Category: Conservatism

Should we deviate from authenticity in order to “game” women?

Posted by DanielS on Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 07:27 AM

    virgin      accolade

Not everyone wants to deviate from authenticity, devote time, money, resource and brain cycles in order to “game” women. Indeed, should we try to live according to the values of puerile female inclinations - fierce and frenzied incitement exacerbated by the exponential pandering to her position with modernist, liberal internationalist disordering and the YKW prohibition of social classification for Whites?

A better sort, the kind who like themselves and their kind, prefer to display power by identifying one who is an acutely appropriate match in reconstructing their type and genetic system, together with whom to explore life. Further, they recognize that playing the field leads to terrible injustice regarding our social capital, demoralizes, undermines trust and moral warrant to defend ourselves as a people.

However, the preference of those who would rather not “game” needs to be institutionalized so that their choice does not get diverted into gaming where they rather search for an appropriate partner; as opposed to (another) one they tricked, a woman who could be another man’s appropriate wife, taken through the instigated anxiety of going out of character and into the “fair game” of boundless competition.

As opposed to gaming what would be someone’s singularly important mate or gaming whorey left-overs or leaving whorey left-overs…

Thus, an endorsement for the option of sex and monogamy as sacrament and voluntary enclaves in that recognition.

 

Tags: ActivismConservatismThe Ontology Project
Comments (5) | Tell-a-Friend


Look at What they’ve done

Posted by DanielS on Saturday, June 6, 2015 at 04:16 AM

      kimameliandI


Look what has happened .... to White men.

Not to mention this huge collage of White women murdered by Negro boyfriends, what about the White men who have lost their appropriate mating partners to universal maturity? And how many have committed suicide in one way or another? Who cares?

Tags: ActivismAnthropologyConservatism
Comments (4) | Tell-a-Friend


Individualism’s Wake: The Abyss - some favorites of Dr. Lister

Posted by Guest Blogger on Sunday, March 22, 2015 at 01:32 AM

I think this is rather pithy - A Word in the Ear of the Future-Seekers — Modernity is not the bridge; it is the abyss.

Fine Persecution — Every society has before it an ideal of the kind of society it ought to be, and every society, in order to uphold that ideal, needs to persecute those within it who are at odds with that ideal. Once again, however, the deep mendacity of liberalistic society manifests itself in that it denies the persecution which it carries out against its hated enemies, namely, those at odds with its ideal. This denial of the persecuted status of its enemies — along with the ridicule of them when they claim it — are additional elements for the intensifying of their persecution.

Specify, or Be Damned — Individualism does not specify itself to be in keeping with any particular society, or even with the existence of society at all, but rather it addresses itself only to an unspecified individuality. Such unspecification about what an individual should be is precisely at the heart of individualism’s boast about its being the friend and not the foe of the individual’s freely seeking to be and to do whatever he chooses. “Do what thou wilt”, it says, whereto it may add the black-box phrase, “so long as it harms none”. Now, given a teaching which says that everyone may do as he pleases, irrespective of all truth, reason, goodness, morality, tradition, authority, obedience, bonds, and so forth, “so long as it harms none”, and which, by its boasted lights, does not specify the kind of society which should be upheld, or even that any should be upheld, how is it that anyone could then come to the belief that it might after all stand as a pillar of any society, let alone a particular one, rather than being, as in truth it is, the rot upon all? One might say that here we are at the brink of sheer madness, inbequeathed through many years of listening to silly tales. But leaving aside an understanding of the teaching itself, which might conceivably have taken any name, the very name which it does carry gives us a clue to its drift, namely, that it seeks to uphold the unspecified individual, not any society, specified or unspecified.
 
There are no ends specific to man as man, rather than to what he shares with mere beasts, which can be reached outside of his fellowship with his kind. No speech nor reasoning, let alone higher arts and sciences, would arise if all men stood from the first outside of fellowship. Every man began as a helpless baby and would have died were it not for the society of his kith and kin. Every man was without speech, and would have remained speechless were it not for the same. Every man was without schooling, and would have stayed unschooled. And so on. No man was ever born into a so-called state of nature, as first imagined by Thomas Hobbes, even if this be helpful as a conceptual threshold for the understanding that the closer a society comes in breaking down towards that threshold, the more brutish it becomes. It is nevertheless a figment which has led to misunderstanding and mischief, and it is from it that individualism has grown. Man’s state of nature is the state of society. Man has never been in the so- called state of nature; for he is by nature a social animal and always in fellowship. Individualists, having thoughtlessly taken all social things for granted, and having for the most part imbibed unawares some old spirit of seventeenth-century philosophy, often speak as though they rose out of the ground and shaped themselves in isolation, wherein we glimpse also the drunken idea of self-creation born of Romanticism.

But he who is unable to live in society, or who has no need because he is sufficient for himself, must be either a beast or a god: he is no part of a state. [1]

The liberal concept of man as selfstanding being, free to set his own moral ends, is one of the biggest untruths ever told — and yet folk swallow it whole, whereat we might take it that they are greedy for something.
 
Individualism is an emptiness which blights the field of personhood, turning men, if they can still be called such, into mere units of the mass to be gathered up in the total state. Man is a social animal; society is required to actualise a man’s potential as a person. There are no pre-social individual persons. In the light of this, we may see individualism as some deeply primitive recrudescence, the tendency of which is to destroy the very conditions by which one can become a human person. A man cannot be a person without the fellowship, community, or society that made him. Un- socialised, man’s potencies are not activated, and he stays at a level close to a beast, bereft of speech and reason, let alone partaking of the higher arts and sciences.
 
Individualistic societies are decomposing social bodies in which kinship-ties are loosened and even cut, and which can be held together only by an all-pervasive and socially-alien bureau-technocratic power — the “coldest of all cold monsters”. In defence of these societies, and, by extension, willing or not, of this bureau-technocratic power, liberals, who sometimes call themselves libertarians, claim the greater freedom of these societies, where the largely unexamined and fuzzily-held concept “freedom” is a multivariate reference, unspecified of what, for what, and to what. In individualistic societies there is more freedom in the direction of baser and thrilling appetites, non-specific to mankind, hence the appeal of this freedom to the mass of baser men; and it is these appetites which dissolve kinship and personhood, bringing even greater demands for individualism, which brings greater freedom in the direction of baser and thrilling appetites, and so on, in downward spiral. In individual- istic societies freedom in personhood is much lowered, whilst freedom in beasthood is heightened; and the bonds of kinship are cut whereby men would be men.
 
Liberals and libertarians, being the fiercest enemies of the freedom of personhood, and the strongest friends of the freedom of beasthood, that is to say, of the liberal haze-ideal of the “individual” whatever that individual may be, must be defeated if the freedom of the person as person is to be upheld. Liberalism, or rather its essential individualism, has a gut-feeling and a canny nose for the breaking-up of everything, even of the person, and it knows nothing of creation. The ideal of individualism can only belittle persons and bring to the fore a bulk of fittingly-blank individuals of the mass — fittingly blank for bearing the stamp of the bureau-technocratic regime.
 
                      libertegalfrat

The conformity that is forged today through the atomized individualism that strips men of their personhood has little to do with the collective identity for which men have always yearned. The conformity today is stopgap and takeover of this natural yearning. The atomised individual is stripped bare of his humanity —which has hitherto been actualised in society —and left adrift with his “freely-formed” and “chosen” opinions, which are in truth nothing of the kind. He cannot think for himself, only of himself, as he is suffering a loss. He rebels against conformity in conformity with everyone else.                         

As the subversive mind is essentially individualistic and isolationistic, so is it essentially collectivistic and identitarian: on the view inherent in it, the curse of division and of being ‘set against one another’ cannot be surmounted except by a ‘fusion into one’; an actual identification of consciousness, of qualities and of interest. In fact, individualism (tending towards egalitarianism) prefigures collectivism from the outset, and again, collectivism is only individualism raised to the high power of an absolute monism centered in ‘all and every one’. [2]

Individualism foreshadows mass-collectivism and the herd of ersatz ‘individuals’. With authorities and societies broken down, nothing stands between pressing individual units of alienated humanity, hitherto existing as persons, into mass, each homogenised unit shaped to fit and imprinted with a set of political ideas and economic desires.
 
The pluralism which accompanies individualism is a social dysfunction built on subject- ivistic-irrationalistic ethics. It denies that mankind has a nature and thereby a natural end to be fulfilled. Only by that denial does it make sense to say that everyone has a right to pursue any goals and practice any values which he pleases so long as he does not seek to foist them upon others. And how is that disorder to be managed? Why, by the totalitarian bureau-technocratic state of liberaldom! But of course it isn’t true that under liberaldom one can believe whatever one likes, nor especially what’s ratio- nal to believe. In liberaldom one can believe anything so long as it makes no odds against liberaldom; one’s unliberal beliefs, if they can still bear the name, are to be mild quirks of self, slight hues in otherwise grey smears of bureaucratic massification.
                     
The task of liberalism from its beginning, namely, the search for neutral ground whereon the life of all mankind can rest, and whereupon everyone can seek his own ends, can find its end only in a true neutrality and indifference, and that is nowhere to be found in man except in his unpersonhood. Wherefore it is that liberalism’s struggle to settle the life of mankind can find its end only in the death of personhood; and it is for this reason that the struggle against liberalism is the final and most profound one. Liberalism is the greatest evil that mankind has yet faced, and there is almost no-one to withstand it. That lack of withstanding, owed to liberalism’s having swayed almost everyone to its side, is partly why it is the greatest evil.

1] Aristotle, Politica, Bk.I: 1253a:28-9, tr. B. Jowett, in The Works of Aristotle, Vol.X (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1921).
[2] A. Kolnai, “Privilege and Liberty” (1949), in Privilege & Liberty & Other Essays in Political Philosophy, ed.D.J.Mahoney(Lanham, Maryland:Lexington Books,‘99),p.21-2.

READ MORE...

Tags: ConservatismLibertarianismPolitical PhilosophyPopular CultureSocial liberalismThe American rightU.S. Politics
Comments (10) | Tell-a-Friend


Are there explicit liberals with implicit sympathy up that path?

Posted by DanielS on Thursday, November 6, 2014 at 06:10 AM

                                      jacktour

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…

READ MORE...

Tags: ActivismAwakeningsBritish PoliticsConservatismEducationFeminismLibertarianismMR RadioPolitical PhilosophyPopular CultureRace realismSocial liberalismSocial SciencesWhite Genocide ProjectWhite Nationalism
Comments (11) | Tell-a-Friend


Ebola remiss an alarm for border control as even most objective standards of human ecology ignored

Posted by DanielS on Monday, October 6, 2014 at 04:23 AM

Judging by his vigilant stream of Ebola updates, it is clear that James considers the threat of Ebola to be under-reported in terms of its significance.

Ebola remiss an alarm for border control as even most objective standards of human ecology ignored by authorities:

        redcrossebola

The handling of the Ebola threat by institutional bodies such as the Centers for Disease Control, supposedly responsible for safeguarding public health, provide a glaring example of how we cannot rely on them to serve our needs, not even as a by-product of the most ostensibly objective concerns of human ecology.

Furthermore, as the remiss demonstrates that these bureaucracies cannot be entrusted to look-after the interests of our relative human ecologies it should create awareness that now is the time to step-up participation in border re-establishment.

As James explains, the mishandling of the threat of pandemic disease, as in the case of Ebola, has been made evident not only through border crossing, but in a pattern of decades, extending to misreadings of the H.I.V. epidemic by these same responsible institutional bodies - such as the CDC, with its authoritative media organ, “Nature” magazine, taken to be definitive of science journalism and featuring assessments by experts such as Princeton’s R.M. Anderson - experts and their fact-checkers who are all too capable of committing fundamental errors in epidemic prediction.

Specifically, Anderson’s initial indication for Nature magazine suggested that an increased number of sex partners was not a particularly significant factor in H.I.V. transmission. This took for granted its operating on a relatively homogenous population, with steadier patterns and where outlier behavior is more compartmentalized into niches. Promiscuous heterosexuals in this sort of population were not particularly at risk as their partnering was in linear alignment and separate from the infected homosexual population. However, with the increasing introduction of diverse populations, not only are more promiscuous sorts added to the ranks of the population, but also those more capable of transmitting the disease, those still more recklessly transgressing niches and even those with malicious intent to deliberately transmit the disease.

“Strength in diversity indeed - for pandemic disease!”

The take-away is that European peoples must take initiative in border control to protect the interests of our human ecologies - for our very survival. Institutional bodies entrusted to be competent and concerned cannot be relied upon for even the basics of public health management - they are not even taking into account such basic factors as the mass introduction of alien biology and behavioral patterns on stable human ecologies; the direct introduction of virulence from primeval breeding grounds and bio-power, e.g., of Sub-Saharan Africa - which your European biology may not withstand. In fact, these bureaucrats in their faux-objectivism, whether the result of pandering or being pandered-to, malicious intent, indifference or incompetence at best, are subjecting European populations to experiments that your European biology should not have to hold up-to, as conducted upon you and the ancient human ecology of our European peoples unwillingly, unbeknownst, without consent.

More, for their very nature as fixed places, James likens nation states to immobilized patients in a clinic, and therefore draws the possibility of their susceptibility to pandemic, such as Spanish flue, which spread rapidly through immobilized patient concentrations in Red Cross hospitals after World War I. Immobile as the nations states are then, it is imperative to secure their borders against mobilized virulence.

Ebola having reached The U.S. highlights this fact. Thriving at length, transmissible even from a corpse, passively, potentially mutating airborne transmissability, Ebola can be far more destructive than the H.I.V. epidemic which the CDC blundered about..

James details the analogy in the misreading of H.I.V. and Ebola epidemiology:

READ MORE...

Tags: ConservatismCrusade against Discrimination in BritainDemographicsEthnicity and Ethnic Genetic InterestsGenetics & Human Bio-DiversityGlobalisationHealthImmigrationImmigration and PoliticsSocial liberalismWhite Genocide ProjectWorld Affairs
Comments (12) | Tell-a-Friend


Jewish tricks: paradoxic injunctions, reversal of terms

Posted by DanielS on Monday, September 29, 2014 at 11:24 PM

..and movements. Proscriptions of European organization and defense, promulgated under a guise of moral acceptability, that have European peoples arguing against their own interests and organization thereof.

                                                        moses
                                                  promulgating the perversion of terms…

Conservatism

Racist/Racism

Leftism

Equality

Diversity

Multiculturalism

Post Modernity

Social Constructionism

Hermeneutics

Marginals

Tolerance

Civil Rights

Hippies/Feminists

Sexual conservatism as pathological

Christianity

 

READ MORE...

Tags: ActivismAnti-racism and white genocideAwakeningsConservatismCrusade against Discrimination in BritainFeminismJournalism
Comments (1) | Tell-a-Friend


Salter: Accept that the State is no longer ours and rebuild radically of our people

Posted by DanielS on Sunday, September 21, 2014 at 07:11 AM

  salter
Frank Salter: Accept that the State is no longer ours, that we may rebuild radically anew, embedding our national interests of our people.

In the West people are not mobilized in their own defense and why is that? Our Majorities are faced with a fundamental structural problem.

That is historically based….. when the nation states of Europe were formed (such as) England initially, there were a dozen Kingdoms….the consolidation of those small principalities came about through an implicit promise ..the promise was that the new centralized government would adopt the functions of the small tribal governments: so it would defend the people, on the same principle, it would defend externally and maintain internal peace.. it would not betray the basic interests of the society….there was an implicit understanding or assumption that the elite is invested emotionally in the people, that it is tied to the people, that it comes from the people….the people expected their elites to not be alien, not to hate them, not be hostile towards them, but to be drawn from them, and to actually feel one with them…so there was an assumption of identity defense…of concern about continuity and so on…

That is all broken down now. The elite do not identify with the people anymore - those normal aspirations for identity continuity. The fact is that the nation/state model (two separate terms there) - Nation, the bond of the heart, and State, the apparatus of government - have become separated; they don’t have the same relationship one to the other that they did even a hundred years ago. But still the assumption is there, that those functions are being performed; when the opposite functions are being performed! These States are actually overseeing replacement, a demographic revolution that’s taking place.

So, I argue that in this light what needs to happen is that the Majorities actually, in a way, need to accept their defeat. Sort of a radical thing, some people object to this. But I think we need to accept, acknowledge the profundity of our defeat and accept that the government is no longer ours. The State no longer belongs to the people. Once one has faced that harsh truth, then one can start thinking what we can do to survive in the future as a people.

We need to starve these governments of resources; and rather we must build-up alternate national organizations that are well embedded in the people.

We are on a healthy trajectory right now with some fight-back in Europe. But for me the real sign of health will be when Tony Blair finds himself in court charged with treason. That would be a clear sign that something healthy is happening.

You know that the Blair government deliberately set-about to flood Britain with third-world immigrants as a way of breaking the spirit of conservatives…so that they would give up the fight to try to retain their country. I view that as least arguably criminal and if laws don’t exist - and I suspect laws don’t exist for prosecuting people like Blair - the law should be created.

 

READ MORE...

Tags: ActivismAnthropologyAnti-racism and white genocideAustralian PoliticsAwakeningsBritish PoliticsConservatismCrusade against Discrimination in BritainDemographicsEthnicity and Ethnic Genetic InterestsEuropean cultureEuropean NationalismGenetics & Human Bio-DiversityGlobal ElitismGlobalisationImmigrationImmigration and PoliticsMarxism & Culture WarMediaPolitical analysisSocial SciencesWhite Genocide ProjectWhite Genocide: EuropeWhite Nationalism
Comments (18) | Tell-a-Friend


“Wise men see outlines and therefore they draw them”

Posted by DanielS on Monday, September 1, 2014 at 10:19 PM

                                    blakecompass
                “Wise men see outlines and therefore they draw them”

  D: Don’t be silly. I can’t draw a conversation. I mean things.

  F: Yes—I was trying to find out just what you meant. Do you mean “Why do we give things outlines when we draw them?” or do you mean that the things have out-lines whether we draw them or not?

  D: I don’t know, Daddy. You tell me. Which do I mean?

  F: I don’t know, my dear. There was a very angry artist once who scribbled all sorts of things down, and after he was dead they looked in his books and in one place they found he’d written “Wise men see outlines and therefore they draw them” but in another place he’d written “Mad men see outlines and therefore they draw them.”

  D: But which does he mean? I don’t understand.

  F: Well, William Blake—that was his name—was a great artist and a very angry man. And sometimes he rolled up his ideas into little spitballs so that he could throw them at people.

  D: But what was he mad about, Daddy?

  F: But what was he mad about? Oh, I see—you mean “angry.” We have to keep those two meanings of “mad” clear if we are going to talk about Blake. Because a lot of people thought he was mad—really mad—crazy. And that was one of the things he was mad-angry about. And then he was mad-angry, too, about some artists who painted pictures as though things didn’t have out-lines. He called them “the slobbering school.”

  D: He wasn’t very tolerant, was he, Daddy?

  F: Tolerant? Oh, God. Yes, I know—that’s what they drum into you at school. No, Blake was not very tolerant. He didn’t even think tolerance was a good thing. It was just more slobbering. He thought it blurred all the outlines and muddled everything—that it made all cats gray. So that nobody would be able to see anything clearly and sharply.

  D: Yes, Daddy.

  F: No, that’s not the answer. I mean “Yes, Daddy” is not the answer. All that says is that you don’t know what your opinion is—and you don’t give a damn what I say or what Blake says and that the school has so befuddled you with talk about tolerance that you can-not tell the difference between anything and anything else.

 

READ MORE...

Tags: ActivismAnthropologyAnti-racism and white genocideArt & DesignBritish PoliticsConservatismCrusade against Discrimination in BritainDemographicsEnvironmentalism & Global WarmingEthnicity and Ethnic Genetic InterestsGenetics & Human Bio-DiversityGlobalisationImmigration and PoliticsLinguisticsMyth and modernityPsychology
Comments (0) | Tell-a-Friend


Page 1 of 10 | Go to:  1 2 3 >  Last ›

image of the day

Existential Issues

White Genocide Project

DNA Nations

All Categories

The Contributors

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.

Immigration

Islamist Threat

Europhobic Media Networks

Audio/Video

Crime

Economics

Education

General

Historical Re-Evaluation

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Europeans in Africa

Of Note

Recent Comments

give it up commented in entry 'Ten years, and how much has really changed?' on 07/07/15, 06:51 PM. (go) (view)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Ten years, and how much has really changed?' on 07/07/15, 06:18 PM. (go) (view)

Dude commented in entry 'Ten years, and how much has really changed?' on 07/07/15, 03:10 PM. (go) (view)

Impulse control and lack thereof.. commented in entry 'African Population Explosion - Augurs to Overwhelm Europe' on 07/07/15, 11:07 AM. (go) (view)

Kumiko Oumae commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/07/15, 10:57 AM. (go) (view)

DanielS commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/07/15, 08:02 AM. (go) (view)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/07/15, 06:39 AM. (go) (view)

TT on controlled opposition commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/07/15, 04:13 AM. (go) (view)

DanielS commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/07/15, 03:38 AM. (go) (view)

Lurker commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/06/15, 11:23 PM. (go) (view)

neil vodavzny commented in entry 'Anti-Anarchy' on 07/06/15, 10:02 AM. (go) (view)

esp.given crypsis, J difference not overemphasized commented in entry 'Anti-Anarchy' on 07/06/15, 07:02 AM. (go) (view)

neil vodavzny commented in entry 'Anti-Anarchy' on 07/06/15, 06:06 AM. (go) (view)

Native National Left synchronous with White Left commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/06/15, 02:50 AM. (go) (view)

NY times interviews Liddell commented in entry 'MajorityRadio: AltRight's Colin Liddell talks with GW and DanielS' on 07/06/15, 01:20 AM. (go) (view)

Wells of Natn'l Geographic: "we're all African" commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on 07/05/15, 02:08 PM. (go) (view)

DanielS commented in entry 'Why Didn't You Keep Your Cohen Name?' on 07/05/15, 09:14 AM. (go) (view)

Eric Bloodaxe commented in entry 'Why Didn't You Keep Your Cohen Name?' on 07/05/15, 08:29 AM. (go) (view)

DanielS commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/05/15, 07:32 AM. (go) (view)

neil vodavzny commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/05/15, 07:00 AM. (go) (view)

"dada" post modernity vs White Post Modernity commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/05/15, 06:38 AM. (go) (view)

tanstaafl on MIR commented in entry 'MR Radio: Guessedworker speaks with Tanstaafl' on 07/05/15, 02:37 AM. (go) (view)

Pay attention! commented in entry 'Majority Radio: Dr Christian Lindtner speaks to DanielS and GW' on 07/04/15, 08:04 AM. (go) (view)

Red cape over socialconstructionism & hermeneutics commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/04/15, 03:25 AM. (go) (view)

Jack Sen on UKIP and The EU commented in entry 'Is UKIP controlled opposition or genuine Nationalism?' on 07/04/15, 02:58 AM. (go) (view)

Arch Hades commented in entry 'Why Didn't You Keep Your Cohen Name?' on 07/03/15, 02:56 PM. (go) (view)

Gottfried's foil commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/03/15, 02:37 PM. (go) (view)

On Arendt, Heidegger and his other students commented in entry 'Hannah Arendt: Far From Innocent' on 07/03/15, 12:40 PM. (go) (view)

Bernstein contra incommensurability/eco-difference commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/03/15, 06:54 AM. (go) (view)

Tracing the red caping of "The Left" commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/03/15, 03:07 AM. (go) (view)

U.K. in the dead of night commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/03/15, 02:41 AM. (go) (view)

Mick Lately commented in entry 'Why Didn't You Keep Your Cohen Name?' on 07/02/15, 09:00 AM. (go) (view)

to clarify commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/02/15, 08:20 AM. (go) (view)

Beam's Bottom Line commented in entry 'Louis Beams Light on Instigation of White Fratricide - From Russia/Ukraine' on 07/02/15, 08:02 AM. (go) (view)

Mick Lately commented in entry 'Chasing The Red Cape of Jewish misrepresentative terms against our interests' on 07/02/15, 05:22 AM. (go) (view)