On Holliday … still

A further post based upon some comments by Amon and John in some recent threads, allowing me to further clarify my opinions.

Amon focuses on the dire consequences and “impossibility” of the idea of a white American ethno-state, despite the fact that white nationalism, as I’ve stated previously, is not based solely or even predominantly on the ethno-state, but is focused on promoting white interests in every context our people find themselves.

I find interesting the comments about how a white ethno-state will be “embargoed” by the world; in other words, we are being blackmailed into accepting self-destructive multiracialism. No, a people’s pursuit of their genetic interests and self-determination takes precedence over such threats; furthermore, I’d think the rest of the world had better consider the economic consequences of the break-up of America, and the consequences of “embargoing” one of the “wealthiest” (right, John?) populations on Earth. Please note as well that I am a firm proponent of the “internationalism” of white nationalist ideals. I believe that any nationalists who focus solely on their own nation are being extremely stupid and self-defeating, for reasons that Amon partially alludes to. Although some nations will be farther ahead in the process than others, nationalist regimes for European-derived peoples will, in the long run, be evolutionarily stable only in the context of having most, or all, majority white nations adopting some sort of nationalism. Let the coloreds embargo a white Federation; who needs them?

I agree that the “nuts and bolts” details of setting up a white ethno-state need to be discussed; for now though, what I am stating is the principle involved. If the objective is agreed upon, if this is the “prize” we set our eyes on, then we can proceed from there. Comments about changing attitudes toward racism are, of course, reasonable, and accepted. I have previously posted on the need to undermine the already fragile multicultural regime, and promote balkanization; anyone who has fairly followed by writings on this blog know I am under no illusions about any “quick fix”, and I promote the idea of dealing with the problem is stages. The ethno-state – if it ever comes into existence – is something perhaps only our progeny will enjoy. We have our hands full right now in John’s “real world”, working to undermine multiculturalism, promote balkanization, jump-start white identity politics, etc. How things will fall out, who knows? If we accept John’s “give up” “advice” (sic) though, we know with 100% certainty that we’ll go nowhere but down.

By the way, it may be easier to discourage Third World man than we have previously thought. The Third Worlders certainly love a “West” populated by feckless, a-racial, individualist whites. Given a society run according to only John’s individualist precepts what Indian or Chinaman wouldn’t like coming to the West? They’d be a whole lot less enthusiastic with more JW Hollidays, and fewer John Rays. We’ll see.

Amon’s prescription of “skilled immigration” (the GC-GNXP mantra) puzzles me, when addressed to racially aware whites. Look. Why tell me that I should support something that I am 100% against, which I see as a dire threat and which I oppose with every fiber of my being? I know you disagree with my stance, but if anything is a “utopian fantasy” it is the idea that I and those like me are going to support the immigration of “skilled Asians” into their country. Really, now! You may as well try to convince John to be a Marxist, or someone from “Aryan Nations” to get bar-mitvahed or go to a rap concert. I’ll make it as clear as day: I do not consider Razib, Godless Capitalist, or any Chinese PhD to be any more my “fellow citizen” than I do Mike Tyson, Jesse Jackson, or Alberto Gonzales. Now, you may say, hey, those people don’t want you as a fellow citizen either. To which I reply – Great! Let’s Separate! That is exactly what I want … for us not to be fellow citizens.

I don’t care if the ethno-state is a “pipe-dream” or not; one thing I do know, is that I will never, ever promote the immigration of any non-whites – skilled or non-skilled – to any majority white territory. These “skilled immigration” advocates are just wasting their time with that. I wonder if there is some sort of self-deception going on. Some of these folks are “skilled” Asians themselves, and they just can’t accept the fact that they will be rejected, on racial grounds, by “skilled” whites.

Certainly, I know Jared Taylor has been the target of some emotional frustration in this regard; Taylor is the epitome of the white cognitive elitist – urbane, intelligent, articulate, and highly educated – from whom the Asians crave acceptance. Instead, American Renaissance clearly places South Asians and East Asians in the “them” category, separate from the “us” of whites. Now, this may be hard for some to accept, who then try to go around this “unpleasantness” by attempting to convince WNs of “skilled immigration”, an absurdity. If WNs are going to advocate for an Asian influx, then they wouldn’t be WNs to begin with, would they? Is there any logic there? Don’t these people understand that the more intelligent, “skilled”, WNs have already thought about this very carefully, and have concluded that “skilled Asians” are just as undesirable, if not more so (because of their greater potential ability to strategize for their own EGI in our nations), than the so-called “unskilled?” When will these “skilled” advocates learn not to beat a dead horse?

John’s view that America’s race problem boils down to only the crime problem and, hence, all we need is “strict policing” demonstrates an ignorance of the “real world” that is breath-taking. In reality – as we who live in America well know – race pervades virtually every facet of life here. Politics, employment, economic efficiency, the educational system, interpersonal relations in “diverse” areas, social welfare spending, and even sports – all these and more are influenced by race and racial considerations. Race is the major fault line in America, and it goes well, well beyond crime. As I’ve previously suggested, John should spend some time reading the archived news stories at Amren, and he can become better acquainted with the facts.

Even with respect to crime John is not correct, for, as the numbers and political influence of crime-prone minorities grows, the political “will” to enforce such strict policing will not exist (besides the question of whether we wish to live in the sort of police state needed to control the actions of an increasing dark population).

John lauds Giuliani’s work in NYC, so we should take a closer look there. John perhaps does not know the details of NYC politics over the last 15 years. Giuliani was elected (and re-elected) because of the outrageous conduct of the previous (Negro) Dinkins administration. Essentially, Dinkins let the blacks and browns run amok (one noteworthy NYC newspaper headline a friend told me about, in response to the crime wave was: “Dave, do something!). In particular, he did the big “no-no” - he let blacks terrorize Jews, and the “Crown Heights pogrom” was the death-knell of the Dinkins realm. Putting things in perspective, Dinkins was simply a couple of decades too early. NYC, at that time, was not demographically ready for a colored mayor who would essentially turn a blind eye to utter chaos. NYC was not quite Detroit or Washington D.C. Plus Dinkins failed to understand that while NYC’s Italian, Irish and other white gentile populations were “fair game” for colored criminality, letting blacks target Jews for attacks was political suicide. So he paid the political price. Now, perhaps John is unaware that, before 9/11 salvaged his reputation Giuliani was quite unpopular towards the end of his second term. One major reason was the very same “strict policing” that John lauds – too many of the “white cops” were harassing and killing “young men of color.” I wonder – if there was no 9/1, and if Rudy was legally entitled to run for a third term, would he have won? Needless to say, the current Jewish mayor of NYC has begun the process of reversing Giuliani’s policies, minorities are pandered to, and white New Yorkers I know tell me that the quality of life is once again declining. Demography tells us that the future of NYC is that of Dinkins and not Giuliani, just as America’s future looks more and more like Jesse Jackson and less and less like Ronnie Raygun. Strict policing – a temporary stop-gap at best – is obviously no answer.

John said, “I wish you WNs would stop dreaming and do something useful —like oppose the Leftists who are the main source of what you deplore”

Actually, John, the current American political figure who I most despise, and who I believe is a viciously destructive force, is that good old “conservative”, George W. Bush. It is his policies that I most strongly “deplore.” Furthermore, insomuch as you associate yourself with Bush I question your claim to be a “conservative” and a man of the “right.” It seems to me that a-racial “conservatives” are just as much my problem as are the dreaded “leftists.” Perhaps, in some ways, this a-racial right is a bigger problem, because it is their opiate that helps put whites to sleep. At least, most traditional-minded white Americans already know the left is their enemy, but they are deluded that “Open Borders” Bush is “on their side”.

JW: “I’m sure, the coloreds are having a grand old time at the expense of my people’s EGI”

John: “Rubbish! EVERYONE is doing better than ever these days. It’s not a zero-sum game.”

In the exchange above, John demonstrates why he is so loved by some of us here. First, he either completely ignores my mention of ethnic genetic interests (EGI), or he completely misunderstands what EGI is, despite all the posts on this blog about that subject. In fact, EGI in any given territory IS a zero-sum game, and it is impossible for the genetic interests of the native ethny to be “doing better” in light of immigration of alien ethnies. Thus, as an answer to my comment, John’s reply is completely wrong and/or irrelevant.

Second, even at the level of proximate interests – which to me are secondary – it is strange that an Australian from Brisbane, who, according to his fellow Australians, doesn’t quite get how bad things are even in Sydney or Melbourne, is telling white Americans that we are “doing better than ever.” John, can you honestly say to us that you know sufficient of the lives of white Americans to instruct us that we must think we are all “doing better than ever”, either as individuals or as a race?

In point of fact, we observe the ever-spiraling downward trend of America, which is also confirmed to us by conversations with family members of older generations.

On another purely anecdotal note (justified given the level of the comments I am answering), virtually all the Eastern European immigrants I’ve known over the last several years are shocked – in a purely negative sense – with the realities of America compared to what they thought they knew (from heresy, movies, TV, books, etc.) before they emigrated. Sure, the current snapshot of America yields a better economic picture than their Marxist-ravaged homelands. But, they shake their heads sadly at the decrepit and degenerating nature of American society and culture, the race problems, the political hypocrisy, the incredibly poor educational system; I can go on and on. They see America headed for the abyss, an “outsider’s” opinion that well matches my own.

We are not “doing better than ever.”

Posted by JW Holliday on Saturday, July 30, 2005 at 04:35 PM in No particular place to go
Comments (34) | Tell a friend

Comments:

Posted by Mark Richardson on July 30, 2005, 05:38 PM | #

Another fine post, JWH.

Posted by Andrew L on July 30, 2005, 06:07 PM | #

That reminded me of an article some years ago by a Uni Student, From Leningrad to San Francisco, where the observation was that The USA was more Marxist than the Marxist Russia she came from.
Ayn Rand statement before the Un American Affairs is an exellent read, even all those years ago.What happened?

Posted by John S Bolton on July 30, 2005, 06:29 PM | #

It should be understood that America is a center for the advancement of science and engineering, and the disruption of this would require the establishment of a new such center in Europe. All of this takes time, and much is lost in the shift of location. An allmerit system would spare us this disruption, and achieve a greater than 90% reduction of the immigration of those whom you may consider incompatible with EGI’s. In a few decades, the deterioration of quality of population here will cause America to be incapable of maintaining its role as the main center of advancement of these fields, and Europe will have to take over that role, as is already occurring.

Posted by Commenter on July 30, 2005, 07:16 PM | #

I agree with you that whites are not “doing better than ever.” In the Southwest, whites are continually on the move to find a place where they can escape the crime, bad schools, culture, and yes, an alien ethnic group. In general, people prefer to live among their own kind. This doesn’t mean that whites mean harm towards Hispanics, just that they would like to have their own communities. White flight (which is progressing where I live at an amazing rate)clears shows this.

With regards to furthering white interests, it’s my current stance that it would be ethical for Europe to offer a monetary incentive for non-whites in their 20s without children to become citizens of another country (perhaps non-European) and revoke their current citizenship. The non-whites that wish to stay should be allowed to and shouldn’t be harassed. This would, through time, decrease their populations while allowing people to choose what they wanted to do with their lives.

I admit though that it remains to be shown exactly how big the monetary incentive would need to be. Perhaps $75,000 would convince enough young Arabs to go back to the Muslim world where they may be able to retire on this amount of money.

I wouldn’t support these programs outside of Europe though because they aren’t an ancestral homeland.

To improve birthrates, I think that traditionalist Christianity is important (see the Lawrence Auster’s “View from the Right” blog for a good Christian perspective that defends white interests). Also, programs where the state helps pay for child care should be explored. This has made a difference with Icelandic birthrates, and I read a story of a German town where this helped as well.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 30, 2005, 07:35 PM | #

“I will never, ever promote the immigration of any non-whites – skilled or non-skilled – to any majority-white territory.” (—from the log entry)

They’ll never admit it but exactly this in reverse is the position of every single Subcon and yellow who runs around spouting how whites shouldn’t object if they overrun white countries: not one of them would ever dream of approving the same in reverse for their homelands. Not one. Jason Soon spouts about it but of course it’s in no danger of ever coming true for China so he knows he can say anything he wants and still sleep perfectly soundly at night—can lie through his teeth all day and then sleep like a baby all night knowing his EGIs will never be threatened, only the white man’s will.

“Even with respect to crime John is not correct, for, as the numbers and political influence of crime-prone minorities grows, the political ‘will’ to enforce such strict policing will not exist”

Not seeing this obvious truth is the second biggest mistake I’ve seen John Ray make. The biggest of course it his not seeing the importance of the race-replacement crisis for whites but that’s because he lacks certain brain circuits, so never stood a chance of seeing it in the first place. But to see this other requires only two functioning eyes in one’s head and a couple of brain firing circuits of a type that no one lacks on earth—it’s surprising he keeps repeating this piece of nonsense. John, where non-whites are more numerous than whites and have political power they’re not going to crack down on their own racial brethren who commit crimes against the (hated) white race.

“Actually, John, the current American political figure who I most despise, and who I believe is a viciously destructive force, is that good old ‘conservative,’ George W. Bush.”

Agreed. Bush and Clinton are, respectively, the worst and second-worst presidents in U.S. history (just to make that clear: Bush beats out Clinton for “worst,” something I wouldn’t have believed possible had I not seen it unfold with my own eyes, gradually, in the nightmarish years since 2001).

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 30, 2005, 07:36 PM | #

“It seems to me that a-racial ‘conservatives’ are just as much my problem as are the dreaded ‘leftists.’ “

Agreed again—I don’t see a difference between the two. “Arch-Conservative” Rush Limbaugh, who is one-hundred percent aracial, will lead the U.S. to hell in a handbasket just as surely and as fast as Bill & Hillary will. When Limbaugh first started out in the late-‘80s he was fantastic, a godsend—you could jump for joy listening to him (I discovered him in the early 90s) but, the deliberate Tranzi policy of slow genocide of white Christians (slow because slow’s what they can get away with) having become crystal-clear since then, aracial Limbaugh no longer serves any purpose whatsoever. All he does is boost everything about the Bush administration and the GOP but what in the hell do we care whom the Bush administration picks for Undersecretary of Health, Education, and Welfare or whatever, when it’s become crystal-clear that its policy in regard to the white majority of this country is to phase it slowly-but-surely out, to be replaced by a majority consisting of Tiger Woodses and Alberto Gonzaleses? Poor Rush has served his purpose, just as poor Bill Buckley once-upon-a-time served his, but they’re both irrelevant now, for one reason: neither has the stuff within himself to grasp the race nettle. Rush boosting Bush in the year 2005, in light of what is now known about Bush’s policies, is like white (Jewish, btw) communist South African Joe Slovo boosting the ANC before the Negro take-over in South Africa. It’s that simple. Bush is the ANC and Rush is Joe Slovo. The Chinese and Subcons so beloved of John don’t have to grasp the race nettle because there’s no “nettle” to grasp: race, far from being a nettle for them, is a settled, unquestioned reality as deeply and firmly rooted and certain, for them, as the blood in their veins and the marrow in their bones. The conversation JW is advancing here, in this log entry, is peculiarly “white”: no yellow or brown could even conceive of having it in regard to his own race or ethnic group: “Should we all agree to go out of existence and be replaced by X, Y, or Z other race?” And the reason it’s peculiarly “white” is because whites like John Ray are missing certain brain circuits—think they’re being clever disputing stuff like racial life or death when there’s a disaster of unimaginable proportions looming right in front of their nose that they can’t even see. They think it’s a joke. The joke’ll be on their children or grandchildren.

“In fact, EGI in any given territory IS a zero-sum game, and it is impossible for the genetic interests of the native ethny to be ‘doing better’ in light of immigration of alien ethnies.”

This is right: it’s exactly a zero-sum game, but it’s not the only game in town, so living standards can still rise thanks to things like the efficiencies of computerization of paperwork and all the others that have gone on in the past thirty years, but they don’t rise as much because they’re dragged down by racial problems both directly (lower IQ of some) and indirectly (increased spending on police, property replacement and repair, harebrained wasteful social programs, trashing of schools and educatonal standards, manned space ships that fall out of the sky due to the incompetence of the mandatory affirmative-action hires at Mission Control, etc.)

“In point of fact, we observe the ever-spiraling downward trend of America, which is also confirmed to us by conversations with family members of older generations.”

Absolutely right and JW’s concluding paragraph about the opinion of E. Europeans is on target. They mistakenly bought the hype John Ray’s buying, the Tranzi hype about how great multiculti race-replacement is. Might as well hype cancer or leprosy while they’re at it.

“In a few decades, the deterioration of quality of population here will cause America to be incapable of maintaining its role as the main center of advancement of these fields,” (—John Bolton)

This is absolutely right. John Ray of course doesn’t see it and never will—he’s too busy swallowing the diversity/“proposition-nation” hype put out by the Bush-family-type Tranzis and sources of influence and propaganda like the pro-race-replacement Jewish opinion-molders in Hollywood (where, as far as the Hollywood Jewish honchos are concerned, the U.S. is already 80% Negro, 15% Chinese and Mexican, and 5% white and dwindling, sort of the dream come true of not a few white-Christian-hating Jews, sad to say, so depicting the U.S. as population as already looking like this is an attempt on their part at a disseminating self-fulfilling prophesy—the more you convince people the nation’s already like that, the less they’ll think to resist its actually becoming like that ...), and elsewhere.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 30, 2005, 07:39 PM | #

The ideas and suggestions of the poster signing as “Commenter” above are one-hundred-percent sound. The more people realize this, the closer we get to a solution.

Posted by Amman on July 30, 2005, 07:49 PM | #

Hooray for WN! :D

Posted by Geoff Beck on July 30, 2005, 07:53 PM | #

Commenter,

Can you address for us the bias present in all institutions of the western world which promotes multiculturalism, immigration, and other forms furthering Gentile hatred and extinction?

Where does this come from, why does it persist?

Posted by Stuka on July 30, 2005, 08:02 PM | #

Excellent post! It’s intelligent commentary like that that brought me here in the first place.

White Nation 2050

Posted by Andrew L on July 30, 2005, 08:05 PM | #

Commentors view is good to a point, BUT, when the third worlders get word of this then they will flood the gates even faster, to collect the booty.
Even in Australia, the Immigrants Illegal or Legal have a near PhD in our social security system,and how to work it. So Bad Idea, Good Idea by taking Welfare away all to gether, and make people understand and fend for them selves is the only way to go.That would decreace Bad Immigration and Family reunion.
When Governments are involved , it becomes a perpetual employment stream to a point it is parasitic , Self Creatinalist employment oppertunity. Bad Idea.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 30, 2005, 08:07 PM | #

For Amman, a Subcon Bengali immigrant, to post that comment he just posted shows character. It’s exactly what I myself would say, were his Bengali nation threatened with race-replacement: I’d go to a Bengali web-site resisting what was going on and say, Hooray for Bengali Nationalism! I view myself as fighting for a principle which applies to all peoples, races, nations, ethnicities, ethnocultures, and so on: the right not to be racially extinguished against their will.

I’ll just add here, Amman, that I deeply respect and tremendously admire the Bengali nation and people.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 30, 2005, 08:37 PM | #

“In the Southwest, whites are continually on the move to find a place where they can escape the crime, bad schools, culture, and yes, an alien ethnic group. In general, people prefer to live among their own kind. This doesn’t mean that whites mean harm towards Hispanics, just that they would like to have their own communities. White flight (which is progressing where I live at an amazing rate) clears shows this.” (—Commenter)

Whites are on the move to find another place to live, Commenter? They’re moving out at “an amazing rate,” you say? And you’ve seen this with your own eyes, because it’s happening where you yourself live? Whites are moving out of the communities of the U.S. Southwest where Bush is deliberately bringing in literally millions of Mexicans? So, those communities previously populated with lots of whites are henceforth going go be exclusively Mexican while the whites find someplace else to make their lives and raise their children away from “the crime, bad schools, culture, and yes, the alien ethnic group”?

In other words, the population’s getting replaced? The race is in the process of getting replaced down there where you live?

Well you know, Commenter, I don’t believe you, and the reason is John Ray who blogs here, a very smart guy, told me once, in response to something I’d said, that “race-replacement was the silliest idea he’d ever heard of.” So, there you have it—he’s an expert, a PhD, former university professor who’s authored hundreds of scientific research papers published in peer-reviewed journals, so if he says race-replacement is nonsense, he must be right and you, with all respect, must be mistaken. Go take another look around your community, please, and tell us what’s really happening, not the imaginary nonsense you posted above.

Posted by Amman on July 30, 2005, 08:43 PM | #

Thanks for the support, Fred. I should say, though, that I’m not a Bengali immigrant—my parents are, I was born here

And as for why I’m not vehemently opposed to WNism…well, it really depends on who’s defending it. I’ll admit I’ve met my fair share of WNs who do little other than whine about “coons/sand coons/whatever.” (This is why I stay away from National Vanguard) However, here at MR, most people aren’t that unreasonable, and folks like Ben Tillman have discussed their beliefs with me cogently and amiably. If someone postulates their ideology logically and calmly, I’ll give it a respectful, nuanced evaluation. This is the case at MR with WNism.

Posted by Stuka on July 30, 2005, 08:55 PM | #

“coons/sand coons/whatever.”

Don’t mean to be picky here, but I believe the correct term is dune coon.

Posted by Svigor on July 30, 2005, 09:09 PM | #

I responded to this in another thread; dunno if it was lost or if I put it in the wrong thread.

JJR:
“Why not drop the double standards of multiculturalism and have whites engage in identity politics like other groups?”

I agree with that. Sauce for the gander etc

I prefer equal justice for all but if we are to have group-based politics that is the logical final step

John, this is WNism. In fact, it’s a more fundamental level of WNism than the forming of ethnostates.

You seem to think that identity politics aren’t to a large extent an inevitability. They are. Social Identity Theory tells us that if people don’t have lines along which to fracture (they always do of course, they’re born with them) they’ll make some up.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 30, 2005, 09:16 PM | #

Thanks for that, Stuka (12:55 AM)—with that post you’re helping to maintain MR.com’s reputation as an authoritative source, a place to which people come precisely because they know that here they can find reliably definitive information about today’s events, information that’s been verified, not the slipshod stuff you see at other sites where anything at all passes for “truth.” Here they get nothing but the facts. You’ve rendered a service.

Posted by Commenter on July 30, 2005, 11:32 PM | #

I didn’t expect such a kind reception. Thanks guys .

I don’t claim credit for this idea. I thought of it myself but later ran across it on the BNP website. I’m not that familiar with the BNP, so I can’t argue for the rest of their positions or their party as a whole, but this one seems reasonable for Europe.

“Can you address for us the bias present in all institutions of the western world which promotes multiculturalism, immigration, and other forms furthering Gentile hatred and extinction?

Where does this come from, why does it persist?”

Well this is such a broad question, that I’m really not sure that I can satisfactorily answer it (or am sufficiently qualified to, I’m actually quite new to the ethnic nationalist movement, finding Steve Sailer’s website last November). Actually, it’s one that I have had as well. But I’ll give it a try (most of these aren’t original ideas).

I think that two factors were important (there are probably more): Nazi Germany and the rejection of Christianity. Here are some premises. The West was disgusted by the mass murder committed by the Nazis.* In the coming decades, the West started to lose their faith in Christianity rapidly. Spirituality is a natural part of the human mind, and that when one loses faith in one thing, it has to be replaced by a faith in something else.

*While disgust was certainly in order, why did it reach a higher magnitude than that for the Communists who have killed even more? One reason is quite simply because much of the West fought them in World War 2 which brought the crimes to a focal point. Another is that they focused their killings on a small ethnic group that made their crimes seem even more unjust. Also, the killings took part in the middle of northern European civilization.

Partly in reaction to Nazi Germany and the rise of Marxist thinking, the West adopted a form of liberalism centered around openness to all of man and militant anti-discrimination which acted as a substitute faith (some call this secular humanism). This is why when someone speaks reason with regard to race, he is treated with such universal disdain. It would be as if you were saying something blasphemous in the 14th century. And really, you are but to the new liberal religion. People feel guilty breaking this faith, just as they do with breaking closely held ideas of spirituality in general. But like many faiths, it doesn’t always view competing religions in the best light. And this may explain why liberals view traditional religion so poorly.

Nazi Germany may have helped reinforce this faith because it claimed that if you did not embrace liberal religion, you are a Nazi. Of course, this is not true. Nazis killed people; we just want a place for ourselves. But it’s difficult for people to progress this far in reasoning without feeling the guilt of leaving the faith and turning back.

Christianity is a time tested religion that has shown that it can stand up for white interests if interpreted in the traditional manner. This liberal one is not and may spell doom for whites if it isn’t cut in size. Actually, parts of Christianity have adopted some of these liberal ideas, and this is why some readers here may view it with skepticism. Lawrence Auster has said,
“So I would respectfully suggest that when Christians translate the spiritual idea of the unity of people under God into the political ideology that people from all cultures should be allowed to come en masse to America and other Western countries, that is not the traditional teaching of the Christian church, that is a modern liberal idea, that is the Religion of Man, which has been infused into the Christian church over the past 50 years.”
Another relevant quote from Auster is,
“Only modern liberals experience it, because, perverting the spiritual framework that made our civilization possible, they have defined civilization as openness to other men, rather than as openness to God and truth.”

Actually some biblical passages like the Tower of Babel, teach that God did not intend for us to be blended into one people.

I’m actually not a Christian. I’m an agnostic (former atheist) at the moment with increasing Christian sympathies. But I have a respect for the central part of the mind that spirituality fills and have a skepticism that whites should be gambling on new faith when a time tested one is already present. I’m not here to tell you how to live your life but just to try to explain why whites are on their current path.

It seems like a coincidence that all types of things from views toward politics, to even the quality of art and architecture started to change just when Christianity was rejected.

Feel free to discuss and critique these ideas because I’m am not positive about all of this. I left a real email address this time.

Posted by Commenter on July 30, 2005, 11:35 PM | #

Andrew L, this policy of offering monetary incentives would have to occur after the non-white immigration to the country in question would be closed or very, very close to this. Otherwise, you’re entirely correct.

Posted by Commenter on July 30, 2005, 11:42 PM | #

Though the theory raises the question of why America hasn’t resisted immigration as well as Europe even though they are more religious. One reason is the two-party system. If there was proportional representation here, things would have progressed differently. Also, Europeans aren’t as occustomed to diversity and have historic nations with a long history.

I’m actually open-minded with regards to America (contrasted with my views towards Europe). Perhaps the Native American reserve system should be expanded. However, I don’t see how flooding the country with immigrants would be wise considering that if Europe falls, we might not have much of a place either.

Posted by Andrew L on July 31, 2005, 12:32 AM | #

In that case It is an exellent Idea, ha , We would save double that in not having to maintain the prison population, estimates about 69,000 P/A per prisoner. Yes a plebiscite for public opinion and feed back, It would work, and I would suggest (Probably Wrong) about 90% approval, Give or take a few,ha. Well worth asking the Question though.

Posted by Andrew L on July 31, 2005, 12:52 AM | #

Stuka, What is a dune Coon, Is it the same as a camel Fornicator ?

Posted by Guessedworker on July 31, 2005, 03:41 AM | #

Amman,

I’m sure I am speaking for all here on both sides of the argument when I say that, in turn, your commentary is welcomed and respected and your demeanour appreciated.

Intellectually, our opponents are not those who have emigrated to our homelands - unless those people, as individuals or groups, set out to delegitimise or criminalise our natural response to them or generally conceal the pursuit of their own interests in false nostrums such as “jobs no one else wants”, “it’s all inevitable”, “the richness of diversity”, “it’s all too late for change” etc, etc.

Our real intellectual opponents are those of our own kind who, again, delegitimise or criminalise our truth and trot out all those same lies and more. These people are to be found at all points of the conventional political spectrum. But it is the left that is the true hearth of evil, and our most frequent and determined opposition must be reserved for it.

Posted by Kubilai on July 31, 2005, 10:34 AM | #

What can one say of Mr. Holliday’s writing, aside from astounding. I certainly cannot add anything to it, JW. Thanks so much for your searing and unwavering focus.

Posted by Geoff Beck on July 31, 2005, 10:56 AM | #

JW,

Agree entirely with your analysis of Dinkins. Everyone ought to re-read that segment - several times. Remember the name “Yankel Rosenbaum”?

Posted by Geoff Beck on July 31, 2005, 11:03 AM | #

Question for JW:

I’ve been auditing the Euro EGI groups in the USA, some of which I am affiliated in some manner. It seems to me we are on the threshold of an important critical mass, enough people to begin to organize economically.

My question is…

Do you think we are ready to form lending societies, insurance companies, and etc… for our own EGI?

As you many know Lutherans, Jews, other EGIs do have such institutions. I think this would be an important step.

Posted by Stuka on July 31, 2005, 11:19 AM | #

Fred—Many thanks. After all, there are standards to uphold, dontcha know.

Andrew L.—Yes, I think so. I’ve seen the term used by the pro-war yahoos to refer to Arabs, Persians, Indians, Pakistanis, Afghans, and assorted subcon types.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 31, 2005, 12:53 PM | #

Incidentally, I like the use of the term “Persians,” as in Stuka’s comment here and in a comment posted not long ago at Turnabout

(by an Englishwoman signing as “Novaryana”). Where “Iran” came from I don’t know, but I’m not using it any more—I’m just not buying it any more. For me from now on it’s going to be “Persia.” Look, it’s not in our power to change some things from wrong to right (not yet), but it’s in our power to change others—such as the words that come out of our own mouths.

On the same subject, “Iraq” probably should be “Babylonia,” which I may also start using. I never use “Myanmar” (Burma), “Zimbabwe” (Rhodesia), or a number of other examples of nonsensical re-naming of places. I’ve been starting to get back to “Ceylon” for “Sri Lanka,” and I plan on doing more of that sort of thing.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 31, 2005, 01:31 PM | #

Look at Gene Expression’s star blogger David B. denying race again. Dienekes correctly critiques

a race-denying New York Times editorial whose argument for “casting doubt on the existence of races” amounts to claiming to cast doubt on the existence of the colors blue and yellow by pointing out that mixing blue and yellow paint gives green paint. See David B.‘s rejoinder to the Dienekes log entry (the first comment posted underneath the entry, and the only one posted so far, as I type this).

Gene Expression is widely viewed as a race-realist site. If their third-most-important blogger over there (third after GC and Razib) persists in running around showing himself to be an outright denier of the existence of race, that reputation of Gene Expression’s risks more and more being seen as a complete joke.

Posted by Svigor on July 31, 2005, 02:39 PM | #

Here’s another one JJR might have missed.

He acknowledges that blacks are a menace and that no one in the world wants to live around them (a senitment that often extends to blacks).

He says that it’s not wise to extend this prejudice to yellows, since they have higher average IQs, lower crime rates, etc. than whites.

Has he considered that yellows might naturally feel the same way about whites as whites do about blacks? That the higher white crime rates, AIDS rates, lower mean IQ, higher birth rates, etc., of whites might constitute a persistent cause for yellow animus?

Similarly, the white stats provide a reason for blacks to separate; who wants a market-dominant people running amok? Similarly, the yellow stats provide a reason for whites to separate; who wants a market-dominant people running amok?

Posted by JW Holliday on July 31, 2005, 03:35 PM | #

First, let me thank everyone who had positive words for this latest post. A few specific comments:-

Amman,

I appreciate your reasonable stance here. I do hope that people of all races will understand that whites have the same rights to strategize for the interests as other peoples, and that the wish of some white Americans to be separate is a legitimate one. Mutual understanding and respect can result in conversation and negotiation, that can be of mutual benefit.

I am very aware that for many Asian immigrants and their American born progeny, the USA is where they wish to stay. Certain South Asian bloggers have made that abundantly clear! Why cannot there be room, at least in principle, for a multiracial American state alongside whatever ethnostates spin off from it? If we can agree in principle, then details can be dealt with as events unfold.

Commenter,

Thank you for your thought-provoking comments. As you may guess, I am considerably “harsher” than you in my opinions of what needs be done.

With respect to Europe, our peoples’ ancestral homeland, repatriation is required. I myself have a “zero-tolerance” attitude with respect to Europe, for reasons I’ve already stated.

With respect to the USA, economic incentives can play an important role in promoting separation. Just ending all “anti-discrimination” laws and all attempts at forced integration (by itself, an enormous task) would allow a generous amount of racial sifting to take place. If this were helped along with a ‘carrot and stick’ approach, all the better.

Geoff,

I agree we really need private, race-based ventures that would be able to assist white Americans in practical matters of surviving in multiracial America. This would take pressure off the activists as well, to have a support network of co-ethnics.

The overseas Chinese are masters at this, they set up their own banks, their own schools, etc. These are the sorts of things we absolutely must do. I don’t see anyone right now with the capital and organizational infrastructure to get started. I’ve been hoping that EAIF, or AR or NPI may eventually grow to an extent that they would delve into this. There is an un-met need out there.

Posted by JW Holliday on July 31, 2005, 03:37 PM | #

(Cont.)

John Bolton,

I am aware of the consequences that would occur as a result of upheaval in America. Besides economics and science/technology one must consider what nations like China would do or not do while America was immersed in these prohblems. However, I see America as already down this path. Even if we had an immediate immigration moratorium today, we are stuck with a race problem that may be insoluble - at least from the perspective of a prowhite position - without separation. It is far more likely that Bush, or a subsequent President, will institute an amnesty/open borders scheme than it is that we will have a moratorium, or even a “skilled” policy.

I do not see the current “snapshot” of America being sustainable, given racial realities and, to be frank, I do not want it to be sustainable. To minimize disruption, I promote an “evolutionary” (not revolutionary) approach to ethnostates, starting with undermining multiculturalism, promoting white identity politics and balkanization, and reaching a point in which people will want separation because the alternative is untenable. We’ll see.

I cannot foresee the exact details of what may happen, so I cannot, and will not, give out specific details of what must be done and what the consequences will be. I cannot know this, none of us can. I can say with confidence that the current America is a long-term disaster for white Americans and that, particularly with sustained immigration that we have now, it won’t last as is.

Furthermore, one must agree that a change from “unskilled” to “skilled” immigration will be extremely difficult to implement and maintain. There are powerful special interests - ethnic, political, business - who support the unskilled influx. Look at the supporters of Bush’s plan. Why should “majority rights” whites invest their time and energy in such a difficult struggle for such a dubious pay-off? EGI will still be damaged (albeit probably less than before). More productive and law-abiding immigrants would replace the stupider, more violent ones - but this advantage would be to a significant degree offset by the increased competition of these newcomers to white Americans for places near the top of the human energy pyramid - higher education, the professions, politics, etc.

Keeping in mind MacDonald’s warning in the last chapter of Culture of Critique, it may not be a great idea to import a new, racially alien professional/managerial class. White Americans are already squeezed from below by affirmative action and above by Jewish and Asian elites (as well as by anti-white white gentile elites); bringing in more Asians will increase the pressure from the upper set of pincers. Meanwhile, we’ll still have the lower underclass still there as well. Furthermore, the newcomers, being more intelligent, will be able to organize in favor of their interests, at our expense. In the long run, what will be the net gain, if there is a gain and not a loss? Isn’t it more prudent to invest our time and energy to those endeavors (such as those Geoff alluded to), that will have a direct, positive impact on our own group’s well-being? The only immigration reform (other than the current impossibility of a Eurocentric preference) that can benefit us without fear of backfiring is a moratorium. Perhaps more difficult than a “skilled policy” (but it may be easier to shut out all, then show a ‘racist’ preference for Asians over Hispanics), but at least the outcome would be worth the effort. Would having more GNXPers in America be something that should entice racially aware whites to invest their efforts in?

Posted by Geoff Beck on July 31, 2005, 04:34 PM | #

> I agree we really need private, race-based ventures that would be able to assist white Americans

I recall reading about grocery stores in Britain being sent out of business by Indian shopkeepers. The story went on to suggest that Tesco - owned by Jews - is now teaming up with the Indians to control the entire market.

The story featured an Irish family that lost their store due to Indian competition. They said the the wholesalers are all Indian, and give better deals to the Indian shcpkeepers, forcing the Whites to pay more.

Sorry, can’t remember where I read this.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 01, 2005, 12:58 PM | #

Steve essentially confirms

“Commenter’s” observation (see the first paragraph of “Commenter’s” post of 7/30, 11:16 PM, above):

“Apparently, The Economist believes the reason that millions of native-born Americans have fled the coast of California over the last dozen years is because they suddenly grew tired of year-round sunshine, mild temperatures, low humidity, and no mosquitoes. Their leaving couldn’t possibly have anything to do with immigration. Thank God for all these immigrants doing us a huge favor by moving into the Golden State, otherwise Los Angeles and San Francisco would be unpopulated wastelands that looked like a neutron bomb had hit them.”

Next entry: Radical Muslim questions tactics of bombers

Previous entry: Victor Hanson: Portrait of an American Traitor

Existential Issues

White Genocide Project

Of note

General News

Science News

Science Categories

All Categories

The Writers

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Controlled Opposition

Crime

General

Immigration

Islam

Jews

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Whites in Africa