British Democracy and the Jews.  Again.

Posted by Tanstaafl on July 07, 2010, 02:05 AM | #

Savage is like Auster in that they both fear Henry Palfrey’s scenario 2 is most likely:

2. White America does not save itself from the MultiCult, and the Jews find they cannot control the beast as expected. It devours them also. Well, anyone could have told them that.

Savage and Auster are trying to tell them, though Auster is more obsessed with “anti-semitism” and more wont to shit on Whites, especially those native to what he calls “the Dead Island”.

Posted by Bill on July 07, 2010, 04:05 AM | #

GW.  BDF P8 @73 In reply to Chrono Mizaki.

All one can say is that in a liberal milieu the radicalism of nationalism is not understood, and perhaps cannot be spoken of.

I like that.

If you don’t know what it’s like to be white English - then your not.

The more I read these people the more I understand their mantra - ‘I did the right thing.’

Posted by Sam Davidson on July 07, 2010, 06:29 PM | #

Well, that discussion you had on democracyforum.co.uk seemed especially pointless.

I talked with my English friend this week and he told me about a television show he was watching.
“The Sex Education Show” - sexual obscenity paraded as education. You’ll also notice that the show puts the Union Jack all over the background. It’s on coffee mugs, sofa cushions, and even the background logo. Somehow the show wants to associate this excessive sexuality with “Britishness.”

http://sexperienceuk.channel4.com/sex-education/season/archives/season-3

I can’t find very much information about who created the show or who writes it. However, it does appear on Channel 4, and the Chief Executive for this channel is David Abraham.  The first Chairman was Edmund Dell. Both Jews.

The Goncourt brothers noted the rise of pornography in the France of their day: “Pornographic literature,” they wrote, “serves a Bas-Empire. . . one tames a people as one tames lions, by masturbation.” -B. F. Skinner

To be honest, many European ‘nationalists’ seem downright ignorant. They always criticize us American “anti-semites” for emphasizing the Jewish Question. They say that in Europe the Jews are not responsible for their decline thus a Jewish reductionism is false. Yet, when I investigate European problems I find the same people behind it all. An example that springs to mind is France’s 1968 turmoil. From my limited investigations it seemed to be the result of agitating by Jewish radicals like Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Alain Geismar, and Alain Krivine.

In Europe you can criticize the corporations all you want. You can criticize other Europeans all you want. But never criticize the Jews or their blood libel of Europeans. You’ll go to prison for that. (Can we perhaps ally with the Jews against Islam? Try it. They’ll defend the Muslims against Europe just like they did during the Swiss minaret ban.)

Posted by Armor on July 07, 2010, 07:14 PM | #

“The Sex Education Show” - sexual obscenity paraded as education.

In France, you can now watch the program “Le sexe, mes parents et moi” on MTV France (cable TV).
It is an adaptation of MTV’s “Sex…with Mom and Dad”.

(I couldn’t watch the trailer on their website. Maybe you have to sign up first.)

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 07, 2010, 08:45 PM | #

I’ve noticed the same thing as Sam Davidson:  Europeans don’t want to hear anything about the Jews.  They think the Jews have nothing to do with what’s going on.  They also don’t want to hear doubts about the Holocau$t Standard Version or for that matter about Martin Luther King whom they worship like a god.  Very weird.

Posted by Guessedworker on July 07, 2010, 09:07 PM | #

Sam,

Pretty pointless, I agree.  Unlike MR, where there are a lot of people who bring fresh insights to the discussion, and where we generally try to advance our understanding, BDF has a fair few members who painted themselves into a particular ideological corner a long time ago.  By and large, what they want is to prove their rightness to themselves in lieu of the fact that the world keeps turning.

I received another “infraction” from the boss today (my third), this time for pulling a Jewess’s leg after she had splurged the usual hate-garbage at me.  It seems that the Jewess has not been reprimanded - something I intend to take up with this guy.  But, anyway, he seems terrified in case “waycism” makes an appearance on the thread, and the resultant heavy hand is extremely unconducive to free discussion.  I’m assuming that’s why so little of interest gets said, even by the two people who I know from private correspondence are very able.

Good to see Soren floating around.  Not quite sure why.

Posted by Guessedworker on July 07, 2010, 09:09 PM | #

It’s a question of trying to strike the right balance, Fred, over here.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 07, 2010, 11:27 PM | #

Here’s someone who names Americans of East Anglian ancestry as a major part of the problem (see East Anglia here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Anglia):

The conventional wisdom is that we Texans are Californians in slow motion, destined to see our state overwhelmed by coming majorities of [non-whites].  The reality is a bit more complicated. 

To be fair to the conventional case, in 2005 Texas was one of the first states to follow California and Hawaii into white minority status.  Those who would proclaim the death of Anglo Texas [Scroob note:  apart from Mexicans themselves, these would be mainly Jews of course] gleefully report that Hispanics now make up an absolute majority of Texas public school first graders, while the white share is down to less than one third. [...]  Hispanics will soon make up a majority of [all] Texas children, and probably constitute a majority of births in the state (2006 statistics put their share at 49.6%).  So no serious person can argue that the Reconquista of Texas is not well underway. 

Even so, attempts to draw electoral conclusions about Texas from California are statistically problematic.

The first obvious problem with the comparison is bad news for Texas.  Texas’s voter demographics reveal that the state has about the same proportion of Hispanic voters (20.1%) as California (21.4%). [...] So those who see California as Texas’ future are wrong — demographically, Texas is California now.

So why is California deep blue [i.e., extremely liberal] while Texas remains deep red [i.e. very anti-liberal]?

Simply, California has an acute white people problem.  In a state where minorities flex their muscles early and often to exploit the white taxpaying population, one would think whites would get with the program and start block voting like white Mississippians.  Instead, California whites exhibit mass insanity — a majority of white males and 52% of whites overall voted for Obama.

In contrast, in Mississippi 90% of white males voted for McCain, exhibiting near-African-American levels of racial solidarity and block voting.  (Yes, I know McCain was an uninspiring candidate and no real friend to traditional Americans.  Most voters, however, did not know this and those who voted on a racial basis would have seen McCain as representing white interests.  Thus, the McCain vote is a valid statistical proxy for white racial solidarity.)

Texas is not quite as rational as Mississippi, but still 73% of whites voted for McCain — actually showing more solidarity than the state’s Hispanic population, who went only 63% for Obama.

So what’s wrong with California whites?  My hypothesis:  many of California’s whites, particularly in the northern portion of the state, are descended from Puritan stock.  Hailing from the East Anglia portion of England, these individuals seem to have an almost genetic predisposition for what psychologists call altruistic punishment.  Once convinced that someone has cheated or been mistreated by others, Puritans will “altruistically” (at great cost to themselves) seek to right the wrong.  This has metastasized to the point where Puritans today vote for political policies that will displace them and their children because a) other white people sometimes mistreated Mexicans in the past and b) other white people once owned black slaves. 

As a Southerner, I believe these hyper-moralistic people have caused more trouble in the United States than nearly any other group.

[read the whole article:  http://www.vdare.com/misc/100707_griffin.htm ]

He may be onto something:  East Anglians are closely related to Scandinavians.  And look at the Scands today in their own homelands:  no race, ethnicity, or group in the world is rushing more enthusiatically to its own extinction.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 07, 2010, 11:41 PM | #

Though the article I excerpted above is a bit pessimistic, its very nice conclusion isn’t at all:

[A halt to race-replacement immigration] will only happen if there is direct, angry and demanding pressure from enough Republican constituents — as on gun control and abortion. […] Our goal must be to stoke the grassroots fire on immigration, galvanizing the aging white population into angrily mau-mauing their representatives on immigration until, kicking and screaming, Republican lawmakers actually do something about it.

Pat Buchanan has a gift for words.  Recently he floated an analogy that has helped me to define my own life purpose in politics:

“And Tea Partiers now play the role of Red Army commissars who sat at machine guns behind their own troops to shoot down any soldier who retreated or ran.  Republicans who sign onto tax hikes cannot go home again.”

The same must be true of immigration restriction — and all the other political issues conservatives care about:  we are called to man the machine guns behind our own lines because our cohesiveness as a group, like the Soviets, must be coerced.  Our enemies enjoy the luxury of an ideologically unified and cohesive political army.  Ours, however, is a lot bigger, but a lot clumsier.  Hopefully, the weight of numbers will play out in American and Texas politics the way it did on the Eastern Front.

Nice closing to the article.

Posted by Bill on July 08, 2010, 05:08 AM | #

Sorry!  I cannot claim this is on topic.

Since I first discovering the rabbit hole on the Internet, I had no idea of how deep and complex it was to turn out to be.  It is deep, it is extensive and is equally, if not moreso, complex.

Over the years, I’ve oft read repeatedly a certain theme that has intrigued me, and has stuck with me.

‘WTSHTF’.  (When the sh*t hits the fan)

I’m sure most, if not all here, is familiar with this prophecy of doom, but what does it really mean?

To me, (being a half empty sorta guy) ‘WTSHTF’ is some vague future defining moment when some momentous event or transformation occurs.  At one minute to midnight everything is OK, life is proceeding as ‘normal’ and at one minute past midnight, catastrophe has struck and our lives will never be the same again.

However,my problem is, how will we know when that moment has arrived?  How will this moment manifest itself and become clear to all that the sh*t really has hit the fan?

For example.  In recent years, the global econonmic situation has dominated certain websites with the predominant theme that the world’s economies are in free fall and when the ‘WTSHTF,’ life as we have known it will be no more.

Has that moment arrived?  Are we now living in a post ‘WTSHTF’ economic world?  Because if we are, I think I must have missed something, for when I step outside of the virtual world (‘Net) lo and behold everything is functioning as ‘normal’, most folk are glued to the box watching the world cup, most folk still have a roof over their head, run a car, have a job and continue to visit Disneyland - in fact life is proceeding as ‘normal’.  So what have I missed?

All of this of course leads me to asking the biggie. How will we know when we have been race replaced?

Posted by Gorboduc on July 08, 2010, 06:07 AM | #

Bill: I suppose that WTSHTF someone is supposed to turn the power off, and the rest of us get out the mops and buckets.

No-one in the UK office had really noticed the pile-up of excreta in a dangerously-poised position: we were all taken by surprise and wonderingly said, How could the bosses allow this to happen?

Actually, the fan has in reality been delivering carefully-graded but increasing doses of sh*t for some time, and those who noticed and complained were told, That’s the way it is: get used to it: plenty more where that came from: why should YOU be different? It suits everyone else.

Consequently many folks have become so used to it they don’t notice it, and if their hair and hands and even their sandwiches stopped smelling of sh*t they’d start to feel worried. Hell, it’s a communal task: we’ve all got to take some of it home with us,  it gives us something in common!
Or even: it’s s free gift, handed out by the authorities: it has to go somewhere and I expect it’s really quite good for us, and after all, all medicines are nasty, aren’t they?

Well you won’t know you’ve been race-replaced any more than you’ll know you’re dead: but you can see and feel the barbed arrow deep in your side and see the eventual result.

Every time I step onto a local bus the arrow shifts a bit deeper: and later the fan in the UK office whirs round a bit faster, and a bit more - um, “debris” comes my way: on the bus I can refuse to pay my ticket, I can get off and lie down in front of the bus in the road and demand that the Turks and blacks be thrown off, and in the UK office I can rant about Magna Carta, and push the furniture over a bit;  but I need help - big help - to shift the pile of excreta, smash the fan, clean off myself and my colleagues, and get rid of the bosses and their tame electricians and “waste disposal experts” who set up the system, and open a new business in a new premisses.
Before I die…

Posted by Armor on July 08, 2010, 10:10 AM | #

“I’ve noticed the same thing as Sam Davidson:  Europeans don’t want to hear anything about the Jews.”

Anti-racist laws are bound to have their effect.

“Yet, when I investigate European problems I find the same people behind it all. An example that springs to mind is France’s 1968 turmoil. From my limited investigations it seemed to be the result of agitating by Jewish radicals like Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Alain Geismar, and Alain Krivine.”

At the time, in France, many of the intellectual (phony) elites were Jews too. I suspect those who were not (Jean-Paul Sartre, Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault…) owed their careers and their visibility to their Jewish friends.

Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont wrote a book about phony intellectuals called Fashionable Nonsense. (1997)

Wikipedia :
“The stated goal of the book is not to attack “philosophy, the humanities or the social sciences in general…but to warn those who work in them (especially students) against some manifest cases of charlatanism.” In particular to “deconstruct” the notion that some books and writers are difficult because they deal with profound and difficult ideas. “If the texts seem incomprehensible, it is for the excellent reason that they mean precisely nothing.”

The book includes long extracts from the works of Jacques Lacan, Julia Kristeva, Paul Virilio, Gilles Deleuze, Félix Guattari, Luce Irigaray, Bruno Latour, and Jean Baudrillard who are considered by some to be leading academics of Continental philosophy, critical theory, psychoanalysis or social sciences.”

It seems the authors were careful not to include Jews in their demonstration. Even so, I think it is largely a Jewish problem. In the 1970s, Jewish American journalists would interview members of the French intellectual “elites”, who would look very intelligent, or full of nonsense, depending if you believed in it or not. But I think those phony elites were largely a Jewish phenomenon. And today, many European nationalists will criticize the American ideology of invading the world and killing ethnic identities, and they will refuse to see that it is largely a Jewish ideology. I have even heard a French nationalist complain of the American ideology that promotes people like Marx, Marcuse and Freud.

Posted by Bill on July 08, 2010, 11:54 AM | #

Gorbo.  July 08, 2010, 10:07 AM

Well you won’t know you’ve been race-replaced any more than you’ll know you’re dead:

Hmm!  Yes I’ve been thinking along those lines myself.  Is that the best we can hope for?  Will anyone care when we’re gone?  These body snatchers have really done their homework.

Thanks anyway,  I assume you are describing observations of your life and work in and around London.

My grandchildren of 17 and 9 watch endless multicultural BBC kid’s programmes and are truly oblivious, they have been body snatched already.  (Same goes for adults)

Posted by Gorboduc on July 10, 2010, 09:20 PM | #

Armor:
I introduced Sokal and Bricmont here a year and a half ago:

Posted by Filius Sancti Bonifacii on January 28, 2009, 02:04 AM | #

Diamed, you can’t have it both ways.
If we LOOK like an evolutionarily unfit bunch, then our PROSPECTS are actually a component of that picture!
I’m not sure what dimensions you’re talking about.
Yes, the Universe has length, breadth and height and exists in time, but it seems to me that you’re calling scientific terminology in to illustrate a metaphysical/philosophical/historical matter.
That sort of thing is fine for Lacan and Baudrillard and the other folks pilloried in Sokal and Bricmont’s book “Intellectual Impostures”. I can’t see that it helps here.

I changed my name but it was me. I’m sticking with my present one.
I think I was saying that some of the stuff introduced here by evolutionists was so airy-fairy - not at all hard-nosed physical science - that it came into the category of, dare I say it, the sort of stuff S. & B. were criticising.
I like one of the guys that S. & B. dissed, Paul Virilio.
He designed a Museum of Accidents: we are all in it.
However, his surname is so rare and strange that I wondered if it was a made-up one, like that of Raymond AbellioI