|
|
|
A discussion with Northerner and Desmond Following his intervention on my Steve Jones post, and his subsequent attempt to demonstrate an Aryan genetic superiority over non-Aryan Europeans, our friend Northerner has found himself hosting a chat between Desmond Jones and myself. For anyone who is unable to sleep, the soporific effects of a rambling, incoherent discussion about National Socialism are guaranteed effective, especially when that discussion is between such philosophical non-supremacists as Desmond and myself. I only mention it in passing. Comments:2
Posted by n/a on Sat, 18 Oct 2008 13:36 | # “subsequent attempt to demonstrate an Aryan genetic superiority over non-Aryan Europeans” GW, this shit is tiresome. You claimed, in effect, that modern science has proven the absolute equality of all European populations in capacity for civilization and in every other attribute which may be of concern to “supremacists”. That claim is baseless. (1) Studies consistently demonstrate genetic variation among European populations, even at resolutions far below those that will be attainable through widespread full-genome sequencing. (2) Knowledge of the genetics underlying brain/behavioral and other relevant phenotypes remains relatively primitive. It’s impossible to show that genetic variants which might be deemed favorable by a “supremacist” are equally distributed when we don’t even know what those variants are. I pointed this out for your benefit and the benefit of any reader you may have misled. Instead of acknowledging your ignorance of “genomics”, falling back to a more reasonable position, or attempting in good faith to argue your original (unsupportable) position to the best of your ability, you have attacked straw men and tried to change the subject, while repeatedly sidestepping the exact issue under dispute. As for throwing around “Aryan” in reference to Europeans—in the present century—I’ll leave that to friends of your like Constantin von Hoffmeister. 4
Posted by diamed on Sat, 18 Oct 2008 16:29 | #
Just click the map. What a stupid argument, the facts are already in. Northern Europeans do tend to outscore southern europeans. Irish score very low and are in the north though. Italians score very high and are in the south. That’s all there is to know about it. It’s likely the reason IQ is lower in the south is due to racial admixture with their more southern neighbors, something the north has largely escaped. Of course, that won’t last long under the current immigration patterns. The IQ of all Europe is set to descend to 85 under north african rule. 5
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 18 Oct 2008 18:17 | # Oops! Melba’s right. I’ll change that for n/a: n/a’s comment (addressing GW) should read,
6
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 18 Oct 2008 18:20 | # Melba’s not the only one who’s right — so’s Diamed:
Truer words were never posted. Anywhere. 7
Posted by Z on Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:12 | # Patrick Grimm’s excellent blog “Zionist Watch” has been shut down by Jewish censors who hate and reject freedom of speech (which is, of course, a fundamental American right)...it’s a sad day indeed. They’ve already targeted Buchanan’s blog, the Real Jew News website, Grimm’s blog, and MANY others—so who is next? 8
Posted by Gudmund on Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:30 | # @ Z, All of the above points to the imminent passage of a new hate speech law in the US, probably sometime next year. The Zionists want to censor the internet something fierce - proof that this is where we’ve been most effective. 9
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:36 | # Northerner, Read your own thread, please, where I answered your point here more than once. I’m still waiting, btw, for you to prove the truth of the Herrenrasse. There is an obligation on you to do that, despite your attempts to slide out from under it. If you just can’t bring yourself to admit that it is impossible - which, of course, it is - at least draw up the boundaries between Europe’s ethnies based on all available metric so our readers can judge the extent and nature of this new supremacism you’re pushing. Put it to the test. Let’s see what it - and you - are worth. 10
Posted by n/a on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 02:00 | # GW seems to be trying to prove either that his character is flawed or he is badly in need of a remedial logic course. GW: A disproves B. Me: No, it doesn’t. GW: You haven’t proved B. Me: I’m arguing A doesn’t disprove B, not trying to prove B. GW: Prove B! Etc. A half-dozen rounds of this is more than enough for me. 11
Posted by a Finn on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 07:04 | # Let’s first give credit where it is due. Guessedworker is far in the right tail of Gaussian intelligence curve. He has always been gentleman in the finest traditions of the English. The site layout is pleasant and works well, although the red Europe logo is worrisome. The background color makes the site comfortable to the eyes and easy to read. Majority Rights has been source of a lot of useful and versatile information. Egi, white communities and microcommunities and science are important basis to the many useful articles. I don’t want to increase his burdens and thank him for all the good things he has done. Guessedworker says in his blogspot profile that he is an accountant. If it is a true statement: Accounting as a job is methodical and it organizes things in well defined predetermined categories. It gives predictability, sense of control and sensible logical framework to the person doing it. This draws on average to accounting people whose social capabilities are less than in people on average. It means that they may have trouble interpreting other peoples’ feelings, intentions, social network dynamics etc. This is mostly normal variation in people and there is no need for everybody to be fine tuned to the currents of social dynamics. It is quite enough that they can arrange their local relationships in a way that is good, sustainable and in general predictable. In some cases and especially in larger and more complex social arrangements this might mean problems. Majority Rights is such an arrangement and there are things that suggest Guessedworker might have such problems. It seems as though he categorizes all the people who oppose immigration for whatever reason and/or are in some ways nationalistic (even imperialistic multi-national “nationalists”) in one category, and puts them into an one account. The quality of the writers doesn’t matter much to him. He gives them all a free pass in Majority Rights and possibility to write articles. This means that the range of writers in many respects is large, so large that it causes unnecessary friction, incoherence, chaotic general impression and lack of practical directions of movement. Majority Rights already has stalinist “nationalists” as writers and it seems that “national” socialists could be the next writers any day now. Live the useless and destructive ideological battles of the past again and again, only in Majority Rights, supplemented in some cases perhaps by drugs. How many participants are already gone and how many potential participants have turned away? Maybe Guessedworker thinks of this ugly mixed soup as an evolution, from where something good eventually pops-up. Wrong. Group evolution needs limits to progress. It has to decrease the internal differences and increase the differences between groups. It has to limit, stop and/or filter the physical and ideological movement between groups. (Ridley 1996, D.S. Wilson and Sober 1994). Here we have group devolution. Maybe Guessedworker thinks this is necessary for free speech to survive. Wrong. Those outside the group can speak outside the group. If it is necessary, outsiders’ freedom of speech can be defended from the inside of the group. Where possible, different groups can co-operate in their defence of free speech. Maybe Guessedworker thinks this is necessary to draw talents from large pools. Wrong. Talents are drawn by coherent and constant quality and intelligence. Need I say more? The formerly mentioned problems include: * Lack of reasonable moderation in the comments. Trolls and rants are given free reign. People can change their name in every post. * Jewish fetish. There are reasons to criticize Jews, but what we have here is not political and functional, and it is often out of proportion. Our biggest problem is our weak, almost laughable communities, not the Jews. Every outside group becomes pathological to us because of this. Also our politics towards Jews should be that which has the most beneficial effect to us. This means strengthening those qualities in Jews that are good; weakening those qualities that are bad; increasing the divide between the good and the bad Jews; co-operating with the Jews, with whom co-operation is reasonable; not criticizing Jews in blanket manner; finding those interest that ensure mutually good end results to the Europeans and Jews (They are never similar); using other names than Jew, where better political, economical or social results can be achieved with them (Liberals, communists, socialists etc.); etc. E.g. in U.S. according to an article of Vdare, 44% of the Jews oppose immigration. That despite the lousy Jewish liberal elites, who increase Jewish support to immigration remarkably. Why there is not even conversation connection with those 44%? Why their position is not tried to strengthen and pro-immigration Jewish position weakened? Is there any efforts to weaken the connection between Jewish liberal elites and other Jews? How large is the genuinely conservative Jewish elite and what has been done to strenghten it? Is this mixed Babylon of Majority Rights capable to political functions? 12
Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 08:10 | #
Define it. Wiki says;
KMac;
Separation and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism p.147
Separation and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism p. 143 Is it agreed that the fundamental meaning of das Herrenvolk is that cultures degenerate when distinct races mix? Or will the criticisms of Alon Ziv be rebuked? 13
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:14 | # Northerner, “A” is that the Herrenrasse is not true. For example, the theory held that the Wehrmacht would defeat Patton’s racially sundered and poorly motivated forces. It didn’t. Asked to advance one proof that the Herrenrasse was true you gave me lactose tolerance. You are confusing distinctiveness with a moral issue here. The Herrenrasse is a moral ussue. Distinctiveness is, of course, to be preserved for reasons of genetic interest. But the racial cleansing, murder and enslavement of other Europeans which was done in the name of the Herrenrasse does rather suggest that something about it was a teensie bit flawed. If you would just say, yes, OK, it was stupid, evil and wrong, that would be fine. The ball really is in your court, however much you complain about it. 14
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 10:49 | # Finn, MR was set up for a purpose which is historical, and which requires the testing of boundaries and the clash of passionately held views. It was never set up merely to give people a place to get the load of their backs. It is not meant to be a comfort zone, not a club for people who think and feel alike. On the contrary, and this is its first purpose, it is a dialectic crucible in which, for example, the race-realism of Sailer and Amren, or the libertarianism at LRC, the paleoconservatism at Chronicles and, now, Takimag, or the conservatism of Auster, myself or Proze, or the ethnic nationalism of Europe’s radical right political parties, are moved beyond their present limits ... and I mean, primarily, limits to their outreach potential. Race-realism, for example, is too narrow to redefine the world for European peoples. The second purpose is to learn about the dialectic process as it applies to nationalism itself, because there is the wider historical requirement of shifting the ground on which Europeans stand, so that we may unite around more vivifying, non-liberal ideas. This requirement cannot be met by MR. But MR can model the process for people to come together at other much more specialised and less public fora. 15
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:23 | # I would add that Amren has not changed the world. TOQ has not changed the world. NPI is not changing the world. VDare is not changing the world. VNN is certainly not changing the world. Nothing we have tried is changing the world, Finn. The world, meanwhile, is relentlessly applying its death-grip upon our people. At what point do you acknowledge our failure, and question what we can achieve as we are? Bottom line: will “more of the same but better” generate a different outcome? Or will it be only repeating ourselves like a damaged android performing the same machine-function over and over again even though nothing happens. If the answer to that is “Probably, yes” and obviously I think it is - I am not an Inevitablist - then we must generate far more impact. We need to forge unity, we need a commanding analysis. These are the basics. They won’t come about without agency. 16
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:59 | # Desmond: Define it ...
Heed the last part of that definition well, Desmond. This is not a question of human difference. It is a question of faith. Scientifically measurable difference does not suddenly authorise a “right” to dispossess, murder and enslave others. You are trying to shift a telelogical justification into ontological fact, and you are dead wrong. 17
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:27 | # At the core of Desmond’s challenge is a rejection of my arrangement of possible nationalist thought along an axis of being <> becoming. But I haven’t picked this out of thin air. It is, I assert, a universal truth that all serious systems of thought about life are arranged according to this axiality. It is as applicable to esoteric religion as it is to Western politics (to both conservatism and liberalism independently). It is applicable, in very broad terms indeed because the subject is so vast, to the division of Western pholosophy into the English analytic tradition and the continental tradition. In nationalism it exposes the illogicality of certain (actually quite obviously Idealist) characteristics of National Socialism, and since those characteristics are still serviceable in certain quarters, that’s a problem. 18
Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:04 | #
Since we will never really know the “truth” of das Herrenvolk ideology or whether the Nazis/Germans believed it, this too is a matter of faith. It is a religious cosmology, whose dogmata, the debasement of Germans, must ultimately lead to a faith doctrine. The basis for the destruction of Germany/nationalism is founded in these Anglo/Judaic creationist myths. Metaphysical universal truths are also faith based because they are not falsifiable. 19
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:00 | # A tad Foucaultian for my taste, that one. Constructions, which is what I take it you are pressing into service, are not faithist and emotional in nature, but representational and thought-based. Representations can be falsified, but they can never be better than approximations - perhaps very close approximations - of objective reality. The fact that a representation is not “the thing in itself” does not make it a faith object. Homo sapiens can still rely upon his intellectualised perception of the world to survive, adapt and pass on his genes. Indeed the representational (or associative) method of the thinking mind evolved precisely to that end - not to provide us with a direct experience of the objectively real. The faith utility is part of the emotional mind, which is a distinct and, in evolutionary terms, far older mechanism than the thinking mind. It operates much faster than thought. It does not use language as thought does. This, btw, is the functional reason why faith objects can never be rationalised into a verifiable form by the thinking mind. As to belief in the Herrenrasse, I think it entirely likely that ordinary Germans internalised the theory at least as readily as we internalise the theory of Jewish blamelessness today. Try talking to someone stone-cold about the nature and methods of Jewish ethnocentrism, and watch them react against you. It’s a religious reaction, of course. But that’s my point. I am not destroying German nationalism, but stretching it out onto the axis of being <> becoming. What happens to parts of it there is inconvenient for some, but that’s not a reason to desist. 20
Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:08 | #
Still waiting for evidence.
You provide no evidence that das Herrenvolk ideology existed for Germans. Clearly it exists for the English and the Jews for it is the foundation upon which those groups assert their supremacy. Blamelessness is another doctrine of your church. It justifies the destruction of Germany and the destruction of self-determination/nationalism. The mass murder the English allowed, post-hostilities, in Germany is sanctified by your church because of the supremacy myth, German debasement. In order to keep the myth alive any attempts to undermine it must be squashed.
21
Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:45 | # Examples of the pervasive nature of the English supremacy myth:
22
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 00:56 | # Evidence? You requested a definition. I gave you one that I find serviceable. In what way is it not serviceable? Definitions are not evidentially-based. They are opinionative, the opinion in question aiming for authority through accuracy. The Oxford English Dictionary is full of them - and not a sliver of evidence in sight, because it isn’t a scientific treatise. Actually, you are not providing evidence yourself. You are selectively appealing to authority - outrageously selectively, in fact. And you are misrepresenting like crazy. There is no English myth comparable to the Herrenrasse (only Judaism offers a mirror image). And if there was it would not alter my analysis, but would fit within it accordingly. It is my analysis that is important to me, not a sentimental attachment to myth. You are aiming at the wrong target. Do please take on-board that my Herrenrasse definition used the limiting phrase “National Socialist ideology”, not “general German ideology”. You build a strawman when you elide the one into the other. More wrong targetting. You appear to understand that there is a sense in which the reputation of modern nationalism hinges on the objectification of National Socialism ... on its re-assessment free of the bastardised view of it created in the public mind in 1939, and only built upon in the decades since. But for some mysterious reason - contrariness, I imagine - you cannot grasp that the standard of truth today is not the same as in 1920s and 30s Germany, and that has a decisive effect on what can and should be saved. The Jewish genocide (yes, even its weakest reading is a genocide by the terms of the Convention) is not without consequence for the reputation of National Socialism. The ethnic cleansing of the lands to the east and the theft of those lands is not without consequence. The enslavement of free European men and women is not without consequence. And the consequence is that the ideas which justified these actions are dead things. They must be jettisoned. 23
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 01:32 | # Does not a man, at least implicitly, affirm the supremacy of that which he loves the most (e.g., his people)? 24
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 01:58 | # A little more than a year ago, as best as I can describe, a switch was flipped in my brain. I was racially awake. I began to contemplate the ineffable beauty of our people, all the bitter sacrifices made by them so that we may live now - tears of anguish and of joy are the literal effects upon me. I experienced the numinous, religious awe. I FEEL that our people are best. I cannot change this, it is futile to fight, it is in me. Is this the stuff of the Herrenrasse? Is this feeling that I have something that should not be inculcated in our people? 25
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 02:19 | # GW, you are maddeningly similar to Leo Strauss. You make an a priori denial of the validity of any faith object. Then you turn around and say that some as-yet-unknown faith object must come to save England and/or The West. Note: I am not comparing you to modern-day neocons, only Strauss himself. 26
Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 03:21 | #
There is no doubt it services your myth.
No doubt they appeal to authority, however, the Oxford suggests an opinion is a personal belief or judgment that is not founded on proof or certainty;
Which has been the point from the beginning. The English supremacy myth is he foundation of your analysis.
Of course there is. The English hold themselves morally superior to the Germans because they project immorality, the Germans are evil bastards, upon them, which reflects the “goodness” of the English, no matter what crimes were committed. Like the Jews, the English are never held accountable.
Too late to worry about wrong targeting. The damage is done. “National Socialist ideology”, and “general German ideology” elide into one.
Please save the patronizing. The position is clear and stands on its own merits.
Of course, once again, they provide no consequence for the English who aided and abetted the enslavement of these people, by allying with Bolshevik criminals and thugs, in an effort to destroy the Germans, and then abandoning them to enslavement and brutality at the hands of a barbarian master. 27
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 03:52 | # “Of course, once again, they provide no consequence for the English who aided and abetted the enslavement of these people, by allying with Bolshevik criminals and thugs, in an effort to destroy the Germans, and then abandoning them to enslavement and brutality at the hands of a barbarian master.” - Desmond Jones Is the enslavement and land-grabbery of fellow Europeans morally defensible in your opinion? If not, how can you with consistency, if moral consistency interests you, condemn the Bolsheviks for said but not the Nazis? What is the source of your fascination with this hyped-up, supremacist, barbarism tinged with sadism? If the Anglo-American forces had taken the Bolshevik armies at their exhausted, weakest point as Patton wanted would not Eastern Europe have undergone the same ravages of race-replacement as present day Western Europe has? Is a supremacist will to dominate the untermensch necessary for the salvation of northwestern Europeans? Why not leave National Socialism where it belongs, in the grave yard of history? 28
Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 04:51 | #
This has nothing to do with the faith based English supremacy that GW’s benign nationalism (We were not ignoble to our Jews) is based upon. However, if you believe that, then why wasn’t war declared on the Soviets when they grabbed a piece of Poland?
You’re aware of the Holodomor no doubt. David Lloyd George:
Obviously that characterisation suits the Anglo-American myth, which apparently you fully imbibe.
Italy is 95% Italian and 98% European. It doesn’t fit your benign Bolshevism construct.
Considering that the German is now the untermensch and is dominated by an Anglo-Judeo supremacy, which portends extinction, according to most here, including CC, then the answer must be yes. Inducing ravage race-replacement requires domination.
If it is heroic, as MacDonald suggests, then why not examine it? If it is not show evidence that is not. If KMac is “outrageously selective” as a source then provide others, beyond the even more selective realm of personal opinion. However, you won’t of course because you can’t. You’ll just continue to ask rhetorically banal questions, dripping with bias. 29
Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:33 | # National Socialism, or at least its Hitlerian variant, was the only 20th century system which defended successfully the interests of indigenous White people against predatory and parasitical Jews until, of course, the suicidally insane British declaration of war on Germany which was to make so much of Europe safe for Communism. 30
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 08:36 | # Monitor, Faith is one of the tools, like reason and instinct, by which Man navigates his path through life. It is an evolved human faculty. The problem here isn’t that it is inadmissable per se. A man may, after all, in desiring to become free from the oppression of his neighbour, hold to himself a shining image of what that freedom will bring. No, the problem is that he may desire to become something that is impossible in Nature - a god or a superman, say - and his attempt to reveal himself in that role may create all manner of difficulties for others. 31
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:05 | # CC: Does not a man, at least implicitly, affirm the supremacy of that which he loves the most (e.g., his people)? He affirms the personal significance of it to him. He attaches value to what is distinctive in it. Racial supremacism, however, is a claim on truth in Nature, by which other races are made subject to the supreme race. This is entirely at odds with the white nationalist desire for segregation of the races, and through segregation, white survival. 32
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:44 | # Desmond, “The English” did not bastardise NS. The wartime British government did, in the name of victory. The German government propaganda machine was equally active. But Germany lost, and the anti-Nazi propaganda, instead of being put aside, was transmogrified into an enduring cultural artifact. It remains so today because it serves powerful interests, which everyone here well understands. It has nothing to do with “English moral superiority”. That is an extremely churlish and possibly racist remark which I find difficult to accept was made in good faith. Sorry to be “patronising”, but you leave me no alternative. There is no dark myth, English or otherwise, which, once lifted, will reveal NS in a morally neutral light. Nothing can accomplish that. Let’s bring the issue back to where it belongs. On Northerner’s thread I gave you Humphrey Jennings filmwork as a public reification of “the English heroic”:- http://www.vtap.com/video/The+Man+Who+Listened+to+Britain+3/CL0155923006_49db10b6a_T0MyMzc2NjE Jennings modus operandum is observation. He discovers, interprets and eulogises the character of the English. I am not at all sure that I would describe this as myth-making in the true sense. There is, of course, English myth-making aplenty, but it still tends to have a historical foundation - Shakespeare’s Henry V, for example. Even so, this is less than mythic stuff. By comparison, the German 19th century völkisch movement placed its emphasis on a re-invented rustic past, and on folklore as a pathway to the German being. I can think of no popular English equivalent. The German love of the romantic runs deep, and contains every palingenic possibility. There is, it seems, a point of romanticization where eulogy tips over into idealisation. Philosophically, that’s the point where one crosses the North Sea eastward from the Analytic to the Ideal. I hold that Nationalism does not exist only in Ideal terms. You seem to hold that it does. That is the crux of anything worthwhile in this disagreement. 33
Posted by a Finn on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:29 | # “MR was set up for a purpose which is historical, and which requires the testing of boundaries and the clash of passionately held views. It was never set up merely to give people a place to get the load of their backs. It is not meant to be a comfort zone, not a club for people who think and feel alike.” - Studies show that to be productive, a working group shouldn’t have too much diversity, e.g. people from different professions might be propitious, but people from widely different cultures and ethnicities do not. I don’t require comfort or suggest total sameness of views, just that the views’ range is closer to optimal. How stalinist rants bordering on hallucinations contribute to “uniting, vivifying, non-liberal ideas”? “.... are moved beyond their present limits ... and I mean, primarily, limits to their outreach potential. Race-realism, for example, is too narrow to redefine the world for European peoples.” - Race realism is in itself too narrow, but it contributes too, among others. Primary limiting factor now is that too much is just alphabets on the screen. There is no communities, their real relationships (contra virtual), reciprocity, altruism, group evolution, social context, networks, authorities, economies (economies of scale, economic networks, local economies, globally leveraged economies [e.g. with internet selling], specialized trades and job opportunities, barter, etc.), higher purposes transcending the individual (collectivity), private education, special culture, grouprules in general and rules of endogamy, charity primarily towards ingroup, ingroup-outgroup morality, energy production, food production, production of necessary wares, etc. There is too little real world activism (political, social, charity, legal, media, etc.), although here the situation is better than regarding communities. “.... so that we may unite around more vivifying, non-liberal ideas. .... I would add that Amren has not changed the world. TOQ has not changed the world. NPI is not changing the world. VDare is not changing the world. VNN is certainly not changing the world. ....We need to forge unity, we need a commanding analysis.” - It seems that you expect some single unifying ideology. There is none. Change becomes because of millions of little things, their sum effect. Most of them concrete things, not just virtual. So Amren etc. are doing a good job, their part. “Bottom line: will “more of the same but better” generate a different outcome? Or will it be only repeating ourselves like a damaged android performing the same machine-function over and over again even though nothing happens.” - First, will more of the same generate a different outcome? Yes. Think about an Euro in your pocket and multiply it with a billion. More of the same and different outcome. Second, qualitative change is necessary, one that withstands time, opponents, changes etc., meaning communities. Third, all the millions of little qualitative and quantitive resources/ monies /things/ communities/ activists etc. should be connected to loose and tight networks that coordinates their energies generally in the same direction and share e.g. useful information and resources. Fourth, I advice strongly against any central state ideology or solution. States don’t last, they always degenerate in the end. States are inadequate compromises. We can participate in politics and influence it, but we should be totally independent of state power or resources. Fifth, our goal should be modest when perceived from the outside (nothing devastating from the point of view of outsiders), i.e. good and enduring communities, and good and permanent environment for them. It also allows co-operation with outsiders, where possible. Very short version of my suggestion. “.... National Socialism. The ethnic cleansing of the lands to the east and the theft of those lands is not without consequence. The enslavement of free European men and women is not without consequence. And the consequence is that the ideas which justified these actions are dead things. They must be jettisoned.” - Yes, and the same and more goes for “national” (read international imperialist) bolshevists. Why you have them here? 34
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 19:13 | # Finn, If you want to contact me privately, using the button under the header, I will answer your questions. 35
Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:04 | # Gosh, a nerve was struck. It appears the unveiling of the English supremacy doctrine is an act of racism. How fitting. The point is, and always was, that to rouse your nationalism from the dead, you need to further the dark myths, sometimes blowing on the glowing embers to re-stoke the fire, of National Socialism in order to differentiate one from the other. Your God can only be resurrected, you believe, through amplifying the darkness of Lucifer. You hope to distract Moloch long enough to escape his boot, still firmly placed upon the back of your neck. 36
Posted by WD on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:35 | # First, I’d like to thank my white brothers and sisters for their intelligent comments. What is race but extended family? Second, Europeans are the only true Aryans left. Those in North India were destroyed by miscegenation. Now only macacas remain. http://library.flawlesslogic.com/soul.htm
37
Posted by a Finn on Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:37 | # Re: previous answer. Desmond Jones, do you ever get tired spewing that rubbish or does it come effortlessly? Keep on going, and you can not be differentiated from silver. It is hard, hard already. 38
Posted by Pippy on Wed, 22 Oct 2008 01:54 | # Amongst Jones’ full throttle cacophony is this:
Why the mendacity, Jones? Everyone who read that knew it was a lie and that you spouted crap. Reason is why, Jones? Stupidity or mendacity? Certainly puts into perspective the rest of your ‘arguments’. At least you are beginning to appropriately link or cite your quotations. Must give credit there. 39
Posted by Armor on Wed, 22 Oct 2008 02:38 | #
But that doesn’t mean there is too much internet activism.
As our world breaks down, we must hope that many more people will wake up and come to share our point of view, even if there is no improvement in the activism. 40
Posted by Lurker on Wed, 22 Oct 2008 03:15 | # Many people know there is something wrong with the world. Hopefully we’ve got a handle here on some of the specifics, seems to me more people are coming round to seeing things in a truer light. One by one… 41
Posted by silver on Wed, 22 Oct 2008 10:41 | #
One presumes he’s “qualified by excellence” to make up facts about people he doesn’t care for. He could be right: the British have a long history of doing just that. 42
Posted by silver on Wed, 22 Oct 2008 10:51 | #
Well, no, that can’t be true, because I’m working to make it easier. Heroes of The White Race like Rienzi, Braun and the VNN gang, who make most normal people want to place their heels on their skulls and press hard, are why it’s “hard, hard already.” Now, relax, I can hear your brain whirring and clicking. It’s okay: you’re too stupid to appreciate it, I understand. 43
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 22 Oct 2008 14:09 | # What about Wesley Clark, Silver? Isn’t he someone whom you, as a “Serb,” want to “place your heel on where his skull is and press hard”? Why is your “Serbian” anger and indignation never directed in his direction, or Clinton’s, or Bush’s (who recognized Kosovo), but exclusively in mine, Rienzi’s, now Braun’s (who is a friend of the Serb people and nation)? 44
Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:41 | # The British have a long history of doing extraordinary things which would amaze simple, (and too weak to resist the Ottoman Empire) Serbs, not the least of which was transporting British underclass members to Australia where even this unlikely crew of undesirable rejects were able, in a reasonable time, to build a decent and civilised society. 46
Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:10 | #
Of course, how can one forget?
A process that can only move in one direction, at least according to your dear Leader.
Or it may not.
etc. etc. etc. C’mon guys, that was all just a little easy. Hewers of wood, drawers of water. You can’t make this stuff up yourself? Of course not. How can one forget? The Greek mean IQ is 92. Just one more variant phenotype. Is it true the Serbs have the lowest mean IQ in Europe? Just asking? 47
Posted by Pippy on Thu, 23 Oct 2008 00:01 | # Jones blathers on and proves what? Answer to that follows shortly. Just asking myself, where are those links that prove Italy is 95% Italian? What is the total fertility rate of Italy? How would those numbers in JWH’s post change with the dismal Italian replacement rate and if the assumptions in the varying scenarios not kept? Why is this catastrophe in the making somehow unimportant and drastically different than the immigration into England? Can we not poo-poo England’s plight with one word grunts such as “assume”, considering we ARE assuming a continuation of immigration into England? Dear Jones, considering I am a fair and tolerant person, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are stupid, and not a lying prick. Idiot actually, strictly for the sake of accuracy. Hope you are comfortable with that considering it is to your benefit.
Isn’t this still better than the sub-85 England is hurtling towards? Have you developed a taste for jerk(-off) chicken yet, Jones? A taste for yarn spinning, we know is in your blood. Always quick to the draw with yet another Christie Pits tale. Or is it the same one over and over again? Simultaneously proclaiming Anglo-Saxon superiority and mewling how the lower elements beat you to the punch. One never tires of that golden oldie. What was the reason this happened again, Jones? Oh yes, “greed” on the parts of the lower elements. LOL Far different from the altruism of your kin, eh Jones?
48
Posted by a Finn on Thu, 23 Oct 2008 05:38 | # Silver, our leftist divide and blunder -troll, inhabiting the gaussian left tail. 49
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 23 Oct 2008 07:49 | #
That’s a correct assessment: Silver is what is commonly known as a leftist, and to get a better idea of the way leftists like Silver think, a better idea of the way they view the world and the way they view a web-site such as MR.com, read James Kalb’s explanation of the way “liberals” think, here. This piece is just up today over at Taki’s, and as with all Kalb’s pieces, is must reading no matter what you think of Kalb’s essential positions on things, because to understand the modern world one must understand everything Kalb sees, whether or not one agrees with Kalb interpretations of everything, and no one explains this material better than he. I first discovered Kalb and Auster in 2002, when both blogged at VFR, and it was like seeing two blinding meteors suddenly streak across the night sky lighting up the ground. 50
Posted by silver on Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:44 | #
I don’t disagree with any of this. Why do you state it in a way that assumes I would? True’s true, but fair’s also fair. Nothing I say attempts to deny you racial self-determination in your homeland, Ross. But that shouldn’t require you making up facts about people. You’re wrong to interpret my pointing this out as an attack.
Strictly speaking, that’s true. He’s half Greek. But pray tell, what makes that clear? (Besides your own good word, I mean, pipsqueak.)
Yet for all that, aFool, for all that you were trounced by him. And you would be again should you actually wish to debate, or, I suppose, even attempt to explain the heart of your problem with him—yes, you are actually that confused I doubt you’d even be able to explain what problem you have with me (besides the trouncing you received from me as an “anti”).
What makes you think it isn’t, scrub? 51
Posted by silver on Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:02 | #
Right, because you all sit and stew, stew, stew all day long. That produces emotional outbursts like this:
Iow, the response of one whose brain is essentially fried from stewing so long. On the odd occasion you get to appear before the cameras your tongues get tied, because, primitve as you are, some part of you is still aware that emotional outbursts do you no good, but nothing else is coming to mind. Google up some David Duke or Mark Webber interviews. They’re fantastically unimpressive. The leftie attack dogs go for the jugular and these nationalist clowns don’t know how to answer because they’ve spent so long stewing in their anger, with the result that they just end up sounding like confused morons. 52
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:44 | # Silver, I’m removing the latter half of your comment at 09.44AM. It is completely unnecessary to attack people who are not on this thread to defend themselves and who are no part of the original post in that offensive manner. I keep trying to extend toleration towards you and you keep abusing it. This can’t go on. Either use the opportunity to post here with some respect or do not post at all. 54
Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 24 Oct 2008 01:32 | # It appears Mr. Malakas’ people are upset because fellow white Europeans are invading their homeland. Here they are sitting at home enjoying a sip of ouzo with their favourite lamb and these bloody Albanians and Bulgarians are pouring into their country, aided and abetted by the greedy Greek elites. Don’t these people know this is Greece and that there is a huge difference between Greeks and Albanians. Bloody wogs go home.
Why are the Greeks so pissed? They invited us here. It was an Albanian that led the Greeks in the War of Independence. The door swings both ways. Just show a little compassion for your white brother from another mother, Mr. Malakas. Greeks are fair and tolerant people. (OK not fair, but very dark and swarthy people. It must be the Macedonian influence).
Just bring a few spring lambs and all will be forgotten.
Yes, all is conveniently forgotten! 55
Posted by Pippy on Fri, 24 Oct 2008 02:32 | # Jones, I worry about you. First you blurt out a venomous lie about Italy being spared the mass immigrant invasions and are called out on it. Nary a link, may I add, but then all lies are without links, aren’t they? Now you have meandered over to Greece, quite the favorite hot spot for Brits no less, and are arguing what? We never did finish the Italy slander of yours and your official (missing) link that Italy is 95% Italian and 98% European. As well why this immigration catastrophe is somehow unimportant to you with a 1.3 Italian fertility rate? Is it the assuming that has you confounded? How about if we use the word “think”, as in if the immigration and fertility rates are maintained, we THINK this is really bad news for Italy just like the rest of Europe. Better now, Jones? Of note though, the UK’s fertility rate is going up over the last decade to 1.85 in 2006. Good news, isn’t it? Of course that increase is highly likely due to the Muslim and Negro births, though let us not quibble over semantics now, shall we? The UK is saved from extinction according to the Jones Theory of Race Relations! Now to your Greece tangent. First off, you do know Italy and Greece are different places, right? One can never go wrong underestimating your level of knowledge on such matters. Greece and Greeks have a multitude of problems, the least of which is what you think of it/them. The “immigration” into the SE nations was not by “invitation”. Regardless, they have the right to maintain a Greek, meaning genetically, nation state just like England and even Canada, Australia etc. That was never the issue my dear “Imbecile Watch” friend. The issue was your pathetic mendacity. Your link less lies. Your abject ignorance on matters of racial importance. Your petty unsettled scores. Your little man syndrome. I think those are the issues that turn people’s stomachs. Get it now “Sir Desmond”? 56
Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 24 Oct 2008 02:56 | # “a Greek, meaning genetically, nation state just like England” Not quite. 57
Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 24 Oct 2008 03:02 | # Modern Greeks, of course, are somewhat genetically removed from their ancient part - forebears (though you’d never guess that listening to anyone boasting of Greek ancestry) but their Aryan genes were also diluted by generations of Ottoman and other non-White inputs. 58
Posted by Pippy on Fri, 24 Oct 2008 03:47 | # Al, I am shocked that you of all people would use the white-history link as some sort of irrefutable “evidence”. I am no geneticist, however, even I know that the first paper in your link is an extremely flawed paper that has been debunked. I cannot find the exact debunking though our friend Dienekes gives some information… http://dienekes.50webs.com/blog/archives/000169.html (see the links Jones?) A small sampling from the above links…
As well…
Dienekes, even with all his eccentricities, would admit to significant admixture if true. 59
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 24 Oct 2008 04:06 | # I for one am interested in the relationship of modern-day Albanians to ancient Greeks. I suspect it’s a close one (as of course you’d surmise merely from their living to each other). When I look at photo series of modern Greeks and Albanians I’m stricken more by the Albanians’ resemblance to ancient Greeks than Greek resemblance to them. 60
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 24 Oct 2008 04:07 | # “merely from their living to each other” merely from their living next to each other 62
Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 24 Oct 2008 07:47 | # Malakas, If the Italy “lie” was actually a lie surely a bright boy like you would have disproved it by now with link and all. But you don’t because you can’t. How many comments now and still no link to evidence that dispels the “lie”. It must take a triple digit IQ to accomplish such an enormous task. Fertility rates? At least be consistent.
It’s simple English even for double-digit dynamos like you. Defend your homeland and continually changing demographic circumstances are mitigated. U beleed da man donja? Possibly GW can loan you his dictionary. Assumption does not require thought, it’s simply adopting a position. The idea was adopted at face value without one iota of thought. Salter is a stranger in your souvlaki soaked halflingbrain. The Greeks have a right to a genetically based nation??? Never. Well, shazzam. What happened to the “White Nation”? Where not too genetically distinct people would live in love and peace…oh man you shook me to the core. I never realised this was a possibility.Low and behold you done opened my eyes. I sees it now brother. It is a fine thing you do. Givin’ us poor folks your blessing and all. Just one question? When will you and your fools be going back to Greece. Your country needs you, Malakas. It ain’t no time to dilly, dally, now. 63
Posted by Pippy on Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:56 | # Imbecile, I’ll let your latest “creation” stand on its own. With the combination of hysterical, semi-literate fallacies and Anglo-ebonics, it appears you’ve proven some point. LOL Though a couple of points need to be said. It is “malaka”. You cannot prove a negative, imbecile. The homeland(s) are NOT defended, hence the concern you raving lunatic twit. 64
Posted by Diamed on Fri, 24 Oct 2008 21:37 | # Italy is indeed almost entirely pure Italian. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Italy Ethnic group ? Population ? % of total* ? As you can see, 95% Italian. 65
Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 24 Oct 2008 23:01 | #
Italian defence of homeland is not perfect, however, it is a whole lot better than most of the West.
67
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 25 Oct 2008 00:13 | #
Thank God, thank God, thank God for Lega Nord! So much for illegal immigration. As for the legal variety, the next step must be to halt all legal immigration of the racially unlike. Then humanely but firmly repatriate all those legals who, racially-speaking, are unlike Italians but whom the communists, race-traitors, homosexuals, Jews, capitalists, and degenerates nevertheless admitted in excessive volumes against the will of the Italian people. Finally, all mosques have to be removed from Italy: tear them down, or transform them, once they are emptied and their congregations sent either back where they came from or to Israel since Jewish loudmouths are the ones pushing Islamization most, or, if the Arab nations want them, carefully move them to Arabia at Arab expense. Once the Jewish race-replacement project has been thwarted by the Aryans, the Jews will only start over again following a cooling-off period during which they behave themselves, a period meant only to deceive: eternal vigilance and self-defense against the Jews is incumbent on all Aryan peoples lest they be maneuvred by the Jews into unstoppable racial annihilation which the Jews will always, always, always try to bring about. Post a comment:
Next entry: Lebensraum and Improving the Racial Stock, 21st century style
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) Patriotic Alternative given the black spot by Guessedworker on Thursday, 14 March 2024 17:14. (View) On Spengler and the inevitable by Guessedworker on Wednesday, 21 February 2024 17:33. (View) Twilight for the gods of complacency? by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 02 January 2024 10:22. (View) — NEWS — Moscow’s Bataclan by Guessedworker on Friday, 22 March 2024 22:22. (View) Soren Renner Is Dead by James Bowery on Thursday, 21 March 2024 13:50. (View) Collett sets the record straight by Guessedworker on Thursday, 14 March 2024 17:41. (View) CommentsAl Ross commented in entry 'On Spengler and the inevitable' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 06:23. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 05:55. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 05:26. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:58. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Thu, 18 Apr 2024 20:49. (View) Guessedworker commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Thu, 18 Apr 2024 18:00. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:22. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Wed, 17 Apr 2024 14:44. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Wed, 17 Apr 2024 14:35. (View) Guessedworker commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Wed, 17 Apr 2024 10:33. (View) shoney commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Wed, 17 Apr 2024 06:14. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sat, 13 Apr 2024 18:22. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sat, 13 Apr 2024 15:33. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 13 Apr 2024 07:06. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 13 Apr 2024 05:28. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 13 Apr 2024 05:12. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 13 Apr 2024 05:09. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:15. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Thu, 11 Apr 2024 14:13. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Thu, 11 Apr 2024 14:05. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Thu, 11 Apr 2024 12:28. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Thu, 11 Apr 2024 11:48. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Tue, 09 Apr 2024 10:46. (View) Guessedworker commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Tue, 09 Apr 2024 09:27. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Mon, 08 Apr 2024 05:48. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Mon, 08 Apr 2024 05:01. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Mon, 08 Apr 2024 04:50. (View) |
Posted by john on Sat, 18 Oct 2008 11:40 | #
What’s in a word? Nietzsche died of brain cancer, slowly. Garret Hardin spoke more common sense:
http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/