|
|
Kai Murros: Moscow Speech 2010Moscow Speech 2010 by Kai Murros Dark clouds are hanging over Europe. The European people have been utterly betrayed by their elite. The magnitude of this conspiracy is unprecedented in human history, our ruling elite has turned out to be a mere corrupt lackey of global capitalism. These high priced paracites have stolen the Europeans their livelihood, their land, their future and their self-esteem. These prostitutes of the corporate world have also exposed Europe to an endles rampage of brutal beggars and forcefully denied Europeans any means of defending themselves. We have become powerless, we have lost control over our lives, we are denied our place in this world and our spirit is waning. What once was ours has been taken away and given to greedy aliens, what we once held sacred is ridiculed and mocked by arrogant intruders, what once was familiar to us has now been degenerated into something strange and threatening. For decades Europeans have been taught to hate and despise themselves, generations of Europeans have been brought up believing that the world would be a better place without them, they have been brought up to feel the crushing weight of the white man’s endless guilt. Europeans are constantly reminded that only through self-destruction can they pay for the sins of their civilization. The death of Europe is the fashion of the day, our demise a sign of progress, the disintegration of the traditional Europe a way forward, the predatory invasions against Europe only the latest trend, self-hatred, a sure sign of intellectual thinking. We are called to celebrate the physical, intellectual, cultural and spiritual collapse of our civilization. We have already been brainwashed to believe that the collapse is inevitable and that it is a law of nature that we should die out and the barbarian hordes at our gates should win. Under the disguise of liberalism, humanism and democracy Europeans have been persuaded to commite an ethnic suicide—a race that has achieved so much and has survived so much has been tricked to welcome its own down fall and to take active measures in order to become a stranger on its own soil. We are witnessing the most vicious and cruel conspiracy in history—the conspiracy to replace the European people, a systematic campaign to wipe out the Europeans from the existence first by socially degenerating the people and then through mental and physical retardation to paralazyze the ability of the people to resist, to poison the very biological stock where all the great deeds of the past once grew. So that in the end a herd of geldings would be easier to usher to their death rather than the once prowd race of warriors, craftsmen and explorers. But as our situation deteriorates the harsh realities of life will force the European people to open their eyes. Undoubtedly the media will try to deny the truth until the end and the academic elite will keep on spreading lies as it has always done, but once we hit rock bottom and face doom the truth will come out. They may preach leftism, liberalism, feminism, love and peace, reason and tolerance but as our desperation and anger grows the old instincts start working again—we are biological beings after all and we have the will to survive, the need to protect our offspring and the urge to defend our territory still intact—they cannot erase them from our genetic make up. You can fight nature only so far but once you have crossed the line, nature strikes back.This is a struggle between sterile theories and the primitive forces within us, between high flying politically correct ideals and our atavistic passions and in the end life will prevail over theory and abstractions. The war for the liberation of Europe means that in the future global politics will be dictated by our biological needs and instincts - the collective beast of the Europeans will take over and replace the soft, polite, liberal and civilized Super Ego. It is clear that when the beast takes over reason, tolerance and moderation step aside—the European revolution will be the revolution of the subconscious. The modern world has turned into a deadly trap to us and in order to break free we will turn to the dark side of our personality for strength. Many of you may ask—will it be too late, maybe the aliens are already too strong when Europeans finally awake. How can we beat them if we are already in the minority?!? —- We will win against the intruders because our resolve is stronger, we are defending our own soil and our roots go deeper—We will win because our existence is at stake, our strategic advantage in this struggle is that we have no place to go. Once we realize that we are cornered like rats, we will unleash a frenzied attack. The war for the liberation of Europe will be the climax of our history, because of this war, everything that has happened to us so far makes sense, our history is a gradual development so that in the end we would declare this war. This war is the logical conclusion of our past and a direct consequence of what has been done to us—the powers that be can only blame themselves. This war is also the beginning of our future, something we will create together as one powerful nation—after we have dealt with our enemies there are no limits to what we can achive and how far we can reach. We must, in the end, admit that we actually need this crisis. This crisis will bring out the best in us—it will harden us, make us stronger and wiser. Without this crisis there would not be unity among Europeans - only the sense of imminent death will bring Europeans together, only the looming peril will force the Europeans to find each other as brothers and sisters and only the burning hatred toward a common enemy will help Europeans to erase all national barriers dividing and weakening our race. The war for the liberation of Europe will finally weld us Europeans together. It had to be this way—economy, technology and some artificial political ideals were never enough to create a nation—the liberal fantasy was doomed right from the start. Instead, we need this intense pressure from the outside, we need this struggle over life and death, we need this explosion of shared emotions——fear, hatred, rage… ... love, loyalty, courage. In the end blood is united with blood and we will witness the birth of a nation. This common struggle—the tears of loss and the tears of joy—the memories of those, who return home and the memory of those who die in battle will create the myths that bind us Europeans together until the end of days. This war will erase our troubled past and gives us the future.—We absolutely and categorically need this war. We need one more war—a war of all wars—one magnificent, glorious, noble, mesmerizing, enticing, breath-taking war. We must never be ashamed to admit that the resurrection of Europe requires the greatest war this planet has ever seen. As long as the Europeans were on top of the food chain, runing their colonial empires accross the globe we didn’t have to worry about the survival of our race and civilization. Europeans were only concerned about fighting other Europeans and becoming more powerful at the expense of their racial kinfolk. But now we have lost the colonial empires and we are about to lose everything else as well. Under the pressure we will, however, adapt, learn and evolve and as a result we will become more cunning, cruel and ferocious. This crisis teaches us to win, this crisis forces us to win. Today the media claims that Europeans are sterile, aging and tired that Europeans are peace-loving that Europeans are shy, weak and always willing to step aside that Europeans are too tired to build anything anymore, too lazy produce anything anymore that Europeans have lost their lust for life.—- We will show them! Let the whole world know that Europeans refuse to die, let it be clear to everyone on this planet that Europeans will not apologize and will not retreat anymore. We will go further than ever before. We conquer the future for us and we will not share it with anyone.—What Europe needs, she takes! For us Europeans defeat is not an option—we have created the greatest civilization on earth, we have always crushed our enemies, we have explored this planet, reached the moon, split the atom and accumulated scientific knowledge far more than all the other races together. Even today, at the moment of our weakness, we are still admired and envied by the entire world. Our enemies, the vile alien masses herding in our streets, attacking, extorting, robbing our people, abusing our hospitality, laying claim on our soil have not yet even grasped what absolute and total violence in massive scale means. They seem to think that they can intimidate us into submission by using terrorism and petty gang violence, but they forget that once us Europeans turn violent we wipe out races, we destroy entire civilizations, we desolate continents and we start world wars. Europeans are masters of violence. The nature has endowed us with courage, patience, resilience and a systematic mind. We will use these gifts to the fullest in the coming years. We will declare a total and radical war of destruction on those who wish us harm and we will not stop untill we have destroyed them completely. Those who hope that Europe would fall will soon be greately dissappointed and those who conspire to harm Europe and Europeans will soon fear for their lives—there is no place on this earth where they can hide from us—we will hunt them down and we will make them pay. The liberals keep warning people about us and our plans, the liberals are like old babbling women who tell horror stories of what will happen if nationalists take over one day. And of course the liberals are right—once we are unleashed we will open the gates of hell and summon the FUROR EUROPEICUS. There is nothing more frightnening in this world than the bloodlust of nation that has suffered injustice. We accept the fact that there is struggle in nature and that all biological as well as cultural evolution is based on this constant struggle. We maintain that the highest form of social and cultural struggle is the struggle between entire civilizations. The age of competing nations is over as nations are now regrouping and gathering under the banners of civilizations. Civilizations are superorganisms, they compete over living space and resources and only the strongest will prevail. We maintain that the European civilization is superior to all other civilizations and that all her needs must be met first. In order to protect her interests globally we will call a global mobilization of the European people. For us there is only one law, the highest law—our survival—and what ever course of action we may choose in the future, its sole purpose is the implementation of this law. The coming war is not going to be a moral problem, the coming war will be a mere technical problem and once we have solved the technical problem we will be able to wage a war of absolute destruction in all corners of the earth as we see fit. We can take the iniative where ever, when ever and against whom ever we want and stay on the offensive until the enemy is exterminated. For us war is the logical culmination of evolution. For us politics is secondary to war, for us politics is just a prelude to war. All the great questions of our time can and will be solved through war. The world is facing cataclysmic changes as the tectonic plates of races and civilizations are colliding—overpopulation is making the world too small for us all. The endless minor conflicts that have burned accross the planet for decades will grow in to gigantic genocidal wars over living space and life sustaining resources—water, food, breathable air and energy. Societies will fall, chaos will reign and civilization will collapse leaving most parts of the planet into savagery. Europe will face these challenges of the future by systematically waging wars with radical enviromental, ecological and ethnic goals. We will check the avalanche of hostile over growing populations, we will decimate the predatory migrations against Europe—- all threats against Europe will be eradicated—- we will strike over-population right at its source! What starts in the streets of Europe with fists, knives and broken bottles will end in gigantic clashes in far away battlefields - our front line strecthes from the Strait of Gibraltar to Vladivostok and from Rio Grande to the shores of Australia.—- In these wars of tomorrow there will be no Finns or Russians, Swedes or Spaniards, Italians or Irish anymore because such consepts have simply seized to excist. The warriors of the future are simply Europeans united in common struggle, sharing the baptism of fire and the communion of power. In the crucible of these cataclysmic wars an entirely new race is born. Through pain and struggle the new European man will reclaim his throne, sacrificing himself at the altar of his race the new European man will be bestowed upon unforseen powers. We will wage the coming wars with religious devotion, Europe’s future armies will be the new Holy Order in a modern battle field, for them the destruction of Europes enemies is a sacred ritual. Our fanatism and uncompromising radicalism will be a rude awakening for those, who thought we would happily accept defeat. In order to secure Europe’s place in the world and to restore her power and prestige we must resort to total mobilization of Europe’s productive forces.—- Europe must stand on its own again, Europe must be self-sufficient—all ties of dependency to foreign production must be cut. Europe must be able to produce everything her people, economy and armed forces need. Our grand strategy must be made absolutely clear to absolutely everybody, right from the start: 1) We will re-industrialize Europe. 2) We will re-militarize Europe. 3) And, we will re-vitalize Europe. This gigantic undertaking will restore the pride and self-esteem of the European working class and a future for those millions of Europeans whose lives have been shattered by the blind forces of global capitalism. This unprecedented collective effort in European history will guarantee that no European will ever again be without a proper job with a proper wage, that no European will ever again go hungry and that there will always be a decent home for each and every European. —Once again everyone is important as all hands are needed in the reconstruction of Europe.—We will snatch Europe from the jaws of death and make her the queen of continents again! All this and much more we will do so that Europe would live forever.—In the years to come our movement will evoke ancient forces, restore long lost traditions, find what once was lost and mend what once was broken. Stories will be told and songs will be sung telling the deeds of the heroes, who fought today for the survival of Europe. And finally when all is done and the heroes have receded in to the twilight of gods, we can safely say that the pre-history of our race is over and the future just about to begin. Posted by Constantin von Hoffmeister on Sunday, February 19, 2012 at 02:52 AM in Comments:2
Posted by Lee John Barnes on February 19, 2012, 06:51 AM | # There can be no victory until the European people once again develop a racial consciouness. Until then we remain as victims. This is why the social struggle must precede the political struggle in order to create a racial consciouness. The racial consciousness that will save us will not be based on Aristolean Philia, it will be the racial consciousness of the Berserker, the Viking, Anglo-Saxon and Teutonic fury. When the system falls, as it will eventually, the victory will go to the strongest, fiercest and toughest - not those lumbered with an archaic ethical consciousness that makes us weak.
3
Posted by Leon Haller on February 19, 2012, 08:09 AM | # LJB,
This prediction may turnout correct, but tell again how you are not a fascist? I don’t mean that as an insult. I think fascism is a perfectly respectable position, albeit one I do not share (except in ‘last ditch’ circumstances; we’re getting there to be sure, but there is still quite a way to go). But you did disclaim fascist sympathies. Were you being specific to Italy? Are you a Nazi? And is this sentiment part of your Cultural Nationalism? 4
Posted by Leon Haller on February 19, 2012, 08:29 AM | # Very stirring speech!! It’s about time European nationalists started talkin’ War. I’ve been saying to all and sundry for nearly three decades that Europe must be re-martialized in preparation for its liberation, which unfortunately will be much messier than Mr. Murros would have us believe: not only will patriots have to expel or destroy the alien colonizers, they will have to fight huge armies of antifa, too. Will Europeans awaken and rise up in time? I’m sceptical but supportive. To my European Kinsmen: Onward to the Racial Republic!! 5
Posted by Lee John Barnes on February 19, 2012, 08:44 AM | # This prediction may turnout correct, but tell again how you are not a fascist? I don’t mean that as an insult. I think fascism is a perfectly respectable position, albeit one I do not share (except in ‘last ditch’ circumstances; we’re getting there to be sure, but there is still quite a way to go). But you did disclaim fascist sympathies. Were you being specific to Italy? Are you a Nazi? And is this sentiment part of your Cultural Nationalism? —
The state must serve only the interests of the people and the National Community, never use the people to serve the interests of the state, the party, the leader, capitalism or the corporations. Fascism and Hitlerism saw the people as slaves to their interests, not themselves as servants of the people and the National Community.
I would define myself as an Eco-Nationalist who sees the link between land, culture and people as the basis of an organic national community. National Socialism is a political methodology and hence could be used , like all potential political models, merely to uphold and promote the interests of the linkage between land, people and culture. The state is a mechanism that exists to serve those interests only until it is no longer needed to do so when the present system no longer needs to be confronted, its powers annulled, its problems solved and its criminals dealt with - then the state must wither away so that the people have the power in their own land. 6
Posted by Republicrat on February 19, 2012, 08:47 AM | #
What about those of mixed racial origins? Will they be part of your idealized racial republic? 7
Posted by Futura Dellanazione on February 19, 2012, 10:03 AM | # What beautiful prose and how TRUE his thoughts. Kai Murros is a gift from an angry White God to an angry White race. I hope he is heard before every White person on Earth is made too weak, stupid and cowardly to hear him. Louder, Kai. LOUDER! 8
Posted by The Man From SMUSH on February 19, 2012, 11:59 AM | # A superb read! This is going into the archive I’ve got for White interests. 9
Posted by Alaric on February 19, 2012, 01:24 PM | # This site has turned into a haven for tired old bolsheviks and wannabe petty bourgeois upstarts. What a shame. 10
Posted by Lee John Barnes on February 19, 2012, 02:06 PM | # Anyone who trusts the state, which is a tool for politicians to abuse power for their own interests, over the right of the people to live in the absence of the state - understands nothing about the nature of power or has learnt from how the state and politicians have abused power. The worship of the state exists in opposition to the interests of the people. Any clique of politicians that control the state will abuse its power for their ends, and their own ends only. Power must be devolved to the people, not kept in the hands of corrupt political elites. 11
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 19, 2012, 02:58 PM | # This great evil. Private Witt from “The Thin Red Line” Only a moral incompetent or psychopath pro-actively wills war, salivates at the prospect and its alleged ‘vivifying’ qualities. If the satanic is real we probably find it in the moral depravity of total war. That violence will always be a part of the human condition and a permanent possibility in human affairs cannot be doubted – only the dead have seen the end of war - but it is always a last resort when all else has failed and the matter at hand is one of existence or not. I am not a pacifist – a world without anything worth dying for is also a world with nothing to live for – but I am not a war-monger. My life is not founded upon or consumed with hate. It is only out of love and gratitude for what we have collectively inherited and enjoy that I wish to preserve our European homelands and our way of being. Perhaps one needs to be a parent to understand how sacred life actually is. Why it is not some cheap throwaway toy to be consumed in fantasies of ‘rebirth’ on the way to the Elysian Fields. 12
Posted by Lee John Barnes on February 19, 2012, 03:16 PM | # Spare us the sermon and homilies Graham, you may not have noticed by all life exists via the Darwinian struggle. War is life in action. Its not a question of glorifying war - it is a question of understanding that war is the essential reality of existence and that we must always be prepared for war. Facing that reality allows us the opportunity to seek to limit war only to when its totally neccasery. That doesnt mean wars for wealth, empires or power. It means fighting for what is rightly ours - our nations, lands, heritage, rights, liberty and culture. The day we as a race fail to fight for our existence is they day our race dies. We are halfway there already what with the embrace of the pseudo-ethics of Pseudo-Christianianity. Hence why we as a race have become dispossessed and alienated even within our own lands. The wise man is prepared for war. 13
Posted by alex zeka on February 19, 2012, 04:14 PM | # Reminder: Von Hoff (deleted) thinks Soviet Jews became honorary Whites by killing Ukrainians. [Alex, please be aware of the limits of the sayable. You are better than that - Editor] 14
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 19, 2012, 04:51 PM | # There is all the difference in the world between a surgeon that wounds to heal (a regretful but necessary evil) and a deluded madman wildly welding a cleaver in all directions, with a not a care for himself or anyone else. If that distinction that makes be a ‘pinko faggot’ or whatever so be it 15
Posted by jamesUK on February 19, 2012, 05:09 PM | # Why did you decide to post the exact same speech you posted not that long ago under a different title Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010? http://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/aquilon_speaks_moscow_2010 What about the Iranian bombings against Israeli diplomats? Andrew Frazer talking to Tom Sunic on The Sunic Journal why white nationalism is a fallacy and will always resort to its ethnic origin. http://reasonradionetwork.com/20120214/the-sunic-journal-interview-with-andrew-fraser-part-2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBnq2NyJXcg http://www.smh.com.au/news/tennis/serbs-croats-clash-at-open/2007/01/15/1168709659893.html 16
Posted by Leon Haller on February 19, 2012, 08:53 PM | #
All well and good, but as I have asked previously at MR, how exactly will Europe be returned ‘to itself’ except through war? What is the goal of European nationalists, racial or ethnonational? Presumably, its sine qua non is the repatriation of non-Europeans to their own homelands. Given the huge numbers of antifa traitors lurking in every corner of Europe, the tens of millions of aggressive alien colonists who have already breached Europe’s demographic defenses, and not at all least, the hundreds of millions of nearby peoples standing more than ready and willing to come to their co-ethnoreligionists’ aid in the event of any nativist uprising (cf: foreign jihadist involvement in the ethnic cleansing of the heroic Serbs from Bosnia), it is simply, strategically, very unlikely that European nativists will ever be able to expel their conquerors except in the aftermath of a successful military campaign. Given, then, the necessity of another European war (and Euro-American? no, the situation is all but lost here; racial secession, not reconquest, is the only realistic option to preserve Traditional America), it seems necessary that the drums start to be beat, that the people start getting used to the idea of conflict again, and thus speeches like this serve a vital strategic purpose. Any European patriot who abjures war or otherwise finds it problematic or distasteful must demonstrate how liberation can be achieved other than by violence. A national plebiscite for deportation? And if there are mass riots, as in the UK last summer ... (how quickly we forget the tinderbox we all live on!)? (Now, if you were a Christian, Graham, you could think of this, at least viz the Muslims, who do seem to be the chief immigration threat facing Europe, as a counter-jihad, or, better, Crusade, to liberate Christendom from the yoke of the Islamo/Decadent-Materialist-Relativist-l’antiraciste Axis. Alas, this religious justification is foreclosed to you.) 17
Posted by Leon Haller on February 19, 2012, 09:10 PM | # LJB@12 Excellent comment! My only quibble is that you are quite wrong to suppose that Christianity is a religion of pacifism. It has been no such thing, either in traditional theology, or, of course, historical practice. It is liberalism, not Christianity, that is the ideology of Western suicide. Unfortunately, Christianity today has been massively infected by liberalism. The solution is to intellectually ‘disinfect’ the historic faith, and use it as a bulwark of European renaissance, not disparage and reject this vital resource (and note: I would say this even if I were not Christian).
Yes, but this is a description of fascism in practice, not a criticism of its theory. The theory doesn;t posit that the people shall be “fodder”.
I could live with this, as a general matter. Of course, the devil would be in the gritty details of actual policies.
18
Posted by Leon Haller on February 19, 2012, 09:10 PM | #
No, they must leave, too. National patriots would have to decide the genetic ‘cut-off point: didn’t the Nazis use 1/32 ‘tainted’? My girlfriend is slightly over half-white, but if we were based in a revitalized Europe, she would have to leave. This is about collective white and Western survival (which takes into account the interests of the unborn, too), not individual justice or fairness (not that a moral case couldn’t be made that the expulsion of nonwhites from Europe is not unjust). 19
Posted by Circassian on February 19, 2012, 09:50 PM | #
To cover the stage with bullshit one has to shit around a lot, jamesUK. I hope I can be excused if I repost my response to the original post of the Great Moscow Speech of a little Finn philosopher with demonstrably gay manners. The liberals might have failed to castrate the Europeans, but this little de beast with his dark corners awakened sounds a bit like a eunuch.
P.S. A note for Judas Søren: Do not delete this comment, and do not alter it. If you do, Circassian will circumcise your schlomo and castrate your matzoh balls. IVAN, YOUR HUMOUR, IF THAT’S WHAT THIS IS, IS NOT WELL-TAKEN. YOU DON’T HAVE TO AGREE WITH SOREN OR ANYBODY ELSE, BUT YOU DO HAVE TO COMPORT YOURSELF TOWARDS OTHERS WITH MORE RESPECT. IF YOU DON’T, YOU WILL BE DELETED/BANNED ON A SERIAL BASIS - WHICH NEITHER OF US WANTS. PLEASE MODERATE YOUR COMMENTARY FROM HERE ON. - GW
20
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 19, 2012, 09:58 PM | # @Leon As a Catholic you don’t believe in war as a pro-actively good thing? It might be a ‘necessary evil’ to prevent a much larger evil but its still an evil. As for the vivifying effects of total war in Europe = rebirth to some utopian ‘new order’, no real conservative could believe in such childish simple-minded nonsense could they? I think you might be a little less insouciant about the joys of war if you had held your own child or children in your arms. It’s a little like those ‘cheerleaders’ for a certain nutter from Norway crowing about how his victims ‘got what was coming to them’. Really so no teenagers have ever had daft or naïve views about the world? I don’t think any normal parent could have reacted with glee at those events – so the ‘fans’ are probably mostly emotionally abnormal homosexuals and other type of weirdos. Yuk! As for the demographics European nations are very differently positioned; a ‘suitcase or the coffin’ policy as the go-to demand might be a little hard to sell to Mr. & Mrs Average at the moment. I thought you were all about the mainstreaming cumulative approach? Let’s try stopping the flow which is a big enough political task. Like I said about the surgeon versus the madman - I don’t really want the loons and nut-jobs (see the OP) in charge of anything let alone a military force. 21
Posted by Republicrat on February 19, 2012, 11:03 PM | #
What does she think of this? Also, what of America; what is your racial standard for an American WN ethnostate? 22
Posted by Dan Dare on February 19, 2012, 11:35 PM | # The only things I could subscribe too here are the need for European nations to re-industrialise and to develop a joint military capability that obviates the need for NATO. 23
Posted by Bill on February 20, 2012, 03:12 AM | # @ 16
24
Posted by Leon Haller on February 20, 2012, 04:19 AM | #
My girlfriend is in her early 20s, isn’t very interested in politics, and has little knowledge of my WN internet involvements. Re: an American WN ethnostate. I doubt this will ever come about, even though it must remain a distant goal (repatriation of nonwhites from the whole of America would never happen without the most unimaginable civil war, which no whites except a tiny minority of genuine extremists would want, given not just the death tallies, but also the economic and property damage). But if it did, then as mentioned above, how we deal with hybrids would have to be decided either by the WN community, or else, more likely, would simply be determined by the revolutionary leadership. I imagine they would be pretty strict, with possible exceptions for any dedicated mixed-race fighters who helped in the WN revolution (though it is equally imaginable that the WN leadership might demand a completely purified ethnostate, and then simply generously pension off any mixed race fighters, while nevertheless forcing them to relocate. America is in a different moral position from Europe. We don’t have that deep history. Whites founded and settled the country, and substantially built it. Thus we were under no obligation to have allowed any nonwhite immigrants. However, having done so, and given that America is still an ‘ontologically’ ‘new’ nation, I cannot see how whites have the moral right (from a Christian standpoint) to expel legally established nonwhites (illegal aliens, of course, must all be deported), at least from the whole of the country. I do think an ethical theory, within a Christian metaphysics, could be developed whereby whites have the right to have some portion of the US for a whites-only ethnostate. But I’m still not convinced that such could be peacefully established. In the US, WNs need to focus on ending the immigration invasion, and then reestablishing our cultural dominance, terminating all anti-white legislation, and confronting violent nonwhite behaviors. We need to develop white consciousness and pride. We also need to restore freedom of association, and then work on building white micro-communities, places of “intense whiteness” within the overarching multiracial country. This is all necessary prelude anyway to any eventual push for our own sovereign ethnostate. But in Europe, our ancient fatherlands, whites must be given back their ancestral lands.
25
Posted by Leon Haller on February 20, 2012, 04:49 AM | #
Well, of course, I’m not recommending Cameron deliver the Murros speech to Parliament! Nor, as a Catholic, can I justify wanton attacks (say, of the skinhead variety) on innocent (well-behaved) nonwhites. (Bash in the skulls of gangbangers, looters, terrorists, etc.) But I did not say that whites should initiate aggressive, terroristic or state-terrorist campaigns. I said, I will always say, I am studying Christian moral philosophy that I might one day say with intellectual authority, that the European peoples have a moral right to effectuate nonwhite repatriation. Is this not bedrock nationalism? Obviously, it should be done in as peaceful and reasonable a manner as possible. But I am supposing that some portion of nonwhites and their treasonous antifa allies won’t peacefully submit to the new white EGI order. What then? Wouldn’t this be rather like the case of a man discovering that his summer vacation home has been invaded and occupied by squatters? Is it wrong of him to demand their removal from the premises - and to plan for violent resistance, just in case? Let us recall furthermore that there is no sheriff or constable to which the European governments could turn to clear out the invaders. My point is a more long-term strategic one. If European ethnonationalists are serious about saving Europe, then I suggest the burden of proof in this arena is on non-martialists like you. You did not answer my general question. If you are personally peaceful and ideologically opposed to war, then what will you do when nonwhites threaten violent resistance to calls for repatriation? Simply throw up your hands and say, “Oh well, we tried”? Is a war of European liberation really that unthinkable? In truth, I don’t think it would be anywhere near as violent as WW1 or 2. Some city centres would burn down, possibly a few hundred thousand deaths would occur. So then the real question is, are nationalists (and more importantly, in the event, European majorities) willing to risk paying these comparatively small prices to ensure the continuance of their race and civilization? As a foreign kinsman, I certainly hope so. 26
Posted by Futura Dellanazione on February 20, 2012, 09:30 AM | # How dreadfully boring, all this nit-picking. Who cares if Kai Murros is queer? Who cares if his speeches are the impotent rantings of a frustrated nerd? Who cares what degree of “Aryan-ness” will constitute a citizen in the hypothetical reclaimed Europe of next year? Who cares if war is moral? Who cares What Jesus Would Do? At this point in history, White people everywhere have a big, nasty fox out in the chicken coop. Why stand around debating it or mocking the grammar of the field hand who is warning us about it? GET A GOD-DAMNED SHOTGUN AND GO OUT AND SHOOT IT, YOU LIMP-WRISTED EFFEMINATES! It’s a f***ing crisis and you’re sitting in the kitchen jerking off over whether you should use 00 or 000 buckshot! Jesus! I’m beginning to believe White people DESERVE to be wiped out! 27
Posted by Selous Scout on February 20, 2012, 09:59 AM | # Leon, In the US, WNs need to focus on ending the immigration invasion, and then reestablishing our cultural dominance, terminating all anti-white legislation, and confronting violent nonwhite behaviors. We need to develop white consciousness and pride. We also need to restore freedom of association, and then work on building white micro-communities, places of “intense whiteness” within the overarching multiracial country. This is all necessary prelude anyway to any eventual push for our own sovereign ethnostate. All of this, you must understand, would lead to civil war, which, in a preceding paragraph, you appear to discount. My position is that war is inevitable and that Europeans and European-Americans would do well to adopt a different mindset to deal with the coming realities. It’s time to think the unthinkable. The old “Judeo-Christian” moralities won’t work. The militaristic prose of Murros and others may appear silly to some, I concede, but that’s only because much of the current audience is stuck in an increasingly irrelevant mind-rut. 28
Posted by Circassian on February 20, 2012, 10:21 AM | #
I do. I don’t like war mongers. Especially when the war monger is pushing a war against innocent patsies knowing exactly what he is doing. I don’t like war mongers who never held arms in their hands and never will.
That’s precisely the problem with this little ‘philosopher’, dummy: He is NOT warning us about a big, nasty fox out in the chicken coop. He never mentions the fox, instead, he keeps talking about the liberals. He himself is a little, nasty fox mopping the trail with his big tail with red herring attached to it.
Why don’t you show us how to do it, brother. Show us the way, macho man.
Perhaps you are talking about yourself here, Futchi-Utchi. 29
Posted by Eupheme on February 20, 2012, 10:33 AM | # Kai Murros is wonderful! So what if his so called critics say he is an odd-ball ‘confirmed bachelor’ in late middle-age that wants young guys to dress in leather for street politics - with insight and leadership like his we are at the start of a new age of European supermen! 30
Posted by Eupheme on February 20, 2012, 10:39 AM | # Circassian your are truthfully a wise and honest man. What are you thinking of Murros? That he is a deceiver of the people? Please explain. 31
Posted by Circassian on February 20, 2012, 10:51 AM | # One can get pleasure from good food, or sex. There are people who can get pleasure from taking others for a ride, I suppose. Humans are intellectual beings, that’s why the process of thinking and figuring things out completely on your own can be more satisfying than even sex, which seemingly couldn’t be so for sex is the strongest drive given by Nature to men to propagate life. But humans are spiritual beings as well. It’s not far fetched to say that spiritual experience can be even more profound and fulfilling. I believe this guy knows what I am talking about: No, it wasn’t God’s will. It was my f***g order! I hope my presence here wasn’t a complete waste of time. 33
Posted by Circassian on February 20, 2012, 12:04 PM | #
I was raised in the atheistic Soviet Union. But I am slowly but surely recovering my wits from that haze. Don’t ask me where my religious beliefs lie in the spectrum of religious doctrines though. They might be way out in the ultraviolet or infrared range. I do not know. There are things unknowable, and I am comfortable with that. 34
Posted by dc on February 20, 2012, 01:04 PM | # Ivan, Your account of the supposed antisemitism of Stalin has a number of people wondering about you. All the same, I like your style, your humour and imagery. Sometimes you must discard the oblique and speak plainly. If I take your message correctly, you are reminding people that the first negros, indians, muslims, ... wogs altogether, arrived in England with the first licensed jews courtesy Cromwell. Do I take you right? 35
Posted by dc on February 20, 2012, 01:14 PM | # GW, I should like to protest against your admonishment to Ivan. Universal respect is desirable only within the camp. The man slings his obscenities laced with barbs and humour. We should not geld our own, if they are in fact our own. And if they are not our own they should be shut out on that account, and not for some supposed lack of respect. 36
Posted by Circassian on February 20, 2012, 02:09 PM | #
I always do. In fact, not speaking plainly is the only grudge I have against GW.
I wouldn’t say ‘arrived’, rather they have been brought to England on purpose. And that makes the first edge of two-edged sward that is to be used in bringing about the new world order. The second edge is clashing the indigenous European population with the ‘wogs’ (If I were you, I would abstain from using that term for that makes you an unwitting, useful idiot in the hands of those working hard to bring about that clash). That’s what Kai Murros is all about. He is not a righteous man he presents himself to be. He knows what his role is and he knows what he is doing.
Kai Murros does not care about “liberals” and the “left” - they are nothing. He wants you to attack the ‘wogs’ and never mention the jews again.
Not quite. But I don’t believe you are a malicious man.
Thank you for that.
Universal respect is desirable for everyone who deserves it, including your enemy in the battle field.
Only at those who richly deserve them, and never at the good people.
You should not geld your own even if they are in the wrong. Kai Murros is not your own. Kai Murros is a provocateur. I hope I haven’t confused you more than you already are. 37
Posted by Guessedworker on February 20, 2012, 03:09 PM | # dc, Ivan understands. He is rooted in a deep culture. He knows about the obligations of community. He is also smart, and notwithstanding the probability that, if we ever met, we’d get on pretty well, he knows that I am serious, and my obligations of community will cause me to move against him if he does that again. It has to stop. 38
Posted by Guessedworker on February 20, 2012, 03:29 PM | # dc, Good Queen Bess twice ordered the “neggars” to be removed from her kingdom. The MultiCult was not commenced upon at any point before 22nd June 1948. Who did it? Well, there was an advertisement placed in a newspaper in Kingston, Jamaica by the owners of the Empire Windrush. And who were they? The Board of Trade ... the British government. The question of whether the decision to place the ad and fire the starting gun for the race-replacement of the English people was political (ie, Atlee’s government), Judaic, or simply a monumental cock-up is still not known. But the President of the Board of Trade at the time was one Harold Wilson: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Government_1945–1951 One possible, half-respectable reason for it may have been that at the time Britain was facing-down the Soviet threat in divided Germany. Montgomery was arguing for a 500,000 strong standing army of the Rhine, and conscription was in full flow. That’s the cock-up explanation. I don’t think it is adequate, personally. 39
Posted by Guessedworker on February 20, 2012, 03:35 PM | # A current example of the same phenomenon: ... sold as a cock-up. “Mistakes were made” ... “standards not adhered to” ... “not me, gov, I’m just the Home Secretary”. 40
Posted by Circassian on February 20, 2012, 03:48 PM | # I was naïve enough to believe that I was doing something good and of universal value here. Evidently I was mistaken. This crowd does not need Ivan, this crowd needs Leon Haller. Mature men should take all evidence as they are without resorting to the comfort of illusions. Entertaining illusions is a kind of weakness, and showing weakness is not compatible with my culture. Good bye, gentlemen. 41
Posted by Jimmy Marr on February 20, 2012, 03:59 PM | # For those who have spare moment, please use it to comment on this YouTube about a solitary White man protesting public funding of Black History Month by taxpayer funded institutions. 42
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 20, 2012, 04:03 PM | # @Ivan Have fun if you really are leaving us all. Perhaps Mr. Murros is an unreliable narrator in the theatre of the absurd? 43
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 20, 2012, 04:08 PM | # @Jimmy Would it be any better if it was ‘Esoteric Black History Month’? Or even ‘Black Magic Month’? 44
Posted by dc on February 20, 2012, 04:43 PM | # GW, I think you need to enlarge your time frame. The question is not only that of the wog invasion. The more important issue is the manipulation of the white, and particularly the Anglo-Saxon, race. Why, for example, did we set out to murder the Boers? Why to enslave the Chinese? The influx of jews and perversion of our power is too much of a coincidence. Ivan, You will suit yourself. But posturing as too good for this world should be left to LH and GL. 45
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 20, 2012, 05:07 PM | # “manipulation of the white” Is that slang for doing cocaine? Tin-foil at the ready – dc your tone and unstated premise this that we Europeans are incapable of stupidity, folly and highly aggressive behaviours all on our own – it must always be those evil outsiders behind it! I find that a rather less than sensible starting point for any discussion. Be specific and constructive. Outline a concrete, non-Ickian, example for illustrative purposes. dc why are the Anglo’s the focus? Are they super-whites? Are the French non-white? 46
Posted by dc on February 20, 2012, 05:43 PM | # GL ignores the unstated. We murdered Boers to give the gold and diamonds of S Africa to the jews. We enslaved the Chinese to the profit of the jew.. 47
Posted by Guessedworker on February 20, 2012, 05:43 PM | # dc,
“We” did not set out to murder the Boers or to enslave the Chinese. We are the people of the land. We are not the 19th century mercantilist elites. We murdered nobody, we enslaved nobody.
If you re-read what I wrote about the future prime minister of England, Harold Wilson, you might care to edit out that sentence. I do not deny Jewish interests or “organisational talent”. I do deny most strongly that there is a Single Jewish Cause for our crisis. In front of it is the nature of liberalism as an ideational totality in which the European personality is formed, and, very probably, the interests of the kind of elites who are selected in a liberal political, economic and cultural environment. 48
Posted by Dan Dare on February 20, 2012, 05:49 PM | #
If the Cap’n were around he would be calling for a sound flogging to be administered for pedantry, but I can’t help observing that, as a troopship, the Empire Windrush would have been operating under the auspices of the Ministry of Transport, not the Board of Trade. Tempting though it might be, we can’t legitimately include the Windrush on the charge sheet detailing Harold Wilson’s many other treasonous acts. As for who placed the ad in the Jamaica Gleaner, that is also well known. It was the local agent of the Royal Mail Lines, although it still remains to be established how a private shipping company came to be flogging berths on one of His Majesty’s vessels. 49
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 20, 2012, 06:04 PM | # Well said GW. dc - not human you say, I’d say human yes - perhaps, on average, rather self-serving and nasty, but I don’t think speciation has occurred just yet. But wait I understand now - the truth will out - verily your Ickian sympathies are revealed. Influence and control are not the same thing dc. 50
Posted by Guessedworker on February 20, 2012, 06:28 PM | # Thank you, Dan, perspicacious as ever. My apologies to dc for a defective memory. I recall, though, that we had this discussion very briefly about three years ago, Dan, at which time you were doggedly sticking to the opinion that it was a cock-up. Something like ... on discovery the Establishment, horrified that their right to rule over all those darkies might be compromised, buried the evidence and became multiracialists overnight. I don’t recall you mentioning the flogging of births on His Majesty’s vessels, but perhaps I am wrong again. The event was only 6 months after the British Nationality Act 1948 came into force, with its definition of “a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies”. It was three years after the victory of the Labour Party in the 1945 general election - the same amount of time it took for New Labour to author the Portes Report in 2000. It is clear in the latter case (not least because of Portes’ redacted reference to “social objectives”) that there was conspiracy by the bucket-load. Someone somewhere must have understood in 1948 (or earlier - in 1947, say, when the Commonwealth conference agreed to each member defining its own terms for citizenship) that there was an “opportunity”. Whether that was simply a commercial opportunity for Royal Mail Lines (who were the directors?) or another kind of opportunity is a mete question because the same pair of possibilities - New Labour business friends that want open borders or Jewish interests that want the same - confront us in respect to the 2000 report and the decision the following year to open the borders (presented to the public totally dishonestly). As is well known, Jonathan Portes was responsible to Barbara Roche who was responsible to Jack Straw. The first non-Jew in the line of command was Tony Blair. Are we to believe that the Jews in this little Home Office dance were unaware of their own ethnic interests, and scrupulously correct in their departmental focus? No and no, I would say. So, who were the actors in 1948? 51
Posted by jamesUK on February 20, 2012, 07:00 PM | # @Circassian You would have been a good commentator on another forum that has a Russian living Moscow and is run by a Russian in Canada to discuss what is going on in regards to the world, Russia/China and the upcoming Iran war and the Circassian issue in regards to the Sochi Olympics in 2014. I still had a few questions to ask you as well. 52
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 20, 2012, 07:17 PM | # “And this is why the binary analysis, present/absent, estrangement/belonging is fragile because it denies evolution. Natural selection is an incremental process. Again, what is incremental absence? How can you be incrementally absent?” So species don’t exist as discrete biological phenomena then? Nested hierarchies and clustering both occur in nature under natural selection. Biology is the science of both similarity and difference in the biotic realm. 53
Posted by Dan Dare on February 20, 2012, 07:33 PM | # GW - I think the Windrush episode has been seen as having greater importance that it really merits, chiefly on account of its symbolic value for promoters of the multicultural state. In and of itself, it seems to me be of much lesser significance in the grand scheme of things. It’s notable chiefly for being the first entrance of racial aliens en masse in the postwar period but we should be careful in coming to a conclusion that it was the consequence of any sort of orchestrated event. In fact, the available evidence - which I will be presenting in the first part of the series I am putting together the Politics of Postwar Immigration to Britain - indicates that the episode came as a complete surprise to the powers that be, and a deeply unwelcome one at that. I know that there is a constituency hereabouts that would prefer that it was shown to be the product of a conspiracy or malfeasance by shadowy operatives of a specific ethnic provenance, but I must warn that they are likely to be disappointed. As for the arrival of the Windrush, this occurred after a few days before the BNA48 came into effect, not six months after. But this is not a major point of contention, since the BNA48 was not a necessary element amongst the various factors which facilitated first a trickle, and then a deluge, of ‘coloured’ immigrants from the Commonwealth. I’ll add a lot more to that statement in Part I. Reflecting on the actual voyage, it seems likely to me that the Windrush was not on official business during its passage from Kingston to Tilbury. Although a troopship, and presumably owned by HMG (I need to verify this last point), it was actually operated on behalf of the MoT by New Zealand Shipping Co., itself a subsidiary of P&O. She was on her way back from Australia via Panama and other waypoints (including Kingston) and, although the details of the outward passage are unavailable (most likely troop shipments to the Canal Zone, Aden and Singapore), there is nothing to suggest that the return voyage had any military purpose. It thus seems likely that NZ Shipping would be touting for passengers at intermediate stops (the Windrush had over 2,000 berths) and this is where Royal Mail Lines in Kingston comes into the picture. I can’t be sure without tracking down the commercial contracts but it would not be surprising if the operating companies were able to lease the ships for civilian passenger traffic during periods when they were not required for trooping duty. It may even be the case that the ships themselves were private property and only leased by the government for specific voyages. I’d need to dig further but this seems to be a plausible background to the Windrush episode than the conspiracy theory. 54
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 20, 2012, 07:40 PM | # GW It’s a work in progress: Liberal theory treats the human individual subject as an abstract universal; it is premised on the paradoxical idea that all individuals should be treated the same with regard to a cluster of liberties, freedoms, rights etc., regardless of who or what they are by virtue of their status as radically differentiated and discrete phenomena, that is their own sovereign individuality. What grounds the reality of the social order is the universality of the ‘unencumbered’ and autonomous self, free to volitionally exert its will upon itself and the world. It offers a deflationary and reductionist ontology of the social and an inflationary account of the status and significance of the free-floating individual subject. There are better definitions but nailing it down to a paragraph is not the most easy of tasks! 55
Posted by Leon Haller on February 20, 2012, 08:02 PM | # All this Windrush stuff is interesting as background, but I’m interested in being taught about the recent treason. Were any of you (besides GW) adults in the 70s? I ask because I spent about 5 days in London as a child on vacation with my family in the mid-70s, then again with a crew team in the early 80s, and then for the last time on a vacation in 1994. Even as a kid, I was precociously aware of race differences (my private school athletic teams often competed against local public school teams, some of which had blacks bused into them; the blacks typically played rough and dirty and very well and I and my friends really hated them; there were no blacks or Hispanics in my class, but already there were several Chinese, and one Christian Arab). I cannot recall noticing many nonwhites in London even in the 70s, except for some waiters. There certainly weren’t scads of them walking around the streets. To older gents, is my memory faulty? I noticed a lot more in the 80s, though then I was still too young to have them uppermost in mind (which was mostly taken up with the regatta, sneaking beers, and oggling girls). I do recall the blacks with British accents, and finding them both amusing and ominous. I knew perfectly well even as a teenager that they did not belong there. By 1994 I was a fully formed racialist, and was specifically on the lookout for nonwhites on my European trip. I was horrified at how many there were in both London and Paris (a city I lived in as a very young child, and in which I cannot remember any nonwhites). I noticed virtually none in Scotland, however, which was refreshing. I’d like to know just how much worse the numbers have gotten over the past 18 years. I’d also like to know something of the history of demographic change in postwar UK. Specifically, was there ever a period of enormous increase in a very short period, and if so when was that, or has there been a steady, if continuously accelerating, stream, as with the US since the late 60s? I really have nothing to offer but my brief and possibly unreliable impressions, but going on them, it seems like the real invasion of Britain (in terms of sheer numbers) has occurred in the past quarter century, and that whatever the ideology or circumstances behind the first boatload, there must have been some radical change in policy suggestive of a dramatic change in the underlying governing ideology wrt immigration at some point in this more recent period (perhaps following from the global racial upheavals in the 60s). I’d like to hear about that. 56
Posted by Guessedworker on February 20, 2012, 08:10 PM | # Graham, do you want to repost that in the Review Call thread, and I will delete this entry? 57
Posted by Guessedworker on February 20, 2012, 08:21 PM | # Leon, If you wait a few weeks, perhaps months, the figures from the 2011 UK Census will answer most of your questions. Most of mine too. 58
Posted by Dan Dare on February 20, 2012, 08:23 PM | # Leon, as noted above I am putting together a submission of the Politics of Postwar Immigration into the UK, as a companion piece to the series on Anti-Discrimination Legislation which is featured in the sidebar at left. This will include full detail on the growth over time of the ‘coloured’ population of the UK, where it came from and, more controversially, why it came. I will be focusing in Part I on the crucial period between 1948 and 1962, when the foundations for the multiracial state were laid. 59
Posted by dc on February 20, 2012, 08:25 PM | # GW. Your remark at 47 is a cheap and dishonest attack playing on the word “we”. As if there were any polling of the population in regard to China or S Africa or all the rest. You know very well that English policy has been jew policy these last three hundred years. The honest Englishmen tried to opt out in BNA. I do not enjoy being played for a sucker. I admire and respect you in many ways, and having lived on both sides of the Atlantic, I can readily forgive much misperception. But here you are dead wrong. And you do yourself a wrong in allowing LH and GL to fester and flourish. In your unguarded moments you have admitted yourself a second-rate. The choice is yours. You can stand on your dignity, such as it is, or do the research and then help fight the rot. 61
Posted by Guessedworker on February 20, 2012, 08:36 PM | # Dan, To put to bed the conspiracy angle, you need to offer an explanation of how the completely novel and, in 1948, incendiary idea of sending Jamaicans to peacetime England as immigrants (not on business or for a holiday or to visit relatives, obviously) could have passed the smell test, so to speak, of all those involved. It seems unlikely to me that normal business considerations overcame the sort of reservations people had in those days. Some very unusual form of logic, let’s call it, was at work here. From experience in other fields, I don’t believe this sort of thing is possible without at least one very determined actor somewhere in the system to really push the thing through. The more complex the arrangements required, the more likely that there will be plural actors in the plot. It is perfectly possible that conspiracy in some form will turn out to be the simplest explanation for what took place. But I shall await your skilled judgement with great interest. 62
Posted by Leon Haller on February 20, 2012, 08:42 PM | #
Yes, we’re back to inquiring into the relations of parts to wholes. It is interesting to begin this inquiry by asking about the self, I must admit. I was long a libertarian, but the extension of radical individualist recognition to nonwhites always bothered me. It struck me as inappropriate. But must we throw out all that is seemingly of value from the liberal tradition merely because of its (I agree) impoverished view of selfhood? Believe me when I say, I am very interested in this question, though I think the metaphysical starting point for the discussion ought to be Christianity. Most of you would say evolutionary science. I’m further interested in whether there is or must be any necessary theoretical disjunction between the two. I happen not to think so, though that is more my gut opinion than the product of deep study in either theology (I’m getting there!), or philosophy of science/biology. Consider this option. It is sociologically and historically, as well as intellectually, plausible to suggest that whites are more individualistic (and innately so) than other races, and that this genetic hardwiring towards individualism is the root of both liberalism as well as its ugly step-child, universalism (which in turn produced such demon offspring as multiculturalism and its bullying brother, political correctness). Could it not be said that at least some aspects of individualist liberalism are biologically appropriate for whites living in white societies - but that their extension to and incorporation of nonwhites, who manifestly do not display the radical non-ethnocentrism of whites, was morally unnecessary and (ontologically) inappropriate? I’m trying to get at the proper relation between the very real accomplishments of Anglo-Saxon liberalism (elimination of feudal hierarchies rooted in ancient force and fraud, impartial rule of law, private property guarantees, personal freedom, free enterprise, free intellectual and scientific inquiry and dissemination via speech and press, limits on collective tyranny over unpopular minorities; many might add removal of State-backing for priestly or religious authority - I would dissent, however), and this suicidal incorporation of biologically alien and therefore culturally unassimilable elements into the regime of liberty, when their very presence and behaviors, including electorally, threatens the whole structure. Very early in life I came to the conclusion that the answer to these issues was to recognize that regimes of liberty were appropriate, provided they were ethnoculturally and morally bounded (also bounded by geopolitical and national security realities ‘on the ground’). Liberty can exist, but it can only endure, I hold, in highly ethnoculturally homogeneous polities. This is basically the traditional Anglo-American conservative position. I believe it to be correct, ontologically as well as morally. (That most conservatives in the latter half of the 20thC were too cowardly to hew to this aspect of their tradition is another matter.) The problem was in the aforementioned extension to and physical incorporation of nonwhites. I do not believe that this was necessitated by the liberal tradition itself. I believe that the liberal tradition was infected by alien notions, and here perhaps, we can start bringing in the intellectual and socioeconomic critique of Jewry.
63
Posted by Helvena on February 20, 2012, 08:48 PM | # European man has always been liberal and it served us well when we were a homogenous people(s). European woman had more social mobility then Roman woman for instance. The young and the old were cared for to a greater degree then other society. It was with the introduction of large groups of alien genes that trouble began. Our group interest/genes are naturally at conflict with theirs. The best argument we have is that if we want to remain a liberal society then we cannot tolerate groups of others. Groups that use their leverage to our disadvantage. Inevitably which ever group obtains the upper hand will use that power to control other groups and liberalism will be the first victim. We are seeing that today with hate speech laws, holocaust denial laws, the patriot act etc. 64
Posted by Leon Haller on February 20, 2012, 08:52 PM | # Well, I can wait, but just answer me this: am I wrong in my recollection of the 70s? Was London then basically white or not? Whatever the origins of the present multiracial state, wasn’t most of the raw number the product of the last quarter century, even just the Blairite junta’s government? dc, “English policy has been Jew policy these last three hundred years”? Are you quite sure of that? Can you offer some arguments? You strike me as very ill-tempered and unpleasant. Are you going to leave us and join your hero JRichards at his new website devoted to “debt-free fiat money”, the Single Jewish Cause theory, and Ickism? Please do. You’ll fit right in. 65
Posted by Dan Dare on February 20, 2012, 09:02 PM | #
This may help: - The 1991 census indicated a black & minority ethnic (BME) population of 3.1 million. - The 2011 census is likely to report a BME population in the order of 7.2 million. So your sense is correct, it took 40 years for the BME population to increase from effectively zero to 3 million, but only another 20 for it to increase by another 4 million. Most of the additional 4 million have turned up sinnce 1997, when the New labour regime assumed power. 66
Posted by Frank on February 20, 2012, 10:05 PM | # @Jimmy Marr: Got your back on that link with all the anti-White stuff, and have called in reinforcements. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FCEnRKt-7U WAY more important to hit the anti-Whites where they lurk than to piddle around debating the BS being debated here. 67
Posted by Williams on February 20, 2012, 11:22 PM | #
Bowery is the smartest guy that’s ever been on here and he said Jews did it. He doesn’t truck much BS and I think that’s what he’d call a phrase like “the nature of liberalism as an ideational totality”. 68
Posted by dc on February 20, 2012, 11:41 PM | # I am not in the least interested in the opinion of LH, but he raises a question of fact, namely, How far back does jew rule in fact go? 1684—foundation of the Bank of England cui bono? 70
Posted by Leon Haller on February 20, 2012, 11:44 PM | # Thanks, Dan. This is horrifying. BTW, as you are a stats guy on this, what is the total UK population (Google gives me a 2010 cite - 62,218,761)? And do you have the relative proportions for all the provinces/nations: Eng, Scot, Wales, and Ulster? For England it must be 1 in 6 (or 5!) is nonwhite. Roughly correct? I cannot believe YOU PEOPLE tolerated this. In America we have the whole Melting Pot, pro-immigration history, open spaces, etc. But the island of Britain??!! This is treason of the highest order! How could anyone (eg Graham Lister) not advocate war and retribution for these crimes?!
71
Posted by Captainchaos on February 21, 2012, 12:30 AM | # There is a strong possibility that Royal Mail Lines Ltd was essentially a British government owned asset:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Mail_Case Antony Beevor endorses in The Guardian a view of Clement Attlee’s pliability to pressure from the American Jewish community:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/jan/29/jerusalem-biography-simon-sebag-montefiore-review 72
Posted by Dan Dare on February 21, 2012, 02:04 AM | # The ‘backing’ refers to financial guarantees which were provided by the Government under the Trade Facilities Act 1924, in return for which the government had the right to appoint a director to the board of the re-constituted company. The largest shareholder in RML was the Furness Withy Line which eventually acquired full control in 1965. Sorry, you’ll need to find another tree to bark up. 73
Posted by Captainchaos on February 21, 2012, 03:01 AM | #
He who pays the piper calls the tune…
and gets to put in place the frontman of his choice.
It ain’t a shell game without shells.
A long time after 1948, and well approaching the neoliberal economic era in which “British” corporations were well shorn of any binding attachment to a national government which made them toe the line of national interest. When Jew-controlled America gives you Lend-Lease, it doesn’t come with complementary Vaseline. Now, take it with a stiff upper lip. LOL
74
Posted by Bill on February 21, 2012, 03:58 AM | # By the end of WW II Britain was exhausted, it took well into the early ‘50’s before wartime production translated into consumer production. Food rationing was still in force in 1952. Coal production was struggling, the railway system exhausted. It wasn’t until the mid ‘50’s that the transition to consumer production really got under way, motor cars, new power generating plants, the television industry, these were the never had it so good years of Conservative Prime Minister Harold Macmillan. By this time, (c1955) with consumer production going flat out, the public service industries could not compete wage-wise, and so a drain from the public services to the new factories became a general unskilled labour shortage problem. The railways system in particular, along with public transport in general, plus the mining (coal) industry was particularly hard hit. It was also around this time that Asian migration was encouraged into the mill towns of Northern England and the cheerful face of the West Indian bus driver could be seen smiling from billboards all over London. Industrial targets could not be met, so the invitations went out. Yes there was a labour shortage problem, but only in the short term (ten years?) until the swords to ploughshares transition had been made. Maybe this temporary hiatus could have been solved by curtailing military national service, which was ending anyway, and directing its manpower to national social needs. I don’t think the case for immigration to overcome the labour shortage could have been made during the 1940’s decade. Other reasons must be guessed at. NB. Bear in mind these observations of yesteryear are seen through the eyes of an old man who was but a callow youth at the time. 75
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 21, 2012, 05:15 AM | # @Leon I’m very much against the LJB et al., style idea/feeling of violence as pseudo-religious ‘rebirth’. Violence in human affairs should be a last resort wielded by morally responsible and sober men, hence my distinction between a medical man that wounds to heal and mad man in a frenzy. On the distribution of ethnic minorities there is this map (too few in Scotland I think to be mapped - it’s certainly not like parts of England). If you look the epicentre is London (the UN says it’s the most diverse city on the planet). And apparently England’s second city Birmingham is due to become majority Muslim in a relatively short time. One might even say that map is a very good reason for Scottish independence. 76
Posted by Guessedworker on February 21, 2012, 05:24 AM | # Dan, I checked my own data-base and I found the following comment I made at BDF some 12 months ago. It was based on figures in the public realm, obviously, and it shows a rather more alarming picture than the one you paint. Of course, the nigger in the woodpile, reality-wise, is the unknown number of illegals, as yesterday’s announcement by Teresa May illustrates. Here’s that comment.
79
Posted by Lee John Barnes on February 21, 2012, 08:04 AM | # GW, You didnt fill in the census form did you ! Until they tell us how many illegals are in the country, they can go fuck themselves if they think they are having any info from me. Re violence as rebirth. All acts of creation are also acts of destruction. War is the basis of peace. Read Clausewitz and Sun Tzu. Those that fear this reality are the problem - they are of no use to those who want the future back for our people. 80
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 21, 2012, 09:14 AM | # @LJB I am sorry I made personal remarks towards you. I’m very much impressed by your recent weight loss. All those techno-raves with the kids must be helping! I had no idea you did youtube videos? More like that I’d say old chap! 81
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 21, 2012, 09:53 AM | # I guess the ‘costume politics’ crowd are doing what? ‘Cause it’s getting heavy…is it overwhelming?...tell everyone waiting for Superman, to hold on the best they can, he hasn’t dropped them, forgotten them or anything… The politics of personality cults are for children, just like the Superman comics. 82
Posted by anon on February 21, 2012, 11:59 AM | # dc
http://www.silverfixing.com/timeline.pdf 1600 London silver market 1671 “Moses Mocatta set up in London, founding 1671 1697 “The Great Re-coinage in England during 1696/7 1707 “Mocatta opened silver account at Bank of I don’t know if people like Mocatta were Jewish by religion as a lot of them were conversos from Spain but that’s generally the first wave imo - Sephardic (ethnic) Jews coming up from Spain and gradually gaining their signature monopolies in silver, gold, diamonds and slaves and then later by extension moving into banking. However i don’t believe it was ever “jew-rule” until the 1980s - influence yes and a lot of it, including sometimes engineering wars for specific purposes related to their niche e.g. diamonds in South Africa, but it took the flood of Ashkenazi Jews out of continental Europe from the 1880s onwards to give them the numbers neccessary to actually colonize and destroy Britain (and America). So i think the British (and French) empires were partly extended Jewish phenotypes as Bowery says but also partly simply an extension of the european countries constantly fighting each other. ### dd
It was the first tip of the wedge - pretty important - and it sparked the “liberal” reaction to the reaction against it, which is one strand of what has since developed into PC and the multicult.
That’s not surprising at all. Like the New Labour open borders policy it could never happen *except* as a secret conspiracy between a few people.
It was plainly a conspiracy - as the previous quote shows - just not neccessarily a government (or whole government) one. Now it could have been an ethnic conspiracy or simply a cheap labor one and the conspirators could have been motivated by ethnic hostility or simply money - even if it was Jews they could have been just doing it for money - and it could have been that if the Windrush venture itself was for money it gave other people the idea for using immigration for divide and rule and / or stealth genocide. There are a lot of possibilities - but it was obviously some kind of conspiracy. nb It’s quite possible (and i think extremely likely) that only a small number of New Labour politicians knew in advance about the open borders policy set in motion by Straw, Portes and Roche. The Windrush story could be the same. nb Tony Blair’s company is called “Windrush Ventures.”
83
Posted by Lee John Barnes on February 21, 2012, 12:42 PM | # @LJB I am sorry I made personal remarks towards you. I’m very much impressed by your recent weight loss. All those techno-raves with the kids must be helping! I had no idea you did youtube videos? More like that I’d say old chap! —————————————————————————-
The day you get sent to prison and some enricher tries to rape you in the shower, then you best pray that one of those young people you mock are willing to save your pathetic, weak arse. Those you mock are more of a man than you ever have been or could be -thats why you mock them, as you are weak effette, pathetic intellectual with an inferioity complex hidden behind the persona of an arrogant prick. Here is the sort of video that depicts what happens to people like you Graham - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ch4l7tfdgQg These are the men who have saved the lives of thousands of young white prisoners from rape, AID’s and violence in prison ; http://www.moviesfoundonline.com/aryan_brotherhood.php
84
Posted by Leon Haller on February 21, 2012, 02:29 PM | #
I watched 10min of this movie. It makes me sick how of course the filthy media and government go after this white gang, while doing nothing to protect often relatively innocent whites inside prisons from horrible abuse at the hands of nonwhites, or goes after the nonwhite gangs which are far more of a threat to the outside world. Western societies, including the US, really need to restore vigorous death-penalty regimes. It is simply uncivilized and disrespectful of the value of life not to be exterminating violent criminals on a routine basis. Three issues on which no man of the authentic Right can ever compromise (note supporting capitalism is not one of them): ending nonwhite immigration, personal right to self-defense, including right to bear arms, and extermination of violent criminals. Re the AB, it should be noted, however, that they are not simply an inside prison white protective organization, or one that righteously kills nonwhite convicts who victimize whites. That would be wholly laudable. They also are involved in all manner of truly criminal activity, much of which is directed towards whites on the outside. Their protective activity inside is quite intelligent: it helps them increase the size of their ‘outer forces’ (which they then control via the hardcore inner circle), which is necessary as, tough as they are, they are still vastly outnumbered by blacks and Mexicans. 85
Posted by CFE on February 21, 2012, 05:34 PM | # Dan Dare:
Looking forward to the series Dan - your “Crusade Against Discrimination” series is excellent. GW’s use of the Windrush arrival when defining who is English on MSM threads is I think just right for those forums, regardless of what you do or do not unearth. 86
Posted by Leon Haller on February 21, 2012, 05:44 PM | # On the horrifying scandal of prison rape:
This is a type of issue that ought to be able to gain some traction with American Christians, while perhaps implicitly introducing some of them to white consciousness. 87
Posted by Dan Dare on February 21, 2012, 06:30 PM | # The Windrush took over a month to reach Tilbury and the nature of its cargo had caused considerable considerable media interest and great public interest well in advance of arrival. The Minister of Labour gave a statement in the Commons on June 8th on the matter. Under the circumstances the presence of a British Pathé newsreel crew which was present to record the event is not too surprising. This newsreel features in the BBC documentary Windrush, although much of the footage interspersed wbetween interviews of ‘Windrushers’ in this documentary was not shot at Tilbury in 1948, but rather at Waterloo Station in 1961, being taken from John Schlesinger’s film Terminus. The Windrush was by no means the first such vessel to arrive from the West Indies with such a cargo in the post-war period but for some reason it seems to taken an unshakeable grip on the collective imagination. Actually, more important in terms of overall numbers are the twenty thousand or so black servicemen and workers who remained in Britain after the war. 88
Posted by Guessedworker on February 21, 2012, 06:49 PM | # CFE kindly mentioned my definition of the English, which I employ on newspaper threads when the usual assertion as to our supposed indefinability arises. This is its current formulation:
Although it appears to be focussed on the Windrushers, it is quite plastic and facilitates the exclusion of those 20,000 black servicemen that Dan mentioned, and every other immigrant going back well into the Victorian era. I recommend such a formulation for anyone who undertakes thread warfare. Wales and Scotland are, I admit, problem areas - they seem to like their anti-English constitutional nationalism just too much. But Australians have the ending of the White Australia Policy as the reference point, Americans the 1965 Act. Not sure about Canada, but doubtless Friedrich or Desmond could come up with something.
89
Posted by dc on February 21, 2012, 10:16 PM | # ad anon, My very great thanks for your leads. It is a big jump from mathematics to history and economics, and I am grateful for all the help I can find. My apologies to any who noticed my intemperance and were irritated. J Richards’ cut and dried approach is much to be emulated. And a particular apology to GW. The one thing I remember from a brief Mensa membership, was the recurrent refrain that it is astounding that so many people devote their cleverness to being stupid. You have nailed your colours to the mast. May god, if such there be, forgive you. I cannot. I cannot be useful here, and so exit as an aging Falstaff, “made an ass”. 90
Posted by Bill on February 22, 2012, 06:43 AM | # The immediate post war years 1946 -1949 were years of shortages and embryonic change in a tired drab Britain. Socialism in the form of an Atlee government was enthusiastically ushered into power by returning ex servicemen, hundreds of thousands of men and women were returning home after six years of grinding war, never again! was the determined mood. (aside. No counselling in those days - straight back to work) These hundreds of thousands of war weary conscripts were going home to their loved ones and old jobs. Why would the government of the day go to the trouble of bringing into the country a few thousand migrants from the West Indies? Would they make good miners? Would they supplement the skills of the building industry? Why would the government of the day add to its problem of overseeing hundreds of thousands returning servicemen and women into a bomb scarred civilian Britain? Aside. (The only black people I saw during the 1940’s were American GIs in the war, I clearly recollect my first encounter (c 1942/3) of thinking how enormous they were compared to my parents.) The war was over and things were going to be different. One thing was clear, the old order had to go, and by the end of the ‘60’s the older order had been swept away. In had come the future. State governed national health care, government ownership (nationalisation) of transport, of energy and coal and the steel industry. A massive home building programme was launched. The way forward was clear, all of this and much more, was signposted to herald into being the Welfare State. Were the elites afraid of something? With communism writ large in half of Europe and beyond, the elites were taking no chances. By 1950 all these things had become a reality to ordinary people. In contrast, running parallel, were shortages of all kinds, the most critical being food and coal, there was never sufficient coal, even for the most basic needs. Coal was as vital to the 1940’s as oil and gas is to the present day. As one who experienced slipping and slithering on the shifting contours of a coal pit slag heap, clawing for the odd rare nugget can readily testify. In the 1940’s and ‘50’s Britain was still in the age of steam! Britain had lost a whole decade of progress and it wasn’t until the second half of the 1950’s progress began to be made and labour shortages became a concern. 91
Posted by Lurker on February 22, 2012, 07:01 AM | # Rationing and shortages continued well after the war as we continued on a war footing - due to the Cold War, an unprecedented peacetime military force. Germany, France etc received Marshall aid while the UK didnt yet we propped up NATO and the war on Communism in a way no other Western state outside the US did. 92
Posted by Graham_Lister on February 22, 2012, 07:37 AM | # I’m not a pacifist but nor do I believe the infantile mythology of ‘redemptive violence’ unlike the ‘keyboard warriors’. I do wonder if they have ever read or thought seriously about violence and its role in human affairs. No, because it’s fairly obvious that they have not thought about anything with seriousness and depth. No normal, intellectually competent and emotionally mature, man pro-actively craves violence and thinks of it as a good thing – yes it might be a necessary evil but never ‘a good’ in the strict sense of the term. It’s funny all the ‘costume politics’ crowd – claim to patriots etc., but how many Europeans suffered and died as a consequence of their favoured regime? That nation was humiliated and crushed for a second time in 30 years, left divided for another 40. That’s patriotism and a love and concern for the well-being of one’s own? Could have fooled me. Its not like war is a couple of hundred men from each side go into a field somewhere and at the end of the day a winner is found. In the modern era it tends to be total and all consuming - especially from the ‘costume politics’ tendency in history. If the Elysian fields or Camelot (or whatever) is thought to be within reaching distance then anything is acceptable to reach the promised land - all moral constraints are abandoned (or radically attenuated) - is this not the politico-emotional background to all utopian movements and their ‘radiant visions’ of future bliss? Perhaps I’m too much of a small ‘c’ conservative to buy into such ‘radiant visions’. 93
Posted by Foundation on February 22, 2012, 10:39 AM | # I’ve enjoyed reading this thread. It evolved toward consensus, which is always welcome. From one end of this great cause to another may I say thank you - and to those Englishman here you are worthy of ancestors: In a stable lying almost in the shadow of the new stone church, a man with And the world will be poorer still if our race was no more. Next entry: Using high school kids and their little “R word” friends for the Repressive Tolerance agenda Previous entry: Population Matters |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. HoroSmutS commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/24/12, 02:03 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 02:03 AM. (go) (view) zhrcwuwmkq commented in entry 'The end of Mel Gibson's career?' on 05/23/12, 11:46 PM. (go) (view) SEO Services commented in entry 'The Cubans of Miami' on 05/23/12, 11:11 PM. (go) (view) Captainchaos commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 11:08 PM. (go) (view) xiaolily commented in entry 'Maltese Incident' on 05/23/12, 10:12 PM. (go) (view) Cockouche commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/23/12, 09:40 PM. (go) (view) Captainchaos commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 09:13 PM. (go) (view) assundaGymn commented in entry 'A Line in the Sand' on 05/23/12, 08:41 PM. (go) (view) GlablePax commented in entry 'University official sentenced for child porn, blackmail' on 05/23/12, 08:23 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 07:47 PM. (go) (view) cuiseur automatique seb commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/23/12, 07:43 PM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'Indian beauty' on 05/23/12, 12:52 PM. (go) (view) Lee John Barnes commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 12:45 PM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'More on the Indian beauty question' on 05/23/12, 12:31 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 11:43 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 11:32 AM. (go) (view) Mellaba Pechios commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 07:55 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 03:51 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:40 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:40 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:26 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:23 PM. (go) (view) 7 Year BA commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 09:19 PM. (go) (view) DARYL commented in entry 'A repeatable comment for mass-pasting on American public message boards' on 05/22/12, 08:57 PM. (go) (view) Thorn commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 08:31 PM. (go) (view) Church of Jed commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 07:40 PM. (go) (view) Selous Scout commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 05:56 PM. (go) (view) Silver commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 11:37 AM. (go) (view) AnalogMan commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 11:29 AM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 07:42 AM. (go) (view) Srakotraqu commented in entry 'A repeatable comment for mass-pasting on American public message boards' on 05/22/12, 07:30 AM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 07:19 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 06:26 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 02:34 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 Momus on February 19, 2012, 05:59 AM | #
Did Kai Murros wear apparel in the style of Touko Laaksonen for this speech?