|
|
Irreconcilable DifferencesI’ve tried twice now to post this comment to the article linked above but something in it is beyond the Pale to Mr. Jobling. I don’t like wasting my time so I’ll post it here instead. Now when I attempt to post just a link to this post at Amren, I get the following message:
Apparently the fifth point is written in invisible ink:
Commentary orginally intented for the Amren thread follows.
A great deal of the bad has been Jewish movements (Boasian anthropology, The Frankfurt school, Critical Theory, Psychoanalysis, multiculti Hollywood, multinut Madison Avenue, race-replacement mass immigration, “civil rights,” counterculture, miscegenation-porn, etc.,). The good has not tended to counter the bad in any way whatsoever. For example, a Jewish fellow who invents some wonderful new technology in no way ensures the survival of the EuroChristian race(s), rather he makes them more comfortable on their way to extinction. Name one successful Jewish movement that worked to strengthen the position of the EuroChristian race(s) vis-a-vis their racial interests. It’s as axiomatic as human behavior gets: find a Jewish movement, find an anti-EuroChristian movement.
I think Jewish solidarity and Jewish behavior explain far more than Jewish ability; the numbers just don’t add up otherwise (all three are critical of course). 40% of Harvard (not merit-only), but only 5% of Cal Tech (merit-only)?
I suggest that one further examine the balance sheet before asking this question. Then ask what it is about Jewish presence amongst us that is a critical part of the black ink on that balance sheet (hint: I’m guessing nothing - we don’t need a Japanese minority amongst us to enjoy wonderful Japanese products, do we?).
That’s debatable. If one accepts that Jews were a critical catalyst for the 1965 immigration change, one accepts that Jews played a great part in making the presence of many of these minorities possible in the first place.
They’re outside the gates. Guess who’s working to let them in?
Then where’s the highflying Jewish innovation and dominance of sectors and movements that help us?
That’s a cop-out. Jews don’t need others to blaze a trail for them, never have, especially not politically. Consider Jewish Hollywood’s response to Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ; there was money to be made. The claims that Hollywood didn’t see the profit-potential are obvious lies. Hollywood knows perfectly well that middle-America is starving for healthy, normal entertainment in general, and Christian entertainment in particular. The fact is that there are some dollars that Hollywood just doesn’t want. Similarly, there are whole sectors with money-making potential that Jews simply won’t touch.
What exactly has David Duke said or written or done in recent memory that you don’t like?
Why am I not surprised?
This from a fellow who refuses to even acknowledge or peruse criticism of Jewish behavior. I have a problem with EuroChristians who refuse to acknowledge the fact that EuroChristian malfeasance is a huge part of our race’s problems. Similarly, I have a problem with Jews who refuse to acknowledge that Jewish malfeasance is a huge part of our race’s problems. Here he sits, telling us who must go and who may stay. He may find his Chutzpah amusing, but should we? Funny, I wonder if my posts would be censored if I referred to the great many malfeasant Jews as “knuckle-draggers,” or some more ethnically-appropriate slur (I can think of a few, but doubt any would make it past the mods).
Have fun with the strawman. Really, who does any of that anymore? Some people might benefit from a trip outside the kiddie pool here; they might even wind up dispelling some of their own dusty, cobweb-ridden, outdated stereotypes.
Comics are some of the worst multiculti and (generally subtly) anti-white sewage you can imagine. You’ve “balanced” red ink with more red ink.
See how that works? In red ink one has entire Jewish movements, and in black ink one has individuals. That’s no coincidence.
I love Michael Savage. In my experience he’s easily the best commentator in the mass media. He’s come within a hair’s breadth of blatant WNism a few times in just the year or so since I started (regretably only occasionally) listening to his show.
Agreed. This is the main reason I give for caution involving self-professed pro-white Jews. Jews have a long history of political subversion; they’re smart, they’re determined, they’re wealthy, and they’ve simply been at it a lot longer than we have (as in, many centuries longer). That urges caution in my mind. Read up on the New Christians for plenty of great examples.
Yeah, I know what you mean! I feel similarly about racists and so-called “race-realists.” In my experience, “race-realists” tend to be obsessives. They can’t keep off the subject of race, and most bad things that happen are attributed to racial causes. I groan when I see them steering discussions to their favourite topic. They even start magazines and organizations on the topic! The more influence they have in an organisation, the more difficult it becomes to discuss problems rationally. No wait, scratch that, it’s people who beat straw men, psychoanalyze their opponents, employ ad hominem arguments, and avoid the meat of the argument who really get on my nerves. See this thread for myriad examples.
You mean, the self-reported intermarriage rate, the one from the same folks who refuse to be counted by the Census Bureau? The same reported rate that Jewish orgs use to rake in cash and deflect criticism? I’ll get back to you on that, I’m looking for some salt. Jews have been dealing with the intermarriage problem for 3000 years now. They seem fine to me.
Why can’t you believe it? Black, brown, yellow, and white opponents post here all the time, why shouldn’t agents provocateur and infiltrators do the same? By their deeds [and words!] shall ye know them. To close this gigantic post, I’ll just add that I always see a great deal of symmetry between arguments (such as they are) used by leftists to oppose race-realism, WNism, what have you, and arguments used here at Amren to boost Jews-as-WNs (the “people are individuals” argument being the big one). Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on Friday, August 18, 2006 at 04:05 PM in That Question Again, White Nationalism Comments:2
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 18, 2006, 04:37 PM | # Also, it just occurred to me why I’m having such trouble reconciling my “big tent” ideas vis-a-vis Amren (needing a place within WNism free of criticism of jewry): allowing discussion of jews without allowing criticism of jews leads to opportunists like “White, Jewish, and Proud” subverting the venue and spreading lies. I’d be fine with a ban on discussing the JQ, but no, we have to listen to the likes of that wretch in addition to holding our tongues. 3
Posted by On Holliday on August 18, 2006, 04:41 PM | # Svigor I think it good to post banned AR material here. One point - Jobling may not be with AR anymore, the last issue of AR had, I believe, someone else as website editor. Does anyone know? Jobling, for sure, was very philosemitic. 4
Posted by On Holliday on August 18, 2006, 04:45 PM | # Svigor, Either allow all speech, or crack down on both sides. When “White, Jewish, and Proud” asks how Jews are a “protected group”, these double-standards are a good example. Don’t get me wrong, I agree with you that there are sound strategic reasons to leave AR as a preserve of WN free of an emphasis on the JQ, and I agree with Taylor’s recent statement on the topic. But, something needs to be done about the other side, as well. 5
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 18, 2006, 04:52 PM | # Yes, it took me a few CPU cycles to figure out what it was that was bugging me, lol. You think you have a handle on chutzpah, then someone like WJ&P comes along… 6
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 18, 2006, 05:06 PM | # I had a funny email exchange with Jobling some months ago. We traded emails over a small matter, and subsequently he solicited my help in moderating AR, with words to the effect that I seemed a sensible fellow (from the context I assumed he based that assessment on my AR comments). I responded that I might be interested, but wanted to know AR’s moderation policies as I frequently found my posts on jews to be censored. He responded with a one-liner that if that’s the case I wouldn’t make a good AR moderator. The total change in tone was hilarious, I could practically see his face go stony. :D The exchange made me curious about AR’s site software; I speculated that moderators couldn’t see the names, only the posts themselves, while moderating the queue. Otherwise he would’ve known damn well that I wouldn’t make a good AR moderator according to his criteria. 7
Posted by Guessedworker on August 18, 2006, 06:19 PM | # Svi, You should know by now that the MR policy is: allow all comment unless it is illegal, uncivil or damaging to the blog. Even then, in the case of 2 and 3 we stretch the point as far in the direction of free speech as we can. 8
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 18, 2006, 07:40 PM | # I assumed it wouldn’t be a problem, but I prefer to be a welcome guest. 9
Posted by Europreservationist on August 18, 2006, 10:46 PM | # Svyatoslav, Your post should have been allowed on Amren, and I agree with those who say that Amren should either ban discussion of the Jewish question or else let both sides be heard. In regards to David Duke, he has written that the Holocaust is a lie in his book “Jewish Supremacism,” and likely in other places. He has stated that the gas chambers in Auschwitz and other death camps were designed to kill lice and save the lives of Jews. I’m sorry but I find this difficult to believe. The Third Reich made no secret of either its hatred for Jews or its search for a “final solution” to the Jewish question. Why would the Nazis, after spending the thirties running around screaming “The Jews are our misfortune!” build gas chambers to save Jewish lives? I’m not a Semite, so I don’t care if your or Mr. Duke or anyone else is an anti-Semite. But I don’t think we should be making up stories about how the Nazis were trying to help the Jews, and it all got bungled somehow. 10
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on August 18, 2006, 11:51 PM | # Syy-I throughlyappreciate your thoughtful,analytic,and well annotated post.Yes-AMREN does have some good materiel,but “comments"are apparently moderated by yhe SPLC and ACLU.I haved been banned,without notice,because of my penchant for calling a “spade"a “spade”.They apparently block E-mail addresses,not IP’s,as mine is dynamic [i.e.changes from time to time].MR and Modern Tribalist are the only true OPEN forums [with posters of more intellect than three rocks and a frying pan]I know of,tho MT doesn’t get the traffic it should-Thanks GW-you are a man amongst men! And thanks to you SVY;I believe you are part of the"crital mass"of MR Cheers& Semper Fi ! 11
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on August 18, 2006, 11:59 PM | # To all=IT’s not my spelling,but my one fingured,eyes on the keyboard typing.I got to start previewing my posts-LOL 12
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 19, 2006, 01:41 PM | #
I don’t see what’s objectionable about it, except that people who can’t take criticism of jews might find it offensive. It’s surely a civil post. The only rule I can divine from my experience at Amren is that the longer the post on this subject, the more likely it is to be censored. The fact remains that I am not an anti-Semite, strictly speaking, because jewishness isn’t enough to put anyone on my bad side. Certainly most philo-Semites would call me an anti-Semite, simply because I say things that make them uncomfortable, but that’s not a difficult task. Yes, I believe revisionism of THE HOLOCAUST is a high-risk strategy. Yes, I believe most of us are well-served by keeping our lips zipped on the subject. On the other hand, revisionism is not just a high-risk strategy, but one with a huge payoff. Intuition tells me it’s just the sort of thing jews would be likely to attempt if the roles were reversed. I’ve looked into the matter only occasionally but a few simple facts have led me to believe there’s a huge rat somewhere, stinking up the place. I think you might be served by a perusal of the logistics of the matter. That said, I’m not a historian and I think those of us who aren’t willing to become revisionist historians should keep our yaps shut on the matter and let the pros work. Nick: yes, I’ve no doubt your conversational style isn’t welcome at Amren (and yes I’d like to see more comments at MT, if only to help ensure that its author keeps at it). 13
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 19, 2006, 01:59 PM | # Nick: just tried to post this URL with an alternate handle and email, no go. 14
Posted by WJG on August 20, 2006, 12:24 AM | # Svi, The last time I tried posting at AmRen was something like 6 months ago. That post was censored. It had taken 15 minutes or so to think out and compose. It was well thought-out but it did present some negative thoughts about the Master Race. After inquiring of Commissar Jobling he said (after a one or two day delay) the reason for the block was that I included the word “crap” in it. True I said something like “we are being fed a load of crap”. He said all I had to do was remove the offending word and it would go thru. I told him I was finished posting there. AmRen is characterized by ‘atta boy posts, and, as others have said, philo-semitic drivel. AmRen is fast becoming the John Birch Society of our time; a forum for well-meaning but naive fledgling white activists who will be warned never to look into the causes of our demise. It is institutionalized John Jay Rayism; a schizophrenic potpourri of symptoms where no rational cure can ever be sought. I only ever tried making about 10 posts there and a good 5 were blocked. ALL of these challenged the Chosenites and that is verboten at AmRen. Blacks and Mestizos are fair game but not that which loosed them in our midst. 15
Posted by Al Ross on August 20, 2006, 02:32 AM | # I used to post quite frequently at Amren until I made mention of the prominent-nosed protected species and received a ‘red card’. Now I simply post under a pseudonym and avoid references to the JQ. It is rather like a discussion form for malaria victims who may post on condition that they dont mention mosquitoes. 16
Posted by Omer K on August 20, 2006, 03:41 AM | # On the topic of Jews, Im thoroughly confused on the topic of the holocaust, my current (and probably permanent) take on the matter is that it occured, but the numbers were vastly exaggerated. 17
Posted by Omer K on August 20, 2006, 03:46 AM | # And on the topic of Amren, Funny thing is I once posted drawing similarities between arabs and blacks in violent behaviour as I grew up in the Middle East…and that got censored. Strange. 18
Posted by Guessedworker on August 20, 2006, 06:07 AM | # As greater numbers of our people begin to look around for information on their newly-perceived “situation” it is inevitable that picket sites such as Amren and, probably, MR too will be colonised by early-learners. All of us are ahead of the wave. I don’t think it does any harm to let the Jewish angle sink in slowly with the new guys. When we began we were certainly not seeking to Duke the Jew every five minutes. My personal policy was to leave the subject alone. But I would not go so far as to ban anyone for raising it responsibly, as Svi will remember. That turned out not to be a stable position. The flow of world events couldn’t be made to conveniently exclude trespasses by Jewry without damaging our intellectual integrity, in the same way that Amren is damaged. Friendly interlocutors such as wintermute and ben tillman knocked the walls down, it’s true. But they were paper-thin all along. 19
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 20, 2006, 01:33 PM | # GW, there’s a temptation to be depressed (for lack of a better word) at the seeming inevitability of winding up “jew-obsessed” by comparison with the mainstream. It just occurred to me though that MR has invented a new wheel, a group blog that intelligently discusses everything, even the JQ. 21
Posted by Andy on August 20, 2006, 07:10 PM | #
This is paranoia bordering on the level of the absurd. A much sounder position would be to let a person’s actions speak for themselves. If a Jew (or gentile) claims to be pro-white but is active in an anti-white movement, consider them a foe. On the other hand, consider a Jew like Michael Levin. No amount of subversive activity that you could suspect him of could undermine the monumental achievement that is Why Race Matters. The same goes for Richard Herrnstein and Larry Auster. They have both made pro-white intellectual contributions that have been matched by only a handful of whites. I apologize for picking on one small part of a long post, but I found this to illustrative of a really annoying habit that many people fall into when arguing the JQ: the habit of seeing absurd Jewish conspiracies behind every bush. I don’t really have any qualms with the rest of your post. 22
Posted by WJG on August 21, 2006, 02:36 AM | # Andy, To not see how Jewry has pathologized whiteness throughout the 20th century (especially) is absurd. For every Auster you cite there are a hundreds of Ignatievs and Sontags. Even for all the good Auster has done he wants to purge AmRen of anyone who deals with Jewry the same way he deals with Islam. If we are to look out for our group our enemies must be dealt with as groups not as individuals. To do otherwise is to fight blindfolded as we Whites are wont to do. We no longer have the luxury of applying our rules of fairness to others who scoff at them. 23
Posted by On Holliday on August 21, 2006, 07:09 AM | # The comments section on the Amren site is absolutely worthless. 99% of the comments are as intellectually vapid as the posts of a certain blogger here at MR. Adding the comments section was the worst thing that Amren could have done, and, if I remember correctly, I warned Taylor against it when it first started. 24
Posted by On Holliday on August 21, 2006, 08:14 AM | # The following comment was blocked by AR and could not be submitted: If you actually read MacDonald’s books, you’ll see that the issue of Jewish intermarriage is addressed at the end of “Separation and Its Discontents”, in which MacDonald argues, citing sources, that the intermarriage rate is overblown. This view is supported by the following: http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/12872/edition_id/248/format/html/displaystory.html The following Jewish-racialist-style article – which sticks to the outmoded 52% data – shows that among the more observant Jews, intermarriage is markedly lower: Combined with differential birthrates, America’s Jews will become more Orthodox and, likely, more ethnocentric in coming decades. Even if the outmarriage rate is 50% that is still indicative of a resistance to assimilation. I combined Dr. Alba’s intermarriage data for white gentile ethnic groups with census data for ethnic group percentages. Plotting rates of intermarriage (to someone of completely different ethnicity) of white gentile groups vs. percent of US population yields a trendline formula of: If the Irish are 10.8% of the US population, they would be expected to have an outmarriage rate of 61.9%. The measured rate, by Alba = 64.9%. That’s a good match and probably within statistical error of the predicted. Jews? If Jews are 3% of the population, their predicted outmarriage rate would be 80.7% - a figure which can be compared to what is above, and which is obviously representative of a real, and wide, difference between predicted and actual. Despite the recent rise in Jewish intermarriage – and the outcry this has caused – the fact remains that Jews, compared to other groups considered white are resisting intermarriage and assimilation. Further, the combination of the increase in the more Orthodox, as well as “interventions” to inhibit the growth of intermarriage among the others, means that this resistance to assimilation is likely to harden in coming decades. Note as well that of America’s “white” groups, only Jews have prominent mainstream individuals and organizations denouncing intermarriage and doing so with impunity, the example of Elliot Abrams being instructive in this regard. The real “irreconcilable differences” are that between the interests of white gentiles and Jews, the latter being a non-European ethnic group that prides itself on its unique history, ancestry, and culture and which is still resisting the assimilation practiced by white gentile American ethnic groups. Thus, it stands to reason that the Jews are, and perceive themselves to be, a minority group distinct from white gentiles; hence, the Jewish preoccupation with leftist politics, diversity, increased immigration, and other methodologies to decrease the numbers, power, and cohesion of America’s European-American majority. 25
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on August 21, 2006, 10:02 AM | # http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MikeSAdams/2006/08/21/sponge_cake_phil An academic with a perspective-beat up on him a while.P.S.,he’s also an avid hunter and GUN OWNER/ADVOCATE! See,I don’t think ALL academics are pin-heads.Just those in pink panties! Ego is a great thing-it allows us to accomplish things we thought impossible,learn new skills,intersperse with people we like/dislike,and act as assholes[yep-me too].But when it becomes the governing trait of self-esteem,call Dr. Phil. 26
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on August 21, 2006, 12:03 PM | # Anybody-This June Gordon has got me perplexed-her E-mail return is phoney,her “sniper"tactics are suspect,and for all intents and purposes appears to be a strawman for the SPLC or ACLU.Does anyone have ANY bio,or LEGITIMATE E-mail address-I’d like to individually rain on her parade 27
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on August 21, 2006, 12:24 PM | # Come-on Holliday;take a break-Stastics suck,and statisticians are generally liars.Or do you feel that everyone who comments on this blog should meet YOUR standards?Damn,it’s a good thing I’m basically bullet-proof,or my sensitive “feelers"would be damaged beyound repair,and I would have to retain a scum-bag lawyer to sue for “mental anguish"LOL& Cheers! 28
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on August 21, 2006, 12:57 PM | # You all-I’ve been pondering some recent comments,and come to some conclusions-If you want an all academic blog-list it on Banner;a strictly academic server;disallow anyone without a Piled Higher and Deeper from posting,and denigrate all that don’t meet your standards.Folks,there are more aspects to this world than a figurative sheepskin,and if reality has passed you bye,great!A good number of we"great unwashed"have paid the price for your”ächievements”,But still understand the word “humility"Apparently something the ego-bound is not acquainted with.Semper Fi! 29
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 21, 2006, 04:15 PM | #
My first objection obviously arises from my EGI; how about blacks, yellows, browns, reds, etc? Should we judge them individually too? If I wanted to be a liberal democrat I’d hardly be here at MR.
Michael Levin has contributed only as far as he could without conflicting with jewish interests. In other words, there’s no evidence that Levin has EC interests at heart. The same goes for Herrnstein. Auster, on the other hand, seems to have subversion as a goal.
That’s an odd thing to say, given the tiny size of pro-white intellectual endeavors in general and the jewish underrepresentation therein.
Jewish conspiracies are a strawman, the work of a stage magician (his misdirection). Consider instead precedent (it consistently favors my arguments) and the nature of the potential threat (i.e., it may only be practically detectable via group-membership criteria). It can be difficult to explain this stuff to someone who doesn’t pay careful attention to he JQ (not saying you don’t); after a while you get a feel for the people, and you become naturally very skeptical that they can ever help us more than harm us in our pursuit of our interests. I have certain theoretical criteria for “WN jews.” To oversimplify, they basically involve apostasy, jews renouncing their jewishness. I’ve never once encountered this. I might be satisfied with a bit of honesty on the JQ, but I’ve never encountered that either. On the other hand, I don’t mind at all the idea of jewish allies on the “right.” That’s hunkey-dory aokay by me. What I do mind is jewish participation in our orgs. Since when do jews need to join anyone else’s movements? If there is any significant collective jewish interest parallel to WNism looking for expression, trust me, history’s grand masters of political expression will do just fine on their own. 30
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 21, 2006, 04:21 PM | # Just look at the participation of jewish members at Amren (W,J,&P; crowbone; a Jew among you; etc.): do they display any significant degree of honesty on the JQ, or do they seek to redefine Amren as a pro-white and especially pro-jewish platform? I think we have enough of the latter, thanks. 31
Posted by Al Ross on August 21, 2006, 10:19 PM | # “I’d like to individually rain on her parade” Hank Williams Jr said it well: Nick, try .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) 32
Posted by ben tillman on August 21, 2006, 11:40 PM | # I have certain theoretical criteria for “WN jews.” To oversimplify, they basically involve apostasy, jews renouncing their jewishness. The primary reason for the success of the Jewish community iin Western nations is the community’s ability to act as a cohesive group cooperating toward the achievement of group goals. Competing as a cohesive group versus individuals, the Jewish community has a huge advantage. In fact, evolutionary biology tells us that the Jewish group is itself a biological unit whose components (i.e., Jewish humans) are inseparable from it. This is not to say, however, that all people who call themselves “Jews” or who have Jewish parents or ancestry are necessarily part of the group. [The word “Jew” originated long before the recent advances in the scientific understanding of the Jewish community as a biological phenomenon, and in the minds of English speakers the concept represented by the word “Jew” is not necessarily coextensive with the scientific understanding of the essence of the Jewish phenomenon.] One central agenda of White Nationalism is White autonomy (self-determination), which will involve opposition to the exercise of Jewish influence and control over the White population. Anyone who considers himself Jewish but does not have a problem with participating in such opposition is, by definition, not part of the cooperating Jewish group and is welcome to join the White community and work toward the achievement of its goals. 33
Posted by ben tillman on August 21, 2006, 11:50 PM | # Excuse me—I screwed up the last comment. The first paragraph is a quote from Svigor. The second paragraph is what I suggested for inclusion in Yggdrasil’s “white nationalism” FAQ almost four years ago. I believe he went with the following:
34
Posted by ben tillman on August 22, 2006, 12:06 AM | # Yes, Jews have caused more than their share of grief in the past century (Marx and Lenin come easily to mind) but they have also given more than their fair share of good things (3% of U.S. population but 24% of Nobel prizes). But there is no reason to think that any of the insights of the Nobel laureates would not have occurred to a European genius at a later date, while there is every reason to believe that poisonous movements like Marxism were dependent on Jewish involvement. 35
Posted by ben tillman on August 22, 2006, 12:11 AM | # I’m curious—how does Prof. MacDonald account for the very high Jewish/non-Jewish intermarriage rate? 36
Posted by Alex Zeka on August 22, 2006, 03:06 AM | # But there is no reason to think that any of the insights of the Nobel laureates would not have occurred to a European genius at a later date, while there is every reason to believe that poisonous movements like Marxism were dependent on Jewish involvement. Ben, could you justify this comment? At first glance it seems highly dubious that, whilst innovations in one field are duplicable, those in another are not. 37
Posted by ben tillman on August 22, 2006, 08:48 AM | # I didn’t claim that innovations in one field are duplicable, while those in another are not. The point is that in the absence of Jews there would be no “field” dedicated to destruction of our own community and thus no innovations in that “field”. 38
Posted by Andy on October 17, 2006, 10:58 PM | # Svigor— I somehow forgot that I had posted a comment on this thread. Sorry this is two months late.
Based on their actions, it seems to me that Jews other than Levin and Herrnstein consider an open acknowledgement of racial differences to conflict with Jewish interests. Isn’t multiculturalism supposed to be Good for the Jews?
I agree with this. My issue in defending Levin and Herrnstein was that I think that they are (or were in the case of Herrnstein) very useful allies. I didn’t mean to imply that I thought that they truly share all of the same goals as WNs. I believe that the promotion of racial reality is a tremendously important part of the defense of our EGI. Levin and Herrnstein have therefore done whites everywhere a service (though I think that only 25 people or so read “Why Race Matters”). But other than promoting “Why Race Matters” and the “Bell Curve”, I agree that white movements would do well to avoid Jewish participation. American Rennassiance’s policy of banning criticism of Jews but allowing philo-Semitism is ridiculous. I’m struggling to keep my eyes open as a I type this, so please forgive any egregious errors in grammar, spelling, or logic. Next entry: Interracial crime is worse than intraracial crime Previous entry: Forgive me while I laugh |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. Scewoweks commented in entry 'Top Wog embraces his Inner Englishman' on 05/22/12, 02:51 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 02:34 AM. (go) (view) Shamim commented in entry 'Dawkins sides with the race realists.' on 05/22/12, 02:24 AM. (go) (view) Facebook Application Developer commented in entry 'Demography challenge' on 05/22/12, 01:14 AM. (go) (view) rags6 commented in entry 'Black serial-killers' on 05/22/12, 12:23 AM. (go) (view) abibemume commented in entry 'ATTRITION THROUGH ENFORCEMENT: Government's Own Data Point to a Cost-Effective Strategy' on 05/22/12, 12:06 AM. (go) (view) HoroSmutS commented in entry 'A Line in the Sand' on 05/21/12, 09:58 PM. (go) (view) alexaesjiong commented in entry 'The Boer genocide' on 05/21/12, 09:53 PM. (go) (view) cocreneamenrYk commented in entry 'Time travel and a pol in the MultiCult' on 05/21/12, 09:51 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 09:12 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 08:46 PM. (go) (view) sweectexcagma commented in entry 'The facial proportions of beautiful people' on 05/21/12, 08:45 PM. (go) (view) Hinksmick commented in entry 'The facial proportions of beautiful people' on 05/21/12, 08:43 PM. (go) (view) pet sitting commented in entry 'The Cubans of Miami' on 05/21/12, 08:36 PM. (go) (view) aharlesjaj commented in entry 'ANTI-JEWISM: The Deadly Plague of White Nationalist Slave Morality' on 05/21/12, 08:26 PM. (go) (view) assundaGymn commented in entry 'It's politics. And it's KMD.' on 05/21/12, 08:25 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 08:02 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 07:43 PM. (go) (view) InsetaTemwews commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 07:08 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 06:54 PM. (go) (view) insaleenvency commented in entry 'ATTRITION THROUGH ENFORCEMENT: Government's Own Data Point to a Cost-Effective Strategy' on 05/21/12, 06:37 PM. (go) (view) Stephen commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 06:33 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 06:29 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 05:48 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 05:23 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 04:41 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 04:19 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 03:33 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 03:08 PM. (go) (view) directrxusa commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 02:25 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/21/12, 02:02 PM. (go) (view) BroowlorCliEf commented in entry 'Top Wog embraces his Inner Englishman' on 05/21/12, 12:44 PM. (go) (view) trobojertunny commented in entry 'It's politics. And it's KMD.' on 05/21/12, 12:31 PM. (go) (view) trobojertunny commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 12:29 PM. (go) (view) enesinhinsDaF commented in entry 'The Boer genocide' on 05/21/12, 11:05 AM. (go) (view) Recent Posts
General NewsScience NewsScience CategoriesAll CategoriesThe WritersEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages. LinksEndorsement not implied. Controlled Opposition Crime
General
Immigration
Islam Jews
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Whites in Africa |
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on August 18, 2006, 04:33 PM | #
I hope this sort of post doesn’t sit poorly with Guessedworker, because I intend to make a habit of this when my longer posts are censored by Amren. I also hope enough Amren readers are MR readers that it will become apparent just how strictly censored Amren really is.