen and vulgar Jewish sophistry to the most sublime calculations of Heisenberg or Gödel.

However, when I critique objectivism it will tend to be heard by those outside of the academic humanities as if I am disposing of the framework which has yielded such fantastic scientific advances in its entirety, as if I am a Jew looking to make rhetorical tropes the king.

The truth is that there are limits and very real problems for us as a people in the pursuit of mere objectivism. It is among the central elements of our problems.

Plato being granted some permission by Christianity, thus having gravity in our traditions, will incline many to see in this argument a stupid straw man that all is relative. That I am promoting sheer sophistry and relativism. Not. In fact, hyper-relativism is an upshot of objectivism.

On the other hand, there is an aspect of rhetoric called casuistry which has also gotten a bad name from Jewish misuse. However, casuistry proper would take into account the sublime limitation of objectivism, taking the facts yielded by its experience and inquiry indeed BUT then making the best argument that it can on the basis of those facts in conjunction with one’s interests inherently social as they are. There is no denial of facts but a prioritizing of them as they accord to human concern. That is right.

Continued...

Posted by DanielS on Friday, December 26, 2014 at 03:42 AM in ActivismAnthropologyHistoryPolitical PhilosophySocial Sciences
Comments (13) | Tell-a-Friend

Implications of Executive Amnesty

Posted by DanielS on Saturday, November 22, 2014 at 11:20 PM in Anti-racism and white genocideAwakeningsCrusade against Discrimination in BritainDemographicsEconomics & FinanceEnvironmentalism & Global WarmingGenetics & Human Bio-DiversityGlobalisationHealthHistoryImmigrationImmigration and PoliticsLiberalism & the LeftMarxism & Culture WarRace realismSocial liberalismSocial SciencesWhite Genocide ProjectWorld Affairs
Comments (2) | Tell-a-Friend

Jan The White Uniter

Jan The White Uniter has initiated a new website and will be talking to MR soon.. 
_______________

Continued...

Posted by DanielS on Tuesday, November 11, 2014 at 11:33 AM in ActivismAnti-racism and white genocideAwakeningsFeminismHealthHistoryMarxism & Culture WarPopular CulturePsychologySocial Sciences
Comments (1) | Tell-a-Friend

Black Lies in White Nationalism: Hitler didn’t instigate war, modestly sought appropriated territory

Black Lies are being circulated in White Nationalism -

“Hitler did not instigate the war”

“He only modestly sought territory ‘wrongly’ appropriated”

Those claims are demonstrably false from the beginning of Mein Kampf:

“People of the same blood should be in the same Reich. The German people will have no right to engage in a colonial policy until they shall have brought all their children together in one state. When the territory of the Reich embraces all the Germans and finds itself unable to assure them a livelihood, only then can the moral right arise from the need of the people to acquire foreign territory. The plow is then the sword and the tears of war shall produce the daily bread for the generations to come.

                                                                                            - Hitler


Does this statement from the very start of Mein Kampf, from the second paragraph in fact, indicate that Hitler was for peace and the head of a Reich merely, passively victimized? Obviously not. It is clear pseudo-justification typical of the inter-European war-mongering that underpinned his world view. Indeed, this statement makes it clear that Hitler was no pacifist nationalist, but an imperialist; and of course this is just one among many examples in which he makes that plain. What is far more exasperating than alarming is that even where present day White Nationalists are altercast their clear innocence, Hitler advocates disingenuously try to bury, justify and even assimilate the facts of Hitler’s intent of inter-European war rather than work to coordinate present- day European efforts to our mutual interests: coordination of nations places an emphasis on mutual non-interference of national sovereignties with one another, but alignment of objectives at the same time. That is very different from what Hitler sought and from what his present day apologists implicate.

Continued...

Posted by DanielS on Saturday, October 11, 2014 at 08:45 PM in Ethnicity and Ethnic Genetic InterestsEuropean NationalismFar RightHistoryNational SocialismPopular CultureThe American rightThread WarsWhite Nationalism
Comments (9) | Tell-a-Friend

Jewish Control of the British Empire, Divide and Conquer, Comandeering European War efforts

Germans in Slavic Lands, Poles and Other Eastern Europeans in Western Europe

rothschild
Nathan Mayer Rothschild

When grappling with the extent and length of entanglement of Jewish interests in European affairs, perhaps one can come to appreciate GW’s fastidious concern to separate what is authentic native/nationalist European - and what is not - through his ontology project.

Continued...

Posted by DanielS on Wednesday, September 24, 2014 at 04:01 AM in ActivismBritish PoliticsEuropean UnionFar RightHistoryImmigrationImmigration and PoliticsNational SocialismWhite Nationalism
Comments (12) | Tell-a-Friend

100th Anniversary of World War I

                        world war 1

Continued...

Posted by DanielS on Monday, July 28, 2014 at 12:15 PM in European NationalismHistory
Comments (13) | Tell-a-Friend

Definitions

Adding (August 4th, 2014) a definition of Peace (at bottom).

1933 words

In response to “Flippityfloppity’s” concern regarding definitions

I may have deserved a barb for being a little hypocritically amenable to Anthony’s proposal that Christianity can serve an important constructive function in organizing a guiding and spiritual light for Whites. I was a bit too agreeable perhaps because I like the rest of what he says well enough. Though his including Buddha and Lao Tze into the mix would indicate that he can reach accord with people like me for whom race serves as the organizing spirit and transcendent, religious factor (our legacy being the hereafter). That is probably why I appeared to flip flop a little to accommodate him.

However, introducing Christianity into the mix, with its propensity for a myriad of definitions, including liberal and universal, non-accountability thereof, is problematic.

Regarding definitions, I do not flip flop. But people, including WN, do, especially between definitions of “Left and Liberal.” Basically because they are following an “official” (i.e., convenient to Jews) definition of “the left”, which fluctuates between being liberal and open to all; or specifically open to unions of non-Whites or unions of people with problems; imposed in special admission, inclusion and integration upon Whites under the guise of equality and undoing exploitation.

The chief reason why people might use The Left defined as such is because that definition has gained wide currency as the Jews have largely defined and promulgated the term through academia and the media – that being a confused definition promoted by Jews precisely because it is confusing and because it altercasts us as rightists (who are not necessarily against imposed liberalism, just against “equality” - great, we are accepting the definition of ourselves as elitist pigs, but open to others if they are “better”). The acceptance of this definition and its flip flop between left and liberal is exemplified by the way that the Political Cesspool (among others accepting the definitions, themselves as right, their opponents as left) will flip flop between saying “the left and liberal” in the same broadcast.

Those who accept the rightist altercast and endeavor its position are to blame as much if not more than Jews for enforcing the idea that leftism and liberalism is all about “equality.” That is even worse theoretically than it is descriptively. For as White Leftists, we would be basing discrimination mostly on an assortment and disbursing of qualitative differences, which would be a symbiotic, largely non conflictual basis; not subject to the false comparison that lends to conflict as the phoney “equality non equality” issue engenders. Equality/non-equality is neither sufficiently descriptive or prescriptive - unless, perhaps, you want to instigate what is likely to turn out to be mutually destructive conflict.

We might stay with the confused definition of The Left - as liberalism, advocacy of non-Whites, their equality and imposition on Whites because it has had currency through Jewish media. Then oppose that for obvious reasons, as has been the strategy of almost all WN. However, staying with that definition, just because it has wide currency - despite the fact that it is a disingenuous and confusing definition promulgated by Jews (for the reason that it is confusing and disingenuous as they want us to be “rightists”, to scare people, our own included) and turn people off, our own included, as such, by reflecting that disingen -uousness and confusion through disorganization and denial of accountability - is neither sufficient reason nor compensation for the price paid. It is like saying we should continue to trade in currency that makes Jews wealthy and destroys us. It is counterfeit currency (definition) aimed to circulate to our confusion and detriment.

It is obvious enough that plutocratic, traitorous and well, elitist pigs of any stripe, will conveniently cite “The left” as the great enemy.

I believe you make a good point, that we probably should nail down some definitions and try to make them stick, as best we can, at least here at MR. One trick will be getting people to do this despite me – so that they will not refuse to do it just to spite yours truly. That can be a problem because I am not always most tactful. I understand this motivation to not be ego bullied (for example, I would not use the prefix “Zio” or “Jewish supremacist” in part because Duke proposes it, in addition to the fact that I don’t like the sound). Nevertheless, I maintain that the aim here is not about ego but theoretical accuracy, viz. theory which serves White interests. I do use the following terms consistently and they continue to make perfect sense – that is why I “stubbornly” continue to do so.

These proposed definitions are holding up, making consistent sense of pro and anti White alike.

We must not be so averse to terms and concepts Jews have abused as to fall into the trap of their being didactic as the Jews may want, for us to rebel against what is good for us. This has happened with social constructionism and hermeneutics for example. To where even the Heideggerian notion of hermeneutics would be looked upon as Jewish and Marxist, such that we would not admit of that part of the non-Cartesian process which provides orientation on scientific focus, to allow for that tad of narrative speculation of the not-at-all-times-observable social classificatory boundary of the European biological system and its history (to allow for Heidegger’s admission of the form of the people as necessary as well, an observation by GW that I had missed).

The White Left as:

A social classification and classifying of a people (specifically native European people), legitimizing unionized discrimination against outsiders; accountability to those within; both in positive return on effort and what is brought historically; and in a negative sense against those would-be facilitators of “scabbing” and those elites who might betray the class. This would be in contrast to leftist classification and advocacy of other groups; and certainly in contrast to our universal obligation to include in (our) vital resources (esp. genetic) just anyone who appears to be down-trodden or desirous of entry, including those outside the socially delimited group. This is discrimination against individuals of classifications based on warranted prejudice of the pattern of which they are a part. The White Left would take the White Class as synonymous with the distinct genus of the native European race and its distinct sub-classifications. It is a social taxonomic classifying necessary to accountability and human ecology.

It focuses on qualitative and symbiotic differences while keeping to a minimum false, quantitative comparisons (as opposed to equality/non equality it focuses more on qualitative sameness or difference).

It is decidedly not against private property (may in fact work with the land tax / exemption scheme laid-out by Bowery)

It does not aspire to equal wealth (there can be some people who are significantly more wealthy than others), but does strive after some balance, a middle class and shared leverage on some basic necessities. The point is that the boundaries are maintained. More or less socialism or free enterprise can be flexible according to the particular state.

As a rule, it applies the silver rule to out-groups as opposed to the golden rule.

Thus, it is in contrast to liberalism as applied to non-Whites, which is what racialists normally mean when they say, “the left.”

Liberalism:

Beliefs and practices which intimate and can ultimately deviate and rupture reconstruction of the systemic biological pattern, accountable social classifications.

Racism:

Designating, classifying a social group as a race (a species of people distinctly evolved to circumstances and practices in history, who have discernibly more genetic similarity to themselves than to other human groups) and discriminating accordingly. It is a motivation to separatism, not elitism, exploitation and persecution. This separatist discriminatory motive is more than generally advisable, it is necessary for accountability, human ecology and biodiversity.

Anti-Racism:

The coercive prohibition against classifying people (could be even non-racial classifications) and discrimination accordingly. The coercive imposition of one people upon another, the denial of their freedom of and from association.

Modernity/Post Modernity:

As they are defined here, they even make sense of how other people bungle these terms.

http://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments//standing_corrected_on_the_its_more_than_that_to_liberalisms_definition#c144061

This issue probably is worth this main post, as trade in the currency of these terms defined in this way would help a great deal to achieve clarity and direction. These definitions make consistent sense of organizing our people, their requirements and problems.

In my next post, I will attempt to show how modernity, as a pejorative term, does not contradict but contributes to the articulation of what Bowery sees as negative in his definition of “civilization.”

In connection with that, both Migchels and Bowery seem to have a concern to maintain individual integrity as an authentic and distinguishing characteristic among Europeans. GW’s close readings have some similarity there as well.

In that regard I would point them to Harré‘s suggestion that there are two vital aspects to self, and thus to authentic self and individuality, which are 1, the corporeal, embodied, genetic self, having biological requirements, potentials and limits (which you three are concerned to approximate in description of its authentic functioning as closely as possible, un-borrowed from non-native influence) and 2, a narrative self, which is crucial for the matter of coherence, orientation, connection with the systemic whole and history. Now, that narrative self can deviate, even terribly, from the authentic biological interests of the self and system. It is obviously better if it accords well with our biological interests and historical form. I believe the Jewish abuse of hermeneutics is why GW has been a bit averse, and surprisingly, as it is one necessary side of a would-be Heideggerian, hermeneutic process; but then, even MacDonald was averse, apparently for the same reason of Jews having made it didactic.

It is important to note that this hermeneutic view not only permits of individuality, integrity of self, I would argue that hermeneutics is absolutely necessary for it - a coherent, agentive and warranted self. What it does deny is that there is no social relatedness and indebtedness to its make-up, its construction and its constitution; or that one has no accountability for its direction other than “the countenance of Jesus” or some other unverifiable source.

Adding a definition of Peace

I will probably turn this into a post later, but I will propose this definition/ working hypothesis of “peace” in comment here.

Later, I will invite others to contribute to a working hypothesis of peace and correlate it to prior definitions proposed.

Peace is:

Peoples as they correspond with nations, states, regions, localities, mutually respecting and recognizing sovereignty of genetic accountability, prerogative to discriminate and prohibit association accordingly; while those who wish to leave may go to a consenting receiving nation, their return to the people they departed from may be prohibited; their offspring, if any, may be prohibited as well.

Negotiative, persuasive, non-lethal tests are sought as the normal recourse in conflict resolution (lest there be any misunderstanding, miscegenation is not a normal problem requiring negotiation - that is prohibited; expulsion being a softer variant in resolving the problem).

This would include the capacity for a people to maintain its genetic kind and the reasonable capacity for individuals to find an appropriate mate; with that, to have the means to provide for a family that does not require a detrimental number of hours away from family and leisure, is grounds of peace.

Those who overpopulate, burden the world’s ecosystem and create spill over effect - let alone deliberate exploitation or usurpation of other nations’ land - are seen as in violation of the peace.

 

Continued...

Posted by DanielS on Sunday, June 22, 2014 at 06:26 AM in ActivismAnti-racism and white genocideAwakeningsChristianityConservatismCrusade against Discrimination in BritainEuropean NationalismGenetics & Human Bio-DiversityHistoryImmigrationImmigration and PoliticsLiberalism & the LeftLinguisticsWhite Nationalism
Comments (4) | Tell-a-Friend

Texas Arcane:  Kwanstainia, UKandia, Kanookistan, and the OZealands

Texas Arcane:  Kwanstainia, UKandia, Kanookistan, and the OZealands

By Robert Reis

I was led to Texas Arcane by a link at http://hawaiianlibertarian.blogspot.com/ .

What follows are excerpts from Texas Arcane’s ruminations at his http://vault-co.blogspot.com/ since 2007.

He has enlightened me and caused me to think about the world in new ways.

Extensive quotations are place between parallel lines, e.g. ===.

Continued...

Posted by Robert Reis on Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 01:50 AM in Australian PoliticsAwakeningsBritish PoliticsEuropean cultureHistoryImmigration and PoliticsNew Zealand PoliticsThe Proposition NationU.S. PoliticsWhite Genocide: America
Comments (6) | 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.

Continued...

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.

Continued...

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?: http://www.ctka.net/2010/wiki.html.

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”?

Continued...

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:

Continued...

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: http://www.dcdave.com/article5/120321.htm

What happened to Dinkin? From Phillip Nelson we have:

Continued...

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.

Continued...

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

Nazism As Overstated Premise of White Nationalism and False Either/Or

Oder-Niesse
Border changes after World War II


It is a particularly important preliminary note that there is virtually nobody here who had anything to do with events of World War II. That fact is most relevant. Under that rubric, let us begin:


Hitler and Nazism as an overstated premise in representation of White/European nationalism; and Hitler and Nazism or the international Jew as false either/or.


Method:

Working hypotheses will be advanced

as to why these logical fallacies are being adopted despite their apparent obviousness;

how they are mistaken;

and remedies will be proposed in cooperative nationalism.

Statements will be set out as hypotheses to allow for efficient positioning of historical viewpoints as they emerge practical in argumentative service of cooperative European nationalism. In addition to the practical efficiency of hypotheses for unburdening detail, the modesty of unfinished claims is meant to facilitate participation from the commentariat to elaborate, correct and amend the hypotheses - i.e., to make optimal use of Majority Rights discussion format.

* Note: in comment number 2, I erred in grammatical present tense when discussing Brelsau (Wroclaw). Which, according to the Treaty of Versailles and through World War II, remained German. There would have been no good argument to that point in time for its not being German.

 

Continued...

Posted by DanielS on Friday, October 25, 2013 at 05:22 AM in DemographicsEthnicity and Ethnic Genetic InterestsEuropean NationalismHistoryMarxism & Culture WarNational SocialismPolitical PhilosophyThat Question AgainThe American rightWhite Nationalism
Comments (77) | Tell-a-Friend

Christianity As Expression of Authentic European Culture

GW has expressed the constraint:

“It is a pity that Christianity, as flawed as it is from a European racial perspective, is undeniably part of the unity of north and south.  We are stuck with it, for it has been too close for too long to us - and the faithful must have their faith expressions, after all.”

DanielS has expressed the constraint:

“Adding yet another knot in the tangle is the argument that with the Christian texts already being the terms in which many of our people think, the currency for two thousand years now, there must be some ontological basis beneath, and we may as well find the positive logic to it for our purposes. However, with the texts being what they are, the motivations of the texts being as convoluted, Jewish and ambiguous as they were to begin, all that winds-up happening with the deciphering of our “true” logic behind Christianity is a contribution to the mess.”

An approach offered by John Harland is to admit the historicity of Jesus in His essential mythic image as descendant of God evidenced in his own over-ruling of texts with direct bodily connection with God as Father, but to deny the historicity of the extant texts—deny them as yet another means by which dastards attempt to interpose themselves between the God-heritage of individuals and their Father, in spirit and flesh.

Ridicule of Harland’s own editing of the texts to suit his view may be conducted only at the sacrifice of the two constraints establishing the context of this presentation. Offer a superior approach if you don’t like Harland’s—either that or declare folly the entire effort to connect with the spiritual force of Christianity.

Click this link for a pdf document containing part of Harland’s account starting with “The Germans” (in the anthropological sense meaning what many identify as Celtic and Nordic pagans of the pre-Christian era), “The Catholic Church Promotes Judeo-Christianity”, “The First Breaking Apart of the Church Serpent” (regarding Henry VIII and Martin Luther), “A Further Break From the Serpent” (regarding the establishment of America), “The Strange Phenomenon of ‘Money-Mad’ Americans” (regarding the closing of the frontier and replacement of Nature and Nature’s God with money-based “culture”), “The American Dream” (the commodification, by conspirators, of the American spiritual renaissance), “The German Reich” (the parallel processes occurring in what became the nation state known as “Germany” during the 1800s leading up to WW I), “The World Picture After WW I” (the situation leading up to WW II) and the concluding section of this pdf document is “The Second World War”.

The entire book is “Word Controlled Humans” by John Harland, ISBN 0-914752-12-X available from Sovereign Press, 326 Harris Road, Rochester, WA 98579 (with which I have no business or personal relationship).

Posted by James Bowery on Wednesday, March 13, 2013 at 08:37 PM in AnthropologyArcheologyBooksChristianityConservatismEuropean cultureHistoryNational SocialismPolitical PhilosophyPsychologyRevisionismSocial SciencesThe Ontology ProjectU.S. Politics
Comments (257) | Tell-a-Friend

A monument in Green Park

Something rather wonderful happened last week in London’s Green Park.  The long-awaited monument to the aircrew of Bomber Command was unveiled by the Queen in front of some 800 surviving aircrew.  It had been funded by private subscriptions and funds from the National Lottery.  It is sixty-seven years late, but it is there at last.

For those who are unaware, the post-war Labour government of Clement Atlee chose to deny the boys who had flown in Bomber Command - the boys in their Hampdens, Whitleys and Wellingtons, Stirling, Halifaxes and Lancasters - the customary campaign medal marking their service to the nation at war.  The policy of denial was continued in the thirteen years of Conservative government that followed. The bomber aircrew were alone among all those who fought under British arms to be so denied.

The problem, of course, was that the sudden unfolding at the end of the war of the devastation caused to Germany’s cities and towns by the Area Bombing campaign and the USAAF 8th Air Force’s daylight offensive was a huge shock for the political Establishment, and a gift for many ambitious men.  The wartime service values of duty, discipline and self-sacrifice were falling away as the nation struggled to find its feet and move forward.  In the battle for the new moral centre there could only be one victor - moral universalism - and the treatment accorded at this time to Arthur Harris was a highly visible function of that.

The political exodus from support for Bomber Command fractured national feeling more or less along the lines that pee-cee and anti-racism fracture it today.  During the war, aircrew were treated with great affection and generosity by the public.  They understood that in the long years from the Battle of Britain to D-Day the strategic bomber was the only means of carrying the war to Germany.  The service performed for them by Bomber Command constituted an act of endurance at arms matched in British military history only by the BEF in 1914-18.  They, the public, did not shift their opinion as their rulers and “moral betters” shifted theirs.  They did not condemn the aircrew because of the excesses of the campaign, or because of the questions over its strategic value.  If its results were very terrible then that, too, represented a victory of sorts over the enemy, for the Germans, who sunk their development efforts into jets and rockets, never produced a bomber with the lifting capacity of the Lancaster, or any bomber at all with four engines.  Had they done so, they would have used it on Britain’s cities and towns to the same effect.

For nationalists the subject of the Allies’ destruction of urban Germany comes with two large and extremely sore points attached.  First, there is the feeling among many, which I do not share, that “the wrong side” won ... the Jewish side, the side of anti-nationalism, of European national destruction.  The people who make this wholly utilitarian argument are very often American WNs of German descent.  But if pressed on their politics they turn out equally often to be right-liberals (in the English sense of that word).

Second, there is the belief among older British nationalists - the generation who fought (and lost) on the streets to the anti-racist left in the final decades of the 20th century - that National Socialism and like forms of Judaic fantasia are viable and true philosophies in their own right ... indeed, that they are nationalism.  If I thought that I’d give up thinking entirely.

I often wonder what kind of national feeling the boys in those bombers, in all their war-will, would have expressed.  That, too, is there somewhere in the new monument to them in Green Park, in the folds of the battle-dress, in the set of the jaw and the line of the eye’s gaze.  One day before too long, I hope, I shall go there and ponder that.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, July 1, 2012 at 07:04 PM in History
Comments (160) | Tell-a-Friend

Hitler’s Unforgivable Crime

Hitler’s Unforgivable Crime
By Robert Reis

During a recent visit to Les Invalides, I encountered a large government sponsored exhibition about the history of the Second World War. The museum’s title for the exhibition was “The War of German Aggression, 1939 -1945.” Nowhere in the exhibition was it mentioned that it was France and the United Kingdom who had declared war on Germany. 

Since it was France and Great Britain who insisted on unleashing the most destructive war in human history, the natural question is: why did they do so?

Continued...

Posted by Robert Reis on Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 11:04 PM in Economics & FinanceHistoryWorld Affairs
Comments (60) | Tell-a-Friend

Ireland Worshipping at the Holocaust Shrine

Ireland Worshipping at the Holocaust Shrine
By Robert Reis

The Irish Independent newspaper published a report on a speech delivered at a new Holocaust exhibition in Dublin on January 23, 2012 by the Justice Minister Alan Shatter. (State ‘did nothing for Jews in WWII’, By Breda Heffernan, The Irish Independent, Tuesday January 24 2012)

Mr. Shatter accused Ireland of turning its back on the suffering of the Jews during World War Two. He proclaimed that the Irish State had lost its “moral compass” during and after the war. He said, “In the period following Hitler coming to power and preceding the Second World War, the doors of this state were kept firmly closed to German Jewish families trying to escape from persecution and death.”

Shatter told his audience that records unearthed by the Minister from the Department of Foreign Affairs while he was researching the period many years ago show that the then Irish Ambassador to Germany, Charles Bewley, recommended the Government refuse visa requests from Jews to protect Ireland from “contamination”.

Shatter was referring to Charles Bewley.

Continued...

Posted by Robert Reis on Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 02:12 PM in HistoryIrish PoliticsJewish Diaspora
Comments (14) | Tell-a-Friend

Mid-nineteenth-century German racial moralism

Der Struwwelpeter is one of the most famous German children’s books.  Written in 1844 by Heinrich Hoffmann, it consists of 10 illustrated rhyming stories, most of which depict children being subjected to fantastic punishment for misbehaviour.  One such story is “Die Geschichte von den schwarzen Buben” (The Story of the Black Boys).  In it, 3 boys are punished by St. Nicholas for teasing a negro kid passing the city gates.  What follows is my translation of the German.  It might sound a bit awkward, but I wanted to keep as much of the original meaning as possible (the English translation changes the story somewhat).

Continued...

Posted by Dasein on Thursday, February 10, 2011 at 01:07 PM in Anti-racism and white genocideHistoryLiberalism & the Left
Comments (21) | Tell-a-Friend

Washington + Jefferson = Soros & Gates? The Founders and what it means to be a nation

by The Narrator

We often (very often) hear the jingoism “take America back” by all and sundry on both sides of the political/social divide.  Particularly on the conservative side we see the notion put forward that The America is somehow far adrift from her foundational roots, as laid down by the Founding Fathers.  But is this really the case?  Is modern Americanism fundamentally different from 18th century revolutionary Americanism?  What would the Founding Fathers think of The America today?

In addressing that, we must first consider what The America is and what The America is not.  What The America is not, is a nation.  What The America is, essentially, is a religion/empire, with much akin to a Marxist state.  And one of the “gifts” which both Marxism and Americanism have bequeathed to the world is the ability to re-define words and even reality itself.

One example of that is the definition of nation. Since the advent of Americanism/Marxism the definition has been completely re-written to the point that it now actually means the complete opposite of what it meant for thousands of years.

As stated, The America is not a nation, which makes such linguistic concoctions as “a nation of immigrants” one of the more profound examples of an oxymoron and generally reflects the intellectual apathy found amongst the populace.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Monday, November 29, 2010 at 11:37 AM in History
Comments (129) | Tell-a-Friend

The Ludlow Massacre of 1914 - A Microcosm of Modern Multi-Culturalism

At a time when Capitalism and Marxism were still yet ‘converging’ to form the present day ideology of cheap labor/institutionalized division known as ‘Multi-Culturalism, a terrible event would take place in the US state of Colorado which would seem to encompass all the ingredients of that unfortunate modern ideology.

Large corporations were promoting ‘immigration’ so as to suppress wages and to create a Tower of Babel so that people could not organize themselves.

As part of their campaign to break or prevent strikes, the coal companies had lured immigrants, mainly from southern and Eastern Europe and Mexico. CF&I’s management purposely mixed immigrants of different nationalities in the mines to discourage communication that might lead to organization…

...Most miners also lived in “company towns,” where homes, schools, doctors, clergy, and law enforcement were provided by the company, as well as stores offering a full range of goods that could be paid for in company currency, scrip.  However, this became an oppressive environment in which law focused on enforcement of increasing prohibitions on speech or assembly by the miners to discourage union-building activity.


Ludlow Monument

The Ludlow massacre refers to the violent deaths of 20 people (14 of them women and children), during an attack by the Colorado National Guard on a tent colony of 1,200 striking coal miners and their families at Ludlow, Colorado in the U.S. on April 20, 1914. These deaths occurred after a day-long fight between strikers and the Guard. Two women, twelve children, six miners and union officials and one National Guardsman were killed. In response, the miners armed themselves and attacked dozens of mines, destroying property and engaging in several skirmishes with the Colorado National Guard.

This was the bloodiest event in the 14-month 1913-1914 southern Colorado Coal Strike. The strike was organized by the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) against coal mining companies in Colorado. The three biggest mining companies were the Rockefeller family-owned Colorado Fuel & Iron Company (CF&I), the Rocky Mountain Fuel Company (RMF), and the Victor-American Fuel Company (VAF). Ludlow, located 12 miles (19 km) northwest of Trinidad, Colorado, is now a ghost town. The massacre site is owned by the UMWA, which erected a granite monument, in memory of the striking miners and their families who died that day.

Continued...

Posted by Alex on Wednesday, March 31, 2010 at 12:37 PM in History
Comments (8) | Tell-a-Friend

image of the day

Existential Issues

White Genocide Project

Of note

Majority Radio

Recent Comments

KM at London Forum commented in entry 'MajorityRadio: Jez Turner talks to GW and DanielS' on 04/18/15, 09:30 PM. (go) (view)

Mary Post commented in entry 'British nationalism on St George's Day' on 04/18/15, 08:42 PM. (go) (view)

Milliband exploiting fears commented in entry 'Sir Gerald Howarth stands by letter: Time for England to fight back' on 04/18/15, 03:08 PM. (go) (view)

Kosher connections to England commented in entry 'We Are Their Slaves!' on 04/18/15, 01:36 PM. (go) (view)

DanielS commented in entry 'Dark Side of Self Actualization & Incommensurate GenderAgendas' on 04/18/15, 11:12 AM. (go) (view)

DanielS commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3' on 04/18/15, 10:00 AM. (go) (view)

helvena commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3' on 04/18/15, 09:57 AM. (go) (view)

Importance of Naming The Red Left commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3' on 04/18/15, 09:03 AM. (go) (view)

A grammar of Optima contra Bowden commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3' on 04/18/15, 06:29 AM. (go) (view)

the nutzies have spoken commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3' on 04/18/15, 02:54 AM. (go) (view)

helvena commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3' on 04/17/15, 07:36 PM. (go) (view)

PNAC protests RT commented in entry 'MajorityRadio: Susan Lindauer talks with Daniel and GW' on 04/17/15, 01:46 PM. (go) (view)

MOB commented in entry '(What would have been) questions for Dr Frank Salter' on 04/17/15, 12:54 PM. (go) (view)

Bianca commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 04/17/15, 12:36 PM. (go) (view)

skinned their knees commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3' on 04/17/15, 12:13 AM. (go) (view)

Helvena commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3' on 04/16/15, 08:05 PM. (go) (view)

Susan Yarbrough defends White women commented in entry 'Dark Side of Self Actualization & Incommensurate GenderAgendas' on 04/16/15, 04:00 PM. (go) (view)

internationally criminalized antisemitism sought commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3' on 04/16/15, 11:05 AM. (go) (view)

170,000 commented in entry 'MajorityRadio: Paul Weston of LibertyGB talks to GW and DanielS' on 04/16/15, 10:58 AM. (go) (view)

Meme weeds commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3' on 04/16/15, 03:09 AM. (go) (view)

Lessons from Lessing commented in entry 'MajorityRadio: Jez Turner talks to GW and DanielS' on 04/15/15, 11:01 PM. (go) (view)

Pedro Pereira commented in entry 'Ritalin: Beyond Just Drugging Your Kids' on 04/15/15, 01:35 PM. (go) (view)

Non Sequitur commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3' on 04/15/15, 01:16 PM. (go) (view)

Javier Nichols at London Forum commented in entry 'MajorityRadio: Jez Turner talks to GW and DanielS' on 04/15/15, 08:26 AM. (go) (view)

Psychopaths' method of power / rule commented in entry 'The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3' on 04/15/15, 04:30 AM. (go) (view)

Angelo John Contradiction/ Horace The Condescender commented in entry 'MR Radio: Jan the White Uniter of United White' on 04/14/15, 06:44 PM. (go) (view)

Lindtner + Humphreys commented in entry 'Papal Worship As Babylonian Mystery: The Worship of Nimrod and His Mother/Wife' on 04/14/15, 12:30 PM. (go) (view)

Nimrud commented in entry 'Papal Worship As Babylonian Mystery: The Worship of Nimrod and His Mother/Wife' on 04/14/15, 12:00 PM. (go) (view)

Jensen on I.Q. testing commented in entry 'The end of the Flynn Effect' on 04/14/15, 03:36 AM. (go) (view)

U.K. commented in entry 'Dark Side of Self Actualization & Incommensurate GenderAgendas' on 04/13/15, 02:35 PM. (go) (view)

Born Ugly commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on 04/13/15, 01:55 PM. (go) (view)

13 commented in entry 'Dark Side of Self Actualization & Incommensurate GenderAgendas' on 04/13/15, 01:49 PM. (go) (view)

Kerry/Cohen - Gilligan.. commented in entry 'Dark Side of Self Actualization & Incommensurate GenderAgendas' on 04/13/15, 08:14 AM. (go) (view)

DanielS commented in entry 'Dark Side of Self Actualization & Incommensurate GenderAgendas' on 04/13/15, 07:05 AM. (go) (view)

Anarchist debate commented in entry 'National Anarchism in the sun' on 04/13/15, 05:55 AM. (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.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Anti-White Media

Audio/Video

Controlled Opposition

Crime

Economics

Education

General

Historical Re-Evaluation

Immigration

Islam

Jews

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Whites in Africa