|
|
Strategies for White AdvocacyStrategies for White Advocacy Never accept the defamatory phrase “non-Hispanic White.” White men must never be defined by what they are not, especially not in their own White nations. Never pass up an opportunity to publicly hoist an anti-White activist by his own petard by vociferously condemning the use of any White racial slurs. The time of White tolerance of petty racial attacks is over. Whites must strategically take advantage of the emotional minefield that racial taboos present. Excoriate and humiliate any anti-White, especially one who is not White, foolish enough to make reference to “crackers,” “rednecks,” “honkies,” “White bread,” “White boys,” “White trash” (Jay Leno does this routinely) or any other term demeaning to White men or women. Not only will this tactic instantly drain the credibility of the anti-White person, it will energize and inspire any observing Whites in the crowd to do the same thing in future opportunities. It is extremely rare to find a White man fighting back against attacks on the White race, so seize every opportunity to demonstrate that it can be done from a position of strength and that it carries moral weight. Anti-racism is a code word for anti-White: never shy from the slander of being called ‘racist’ One of the strongest rhetorical weapons of the enemy is the word ‘racist.’ The good news is that all of its strength will disappear if the public no longer takes it seriously and realizes that it is a thinly-veiled attempt to silence White advocacy. James Edwards’ Racism Schmacism provides all the ammunition you need on this one. For decades, pro-White politicians and activists have shrunk back in horror whenever they hear the word. Destroy the credibility of the word ‘racist’ by confronting it directly and without fear. There are two options: point out that the accuser is using the modern-day equivalent of the word ‘heretic’ or simply explain that the word is only used to silence White people who are winning a debate. Shouting “heresy!” or “racist!” is an underhanded way to avoid difficult subjects, facts, or ideas. Using shaming language is an emotional appeal to crowd psychology that dodges any real analysis of the underlying arguments. Drain the potency of the word ‘racist’ to pave the way for public advocacy of White interests. Redirect the focus upon the accuser—“Anti-racism is just a code word for anti-White.” Do not exhibit warning signs Humans are heavily biased towards visual sensory input. Like it or not, a person’s appearance is a crucial causative variable in how ideas are received and evaluated. When a message is controversial or strains against the ruling dogma it is even more important for the spokesman to be aesthetically appealing. Those who are serious about raising White awareness and pointing out the hypocrisy of anti-White multiculturalism must be paragons of civility, not exemplars of barbarism. Leave the swastikas at home. In a healthy White society, the swastika will be another symbol to study, admire, or criticize along with the rest of the ancient cultural symbols. Presently, America is not a healthy White society. Hence, the swastika is an instant deal-breaker for the overwhelming majority of the population. The demonization of the ancient Aryan symbol, which most racially-aware White scholars know predates Adolf Hitler’s particular manifestation by thousands of years, is indeed unfortunate, ignorant, and rather silly. But publicly reclaiming the history behind the swastika must be put aside to tackle far more important matters—the existence and continuity of the White race.
Avoid stereotypes The Jewish-dominated mainstream media has spent billions of dollars promoting a caricature of the very worst type of White racial advocate. Everyone can picture this condescending portrayal of a White man who cares about his extended family. A shaved head, multiple tattoos, ragtag clothing, and a penchant for militaristic adornments are some of the familiar attributes. Whenever this sort of ruffian is depicted in a movie or television show he will invariably have a foul mouth, angry grimace, and obvious lack of education and tact to go along with his swastika tattoo and bullet bandolier. This is precisely the image that counter-productive and foolish White advocates present to the mainstream when they make brief cameos in anti-White documentaries or sensationalist reports on “hate in America.” The enemy exploits this phenomenon and likely cherry-picks White racial advocates for media appearances based on their lack of appeal to the broader masses. Successful White advocates must avoid these caricatures at all costs. An effective persuader will be well-dressed, well-groomed, well-spoken, and well-informed. Be an ambassador of the White race, not a foil or scapegoat for the anti-White media. Leaders must look and act like they are worthy to lead. Spokesmen and proselytizers must inspire trust and exude confidence. Reading books about public speaking or practicing the art of presentation via organizations like Toastmasters can go a long way towards advancing White interests. Undoubtedly, White advocates will be held to a much higher standard than non-White ethnic advocates, but this should pose no problem, as White men can rise to the challenge as always. After all, White advocates are men of European heritage—heirs of a proud tradition of scholarship, civilization, gentility, societal advancement, and moral evolution. Start acting like a White man. Avoid the tripwires of massive propaganda There are some topics that should be avoided when dealing with potential converts to the ideas of White Nationalism. Foremost is Holocaust revisionism. Please understand the distinction—talking about the Holocaust is important and effective in other venues but it is absolutely disastrous to bring it up around the vast majority of Whites. Unfortunately, the proverbial man on the street—who might be persuaded to entertain radical new ideas about White dispossession—will be instantly repelled by discussions of the Holocaust. There is a reason why reactions to Holocaust revisionism seem almost involuntary. It is because they are conditioned responses built upon years of carefully-constructed propaganda, backed by billions of dollars, and spread by many influential figures in the media, politics, and academia. Do not make the foolish mistake of trying to broach the subject with a potential recruit who still suffers under heavy demoralization. Another topic to be avoided in initial discussions is the defense of National Socialism. Again, please note that this is not an appeal to denigrate National Socialism or to strike it forever from rational discourse. This is merely a tactical suggestion to promote the spread of White identity and interests in the short term. America, like or not, fought on the side of the Allied Powers against Germany in the Second World War. Thus, any potential convert to White nationalism is likely related to or knows someone whose relative(s) fought against the National Socialist Germans decades ago. It is far more productive to promote certain tenets of National Socialism without actually referring to the ideology by name. Staunch nationalism, ethnic pride, prioritization of the citizenry’s interests above money interests, and protections against foreign ethnic influence are easier to sell than explicit National Socialism. Furthermore, the term “Nazi” has been adopted by anti-Whites to demonize any shred of White identity, White pride, or White advocacy. The only way that the word “Nazi” should enter into a conversation with potential recruits to White advocacy should be as a clever psychological maneuver to rob the word of its potency. Use this technique with caution: when describing a pro-White position—such as defending the existence of the White race or opposing illegal immigration—ridicule the enemy by adding: “For merely defending our people against White genocide, these anti-Whites will try to label me a Nazi.” The idea is to short-circuit the programming which conflates National Socialism with any sense of White pride, identity, or nationalism. White interests are constantly tarred by the brush of National Socialism and this dishonest chicanery is a fine example of the planned dispossession of White Americans. Most pro-Whites have little to no interest in the tenets of National Socialism so they will recognize the devious red herring of conflating any White racial awareness with the rise of a historical bogeyman. From that simple realization, the door is opened to discuss how and why White Americans are being robbed of the right to self-organize and advance political goals. Frame the issue according to the audience Know the audience. Adjust the message to the right frequency to ensure that it resonates with the audience. For example, left-liberals will be unlikely to sympathize with a message of interracial violent crime disparities because they usually believe Black males are unfairly targeted for prosecution of rape, robbery, and murder. (Predictably, they rarely make the case that Northeast Asians seem to be unfairly ignored by the criminal justice system.) Instead of appealing to disparities in racial violence, take advantage of the penchant for environmentalism of left-liberals. Illegal aliens have been known to urinate, litter, and disturb the tranquility within public parks, parking lots, or downtown streets where they huddle en masse, waiting to be picked up for a day’s worth of labor law violations. If that does not work, bring up the explosive rebirth of infectious diseases that were once virtually eradicated but have since reappeared, thanks to the massive invasion of Third Worlders pouring across the Southern border and bringing all manners of virulence and pathology to America. There are so many examples of anti-White policies or trends that a few will resonate with almost any type of potential White convert. Older White people can be reminded that a future for their White children and grandchildren will not be pleasant if it is under non-White rule, e.g. former Rhodesia and South Africa. Blue-collar workers and tradesman are well-aware of the fact that their jobs disappear and wages decrease due to a flood of illegal aliens in the employment pool. Law-and-order type White people are usually angered by illegal immigration strictly because it is illegal and flouts existing procedure. This legalistic outlook may need to be adjusted towards a sense of racial preservation, but for now, it can be used to create a stalwart force of propaganda, money, or grassroots efforts against the tide of non-White invasion. Never pass up an opportunity to identify anti-White double standards Many Whites can be easily radicalized through exposure to the astounding number of hypocritical policies and taboos that stifle White interests and advocacy. Myriad non-White organizations exist yet pro-White organizations are universally demonized. White men changing the culture of foreign non-White nations is called evil, imperialist, colonialist, and racist, yet a flood of non-White foreigners taking over formerly White suburbs, cities, and nations is supposed to be a wonderful example of diversity. Genocide in Tibet or Darfur attracts celebrity attention and endless news reports, yet worldwide White genocide is carefully ignored. These injustices can be used to demonstrate to the potential White Nationalist convert that words like ‘anti-racism,’ ‘diversity,’ and ‘tolerance’ are nothing more than code words for anti-White policy and ideology. With enough talking points and real-world examples about the anti-White realities of life in America, even the most racially-unaware White person will begin to question the unsustainable tenets of multiculturalism and realize that White culture is designated for destruction under the master plan. Soon enough, the awakened White man might respond to an anti-White’s predictable ad hominem criticism of a pro-White position by saying, “In your opinion, I’m racist—you’re just saying that because I’m White. Anti-racism is just a code word for anti-White. You just want to silence White people by calling us silly names—that’s not going to work anymore.” Small victories can add up to significant breakthroughs. Speak in the White voice to set the trend Explicitly advancing White interests is currently heresy. Brave White men and women must steadily chip away at this taboo so that White advocacy can reach mainstream legitimacy. Lay the foundation for others to follow—boldly go forth where few White men dare to tread. Many White Americans become very uncomfortable if they mention their White heritage and they are deathly afraid of tying that heritage to a political outlook. This, of course, is due to decades of propaganda aimed at preventing White advocacy and instilling a superfluous sense of White guilt. No other group is afraid to combine a political outlook with an ethnic identity. Black Americans are free to say “As a Black man, I want…” and mestizos are never attacked for saying “As a wise Latina, I feel…,” but anti-White political correctness silences White Americans in this regard. This taboo can be eroded over time by consistently ignoring it as if it does not exist. Calmly, confidently, and nonchalantly express political desires as a representative of “diverse White Americans,” “European-Americans,” or “men of European descent.” Choose how explicit the ethnic identification will be depending on the intended audience. Strangely enough, claims to European identity are accepted with less apprehension than claims to White identity, so take advantage of the disparity when needed. But if the audience is suspected to have strong racial loyalty feel free to preface pro-White talking points with the bold and direct, “As a White man, I realize…” An important preliminary for future White advocacy is legitimizing and mainstreaming the fact that White people have interests to advance. White identity politics will not get anywhere unless the taboo of organizing around the White race has been destroyed. Speaking in the White voice will embolden others to do likewise. Every White Nationalist can contribute to this long-term project by talking to friends, family, and associates in a manner that reminds the audience that they are part of a distinct group that must advance its interests if it is to survive. Always speak with clarity and conviction, never retreat from anti-White defamation, and carry forth as a proud ambassador and defender of the White race. Posted by Christian M on Tuesday, May 10, 2011 at 08:10 PM in Activism Comments:3
Posted by Thorn on May 10, 2011, 10:58 PM | # Thanks Christian. That’s a very good set of working instructions from which to draw. There are some(ahem) regulars here at MR that should really take to heart the advice contained in paragraph the under the heading, ‘Do not exhibit warning signs’.......just sayin’. 4
Posted by Robert Reis on May 11, 2011, 12:14 AM | # Why bother being concerned about white America? Can’t hold us down
Children for gay sex.
5
Posted by Christian M on May 11, 2011, 02:26 AM | # Soren, I saw a chaste man in Botswana hawking t-shirts that said “Billions will die, we will win.” If you followed pro forma habits you could be swimming in royalties. ... It’s true that works need not be explicitly identified as copyrighted. They are copyrighted immediately and automatically. Beyond legalities, it seems strange to copyright something that is meant to be spread far and wide. The Soviet dissidents finally got their acts together when they started distribution talking points without attribution. 6
Posted by the Narrator... on May 11, 2011, 02:29 AM | # The problem I have with this is the idea of “White Advocacy”. Advocating to who and for what? An equal chair at the table? The very notion is an acknowledgement of surrender, of defeat. It means we are content to be just another minority “advocating” for an equal seat within OUR OWN societies! Is that really what we want? In the future I guess we’ll be advocating for having English labels at the supermarket and for PBS to hire a token White guy to better represent our rainbow society. “White Advocacy” is begging for scraps in our own house. It’s politely tiptoeing around the burglar that broke into your house so you want disturb him. It means we lost. ... 7
Posted by Grimoire on May 11, 2011, 02:52 AM | # Good article. ‘white advocacy’ is a political term, meaning we are playing the game. And when the time is right, we shall name it and everything else as we see fit. 8
Posted by Leon Haller on May 11, 2011, 06:52 AM | # No time yet to read article (I suspect I know what it says, though - and I would largely agree). Scanned comments, NARRATOR’s is correct. We whites define our own societies, we do not beg for a place at the table carved by our ancestors, or at the feast our talents and toil have provided. That was the problem some years ago with the well-meaning, if incredibly naive and implicitly insulting, proposal for a European-American History month, modeled on the black colonization of the month formerly known as February (as Sam Francis used to joke). Such a proposal, made in a plaintive, “aren’t whites people, too?” mode, implies that America is one great multicultural place, but that the, uh, contributions of whites, excuse me, “European-Americans”, like those of, say, Hindus, Mohawks and Santerians, aren’t being sufficiently recognized or appreciated by the larger society, and thus need greater public recognition. In fairness, it would be nice if there were greater public recognition of the role of whites in American history: in, that is, founding, settling and building the entirety of the modern nation our liberal masters are now so generously sharing with the itinerant lice of the Turd World. In the event, we didn’t even get our month. The greatest indignity: to be made a servant in the house where you were the master (or worse, the owner). Not even the most ‘squishy’ portions of the New Testament require that of Christians. 9
Posted by Lee John Barnes on May 11, 2011, 12:01 PM | # The easiest way to respond when someone calls you a racist is to say ’ what do you mean I am a racist ?’ That way they have to define their own brand of what the word ‘racist’ means to them, as everyone has a different meaning for the poxy word. Most will be unable to answer. If they do they usually say ’ oh you think white people are superior and other races are inferior’. Then you simply answer ’ not at all, I am not a racist, I am realist. Just because scientists and geneticists say that different races exist in the world, does that make them racist ? of course not. That makes them scientists. We live in a world of racial diversity as opposed to your fantasy world where zulus, inniut, orientals and Irish men are all the same when they are obviously not ‘. 10
Posted by Silver on May 11, 2011, 01:02 PM | # Then you simply answer ‘ not at all, I am not a racist, I am realist. Just because scientists and geneticists say that different races exist in the world, does that make them racist ? of course not. That makes them scientists. We live in a world of racial diversity as opposed to your fantasy world where zulus, inniut, orientals and Irish men are all the same when they are obviously not ‘. That might “shut them up” but I would bet anything in their minds you’ve just confirmed that you’re one hell of a racist. Being a “realist” means you think race matters, which for most people is what racism “is.” Look at you, they tell themselves, you’ve actually taken the time to sit down and think about this stuff. Wow. Textbook racism. That’s why Bob Mantra’s “you’re just anti-white” approach is superior. Though I imagine that his minions muck it up by overusing it even when it’s obvious that nothing about a situation or individual actually is “anti-white,” it’s still better than explaining yourself because it introduces the term into circulation. People hear it once and it probably does nothing (whether it’s used correctly or not), but after they’ve heard it ten times something can click in their minds and they then take the tentative step of uttering the notorious phrase “I’m not racist but…” and then they’re on their way. That said, the approach I take with your people (anglosaxons and the like) is to say (following a contextual preamble, which can be pretty much anything), “If it were all no big deal, then there would be nothing to talk about. But I think there is something to talk about and the reason I say that is this. In the long run what multiracial society means is white extinction. That can sound shocking or panic-mongering if you haven’t thought about it, and some people who have thought about think it’s okay (whether that’s because they like the idea, or they just don’t care, is sometimes hard to tell), but it’s actually true. And as more people become aware of it some of them get pretty upset, because they feel ripped off, or they’re mad because no one ever told them that was the price that multiracialism would exact in the long run. That’s where a lot of the “racism” you sometimes here actually comes from—from people who feel pretty strongly but don’t really know how to express it. But what that says to me is that whether you think it’s worth getting upset over or not, the point is that I think it’s something that should be discussed. For my part, I just don’t think multiracialism’s “worth it.” I mean, just how great is it? Most people don’t seem to hate each other, and we all seem to get along…but I don’t think we really get along well. That’s a “tolerable” sort of a situation, sure, but I wouldn’t describe it as “great.” The problem is if you don’t think multiracial society is “worth it,” in terms of the price it’s going to cost, there’s no easy or obvious way out of the situation. That’s why I think it’s something that deserves greater public discussion, because if it can be discussed, then a solution can be found that makes most people happy.” That isn’t delivered as a monologue because there’s always interjection at various points, and it varies according to agreement/disagreement, but that’s the basic gist of it. Call me a “race-replacement advocate” if you will (as the mercifully departed Fred Scrooby used to), but I think this has more going for it than some “snappy refutations” which in practice refute nothing and probably solidify mental opposition. 11
Posted by Lee John Barnes on May 11, 2011, 01:55 PM | # The anti-white approach works only if you are trying to reinforce their opposition, not win them over. Most ‘anti-racists’ are not anti-white - they are supportive of racial equality and just accept the proposition that other races are oppressed by whites because they are unable to logically assess their own position on the issue. If you understood psychology you would realise that the best method of persuasion is not confront or to create conflict with your opponent - it is best to allow them to realise for themselves the logical inconsistency of their own position and then allow them to change it for themselves - and not to put them into a conflict position where you accuse them of being anti-white when they are not which consolidates their opposition to what you are saying, as you are advancing a contention that is incorrect and confrontational. The ONLY people who say ’ I am anti-white’ are by definition racists - and they are very few and far between. Most liberals and leftists do not say ’ am anti-white’ as they already believe that races exist and are simply anti-racism and anti-race hate. 1) make them see that being an anti-racist is predicated logically on the fact that races exist, otherwise racism cannot exist between racial groups 2) that accepting races exist is not racism, but that advocating that races are inferior is racism 3) that if other races are entitled to advocate their racial interests and that is not racist, then when white do the same they are also not racist for doing so Calling a white anti-racist ’ anti-white’ will merely ensure they do not listen to you, as to be frnak you are talking bollocks. 99.9 % of liberals are not anti-white, they are just anti-racism. The aim of debate is not to shut doen communiction and consolidate their opposition to white rights - it is to allow them to realise for themselves that their position on race is logically flawed. Your approach doesnt do that. Mine does. 12
Posted by Grimoire on May 11, 2011, 02:33 PM | # I second the constructive approach, as LJB lays out. Patience, thoughtfulness, forbearance represent strength and confidence. ‘The Narrators’ point is key also, a ‘victim’ mindset is a poisoned psychology . An opponent knows you’re halfway defeated as they and their sponsors have defined the terms on your playing field. 13
Posted by Ivan on May 11, 2011, 05:41 PM | # The irony of Silver vs. Lee John Barnes debate is that Barney calls himself realist - Silver doesn’t, but Silver is hundred times more realistic in his way of thinking, than Barney could ever be. Barney does not realize, or pretends that he does not realize, that nothing can be achieved with the majority of population by ‘proving’ logically something to them, especially when the living conditions are more or less tolerable. 95% of the people, any people - white, black, green, yellow - are lemmings as defined by Dr Pierce. Lemming does not mean stupid or idiot. As defined by Dr Pierce, the notion of lemmings is a code word for individuals who are incapable of independent thought. And it is certainly true that majority of people derive their beliefs not from thoughtful investigation of what is true and what is not, but by conformity, by going along to get along, by herd mentality, by what is fashionable, by what is cool, by social conditioning, etc. And that is precisely the reason why the jews could gain so much power - not because the jews are so smart, but because the majority of all gentile peoples are gullible lemmings. They are not stupid, they are not idiots, they are not bad - they are just lemmings. So how do you control the lemmings? What can force a lemming to start thinking? The best and the surest thing that can force the lemming to overcome the laziness of mind (which, by the way, he is imbued with by nature with a certain purpose: stability of society) is worsening conditions of living. The second best is - constant appeal to their emotions and constant bombardment with propaganda. If you subject them with good and life reaffirming propaganda - they will be good. If you subject them day in and day out with jewish propaganda, as it is happening today, they will be what they are today. 14
Posted by MJ on May 11, 2011, 08:23 PM | # Why would ANY American WANT a swatsticka flag? it is a FOREIGN flag. “Dont tread On Me” is sufficient for the times. 15
Posted by Wandrin on May 11, 2011, 09:35 PM | # Good article. Very practical.
They may not intend to be but the definition of anti-racism has been designed to be anti-white so they are whether they realize it or not. For example, say the multicult definition of racism has two clauses in the small print (which it does). 1. Only white people can be racist. What does “kill all the racists!” or “destroy racism!” mean in that context? However,
The BUGS style works best (in my experience) when you’re not trying to persuade the opponent but when you’re just using them to persuade the audience in which case it doesn’t matter if you upset them (because if they’re consciously anti-white who cares, and if they’re only brain-washed to be anti-white they’ll forgive you when they wake up). However if you’re on the doorstep with someone one on one then yes you’re right you want to be more non-confrontational. Personally i still say the same things just in a less belligerant manner i.e instead of “you anti-white scum-sucking SOB” something like “the political correct ideology is anti-white” so it’s less personal on them. 16
Posted by MJ on May 12, 2011, 12:24 AM | # I wonder what is going to happen to these stupid left wing Jews that are white, which they are, sorry to make you all sick.. 17
Posted by MJ on May 12, 2011, 12:31 AM | # MEANWILE….. We are locked and loaded waiting for the Methicans to start some la raza conquest. Its sickening what just happened in my own fking neighborhood.. Talk about a DUMBA$$ ‘Jew’ living across the street… He ‘rented out to own’ his house… And you’ll never guess… He rented out a 3005 sq ft gorgeous home in WHITE neighborhood to really DIRTY Methicans. ALREADY, in one months time…they park their car bass ackwards, leave their garbage cans out all night long and now the friggin mariachi noise pollution is playing. THANKS TO A JEW. So, if you all think ALL of us Jews like these “Jews” you are CRAZY! 18
Posted by Mr Voight on May 12, 2011, 12:47 AM | # MJ, just looked at your blog…your husband is the JTF guy? 19
Posted by the Narrator... on May 12, 2011, 02:00 AM | # One thing is for certain if you intend to take the long road of subtle persuasion, “A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.” You might want to wait and apply the art when you find yourself the casual stranger in casual situations. When it comes to family and friends you’ll have to leave bread crumbs for them to discover all on their own. But overall I’m of the opinion that things have deteriorated to the point that it will take tyrant-king to extract us fro the current predicament.
Yeah, ironical that thought is. Has there ever been a race riot that didn’t have jews at the back of the orc pack with whips?
. Does satire and surrealism really work well together? Sure, it did for Adam West, but still…. ... 20
Posted by Thorn on May 12, 2011, 08:33 AM | #
Thanks for your input, MJ. Unfortunately, MJ, there are a few characters who post at Majority Rights that ARE crazy ... or at least mindbendingly brainwashed. What happens to them is this: they read a book or two such as CoC by Dr. Kevin MacDonald, augment it with a few dozen essays supporting the anti-Semitic thesis, then VOILA! it results in yet another deluded pseudo-intellectual. To make things worse, they go around indiscriminately spreading their Jew hatred; which in turn makes the cause of fighting against anti-white racism and white dispossession/race-replacement even more difficult than it already is. One thing I’m certain of: when the cause of promoting white interests becomes mainstream politics, all the 9-11 Truthers and rabid anti-Semites and Christian haters will be swept aside and marginalized even futher than they already are. 21
Posted by the Narrator... on May 12, 2011, 10:46 AM | #
I could care less about 9-11. But jews ain’t White, so its all a moot point anyway. ... 22
Posted by Mj on May 12, 2011, 02:03 PM | # Sorry, Narrator WRONG. There are 3 races in the human race of humans; I am not Mongoloid. I am NOT Negroid. Sorry to make you sick. As a younger lady, I was beat up by 3 black girls just for being white. So, you can tout that craziness that Jews are not white all you want, but it is what it is, whether YOU like it or not. 23
Posted by Mj on May 12, 2011, 02:12 PM | # Thorn: Jew, non-Jew, Christian, Buddhist, etc have a choice in this life; either to follow evil or good. ANY person can go buy a Bible. You can buy the New Testament anyplace, even the Dollar store now. You can buy a Torah if you wish as well. All of the good vs evil scriptures are there. I am extremely observant of the Christian faith and attend Church services quite frequently. I do this b/c I am not ‘well loved’ in ‘Conservative’ synagogues. (And at least I feel accepted in Christian churches because my views on life are very similar to Christianity..) It is fine if they dont accept us, whatever. They are the ones missing out. When I go to hear the words of God, I WANT to hear HIS words, not some political, socialist, craziness, and I am NOT Orthodox by ANY stretch of the imagination. I am not read in the Talmud as well. I dont like fable or falacy. If people want to be anti-semitic, they have a right to be. They need to read the book of Revelations, however, and the book of Daniel to see just WHO they are aligning with. If people want to have racial preference for being with their own kind, they have a right to be. BUT, I wish they should see that not all of us JEWS are evil and tow some crazy line of social mumbo jumbo. Definitely NOT I. I have 3 years of writing to prove just who I am. 24
Posted by Wade on May 12, 2011, 05:55 PM | #
So are you saying that Whites will be slaves to Jews for eternity? 25
Posted by Wade on May 12, 2011, 06:01 PM | #
Well, shit. I guess we’ve all been wasting our precious time worrying about all those Arabs flooding Europe. After all, they’re all just a bunch of Caucasians. 26
Posted by danielj on May 12, 2011, 07:47 PM | # As they were beating me with a stick, they were screaming; So, if their Jewdar was functioning properly, would it have made the beating more bearable? If they were screaming “YOU FILTHY JEWESS BITCH!!!” as they pummeled you, would you feel better about the episode? 27
Posted by Wandrin on May 12, 2011, 09:08 PM | #
That’s a good example of how big Jews are creating a future nightmare situation for a lot of little Jews. Again. But that’s part of the process. Take 20% casualties with each iteration and replenish those losses with the children of the sociopaths from the host population who helped. (Watch who the Blairs, Murdochs, Clintons, Bushs etc kids marry.) 28
Posted by Ballantine's on May 12, 2011, 10:24 PM | #
Right. Think about “The Jew” not as a bunch of individuals, but as a slime mold, sort of halfway between a bunch of individuals and a super-organism, that occasionally forms Sporangia from which spores are ejected to start the life-cycle anew in unexploited environments. The Sporangia may be thought of as huge Ponzi schemes in which only a few “individuals” get to survive and represent the germline of the organism, while the rest are sacrificed. This explains quite a lot about Western history including attacks on innocent Jews in response to the virulence of other Jews who may have, themselves, victimized fellow Jews. 29
Posted by Ivan on May 12, 2011, 10:28 PM | # I wouldn’t worry too much about MJs - they are relatively harmless folks. I wouldn’t worry even about a jew who, like Joel Stein, can’t resist the urge to show the hutzpah coming out of his ass in public:
Joel Stein’s type, who can’t resist running his mouth, is a useful idiot to be used to expose the jews. As long as a jew admits he is a jew, he becomes relatively harmless. I am worried about the hidden jews, Marrano-jews, chameleon-jews, Trojan-Horse type jews. I am worried about the jews claiming they were born jews, but they stopped being jews, like Israel Shamir or Brother Nathaniel, for example. The latter is a relatively harmless buffoon with multiple crosses hanging from his neck, but the former is an extremely perceptive, and extremely erudite fella, who tells a lot of truthful stuff about the jews, but at the end he will try to convince you that Dr Kevin MacDonald is a crackpot, and race does not matter. I am worried about characters like Thorn, Leon Haller, and Grimoire, who are not nearly as perceptive as Israel Shamir, but are complete liars and frauds, who parade as whites, who are good at nothing except damaging white peoples reputation. 30
Posted by Grimoire on May 12, 2011, 11:56 PM | # Ivan may like to think and write like an idiot, but he doesn’t fool anyone; he really is an idiot. 31
Posted by Ivan on May 13, 2011, 12:51 AM | # I am sorry, Grimoire, but I got some bad news for you sunshine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRvPoCWElOc&feature=related Are there any queers in the audience tonight? Now there’s one in the spotlight he don’t look like to me And that one looks jewish! and that one’s a coon! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_leY_LgOuQ&feature=related As, I am sure, GW knows very well, the above words are not mine so, clearly, I am not in violation of any British laws. My only sin is that I love Pink Floyd - the gratest English rock band ever. Good night, baba. I like you. 32
Posted by the Narrator,,, on May 13, 2011, 02:09 AM | #
Translation: ‘When Whites are allowed to be for scraps at what was once their own table…’
There are three currently agreed upon (by some academics) branches of the human race. Many claim there are no races at all. When I say White I am referring to those peoples indigenous to Europe. Jews are indigenous to Asia. Culturally, linguistically, Religiously etc.. jews are an Eastern, not Western, people. Yeah the United State Bureaucracy considers jews as Caucasian. It also considers Arabs, Egyptians, Turks, Persians and many others (including Mexicans wanted by Federal Law Enforcement agencies) as Caucasian as well.
.
B.It’s particularly true in this case as you say your assailants were black, and blacks are extraordinarily unintelligent creatures. If a group of blacks cornered Jackie Chan in an alley, they’d likely move in on him while shouting, “hand over the chopsticks whiteboy!” C. As the average jewish female tends to look like Carla from ‘Cheers’ and the average jewish male resembles Golda Meir, odds are you could change your last name to Rodriguez or Zayid and no on would be the wiser. Put on a Che shirt and the black girls will leave you alone, fearing reprisals from your latina sisters.
You must be really young. Or your entire persona is satire.
33
Posted by CS on May 13, 2011, 07:13 AM | # Let’s cut to the chase. The problem is that WE are vastly outnumbered by liberals, white lemmings, and non-whites in our own countries and I don’t see how that is going to change. However, if all functional white people from all over the world.moved to one small country we might have the numbers to take over and run things or at least influence things enough so that in the long run we will.. Then we could do all sorts of fun things like hand out citizenship and the vote to our people who don’t even live in the country. We can start harassing antis with impunity which will motivate them to leave. We can control government spending and have it spent on projects worthwhile to our cause. We can start practicing eugenics. We can deal harshly with career criminals and motivate them to leave. We can control the education system and teach our kids what we want instead of what liberals want. We can start producing white children for adoption to other countries. There are probably many other fun things we could do once we are in control of our own country but the problem is getting into control. 34
Posted by Thorn on May 13, 2011, 08:13 AM | # When Ivan turns in his much anticipated essay for to GW to publish, I hope it contains lots and lots of stuff in there explaining to us the REAL reason why the 9-11 attacks occurred. This is important because, after all, Ivan said he was going to use 9-11 as a litmus test to judge people. Those who fail HIS test will be marched off to the camps - AND HE’LL DO IT TOO! LOL! In case you didn’t already know, Ivan is a VERY VERY powerful man. Heh! And I also hope he explains for us how and why neo-Nazism and rabid shouting from the rooftops anti-Semitism is a wise strategy from which to accomplish our goals. Of course those things have worked so well for us thus far, right? Why change what really works, right? In other words, I hope Ivan completely exposes himself as the misleading trickster he actually is. 35
Posted by Ivan on May 13, 2011, 09:22 PM | #
Well yes, Thorn, that is true. Ivan is as powerful as truth can be - his powers are potentially limitless. Truth in itself is powerless unless shared by those who have real power - the people. The corollary to that is: The deception is as powerful as the multiplicity of people that can be deceived. The power of deception prevails today in the world thanks to you, Thorn, and your kind. Congratulations on the job well done! The bad news is that the balance of power is shifting. As a jew, you can feel it in your guts, Thorn. Under these circumstances, my job is very simple and very clear - to assist this process as much as I can, to push it a bit further. It does not feel like a job at all, Thorn, it is more like having fun and sheer joy rather than doing a work.
Well, Thorn, you can juggle as much as you wish with magic words - anti-Semitism, neo-Nazism, Islamo-Fascism, Holocaust, etc - their spell powers are dwindling by the hour. They won’t help you much longer. Time is ticking, tick-tack, tick-tack ... Don’t miss the starting gun, Thorn http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPBYLDqUwQk And remember - I like you. 36
Posted by Grimoire on May 13, 2011, 11:06 PM | # Somewhere in the Caucasus a village has lost it’s idiot. 37
Posted by Ivan on May 14, 2011, 12:32 AM | #
Yes, Grimoire, that is absolutely true: I don’t fool anyone - I am not in the fooling business. I think of myself as hygiene and mental-disease prevention services worker - my job is to rehabilitate people fooled by you and your kin to render them fool-proof and jew-clean. And remember: I like you, just like GW has advised me to. 38
Posted by Leon Haller on May 14, 2011, 03:46 PM | # I got some bad news for you sunshine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRvPoCWElOc&feature=related Are there any queers in the audience tonight? Now there’s one in the spotlight he don’t look like to me And that one looks jewish! and that one’s a coon! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_leY_LgOuQ&feature=related As, I am sure, GW knows very well, the above words are not mine so, clearly, I am not in violation of any British laws. My only sin is that I love Pink Floyd - the gratest English rock band ever. Good night, baba. I like you. (Ivan) ——————————————————————————————————
39
Posted by Ivan on May 14, 2011, 04:09 PM | #
Yes, Leon, when The Wall came out in 1979, Roger Waters probably believed that what happened to jews in Hitler’s Germany was just that - heinous crimes against innocent God chosen people, committed by evil Germans. But I am not so sure that Roger Waters still believes jewish lies and propaganda as he used to in 1979. 32 years is more than enough to grow up. 40
Posted by Jason on May 22, 2011, 02:00 PM | # Leon Haller on May 11, 2011, 10:52 AM, said in part, “...a plaintive, “aren’t whites people, too?” mode, implies that America is one great multicultural place…” No one here believes the America is a multicultural place which is a deceptive term that beguiles fair-minded hearers. America is a multiracial place. Better just to drop the term “multicultural” because those who use it are objectively anti-white, and are subjectively attempting to create a new dominant social order of everyone but white Americans. They believe that white Americans are distinctly responsible for horrible events, but that bus is coming apart as Mexicans challenge blacks with extreme vigor, and as Asians challenge Mexicans with slyness and surprise tactics. It takes a while to see this, but it is abundantly clear from pro-immigration groups, human relations & human rights entities, newspaper writers, Hollywood film-makers, the urban-coastal class, the dominant media culture, the corporate entertainment culture, and the Manhattan glossy magazines that the goal of those who call themselves multiculturalists are really racial revolutionaries seeking to marginalize white Americans all the way to the point of establishing a caste system in America. And worse. 41
Posted by GT on May 22, 2011, 05:05 PM | # CS,
What do you mean by “functional”? Do you mean race-aware? The problem is most race-aware white people are themselves products of seven generations of Judeo social and economic selection. Shaped and dependent upon the very system that harms them this small country comprised of race-aware whites would likely capitulate, just as Rhodesia and South Africa did, in the face of international moral condemnation and economic boycotts. Like it or not a new Dark Age is upon us. Despite intermediate steps taken now for the benefit of “functional” but dependent white people the long-term survival of our race may well depend on the success of new populations born from a tiny handful that demonstrate the ability to quietly survive and thrive on the mainstream margins. 42
Posted by MJ on May 23, 2011, 09:41 PM | # Narrator, you do run on. Hopefully, you have the good fortune of not having the same happen to you. Jew jew jew, bla bla bla.
DITTO Darlin. 43
Posted by To MJ on May 24, 2011, 07:45 PM | # MJ, Great to see a Jew supporting the rights of Whites to advance their own interests and live in their own all-White nations. Amazing to see this, given that you are not White and are a Jew. So thanks for that. BTW—do you live in Israel or Birobidzhan? 44
Posted by CS on May 25, 2011, 04:28 AM | # Roger Waters is a pinko who was upset that Whites in Britain might want to expel all the darkies flooding in. 45
Posted by CS on May 25, 2011, 04:29 AM | # GT, By “functional” I mean White people who don’t care if they are called racist and who will at a minimum vote to keep non-whites out. 46
Posted by Leon Haller on May 25, 2011, 06:42 AM | # “However, if all functional white people from all over the world.moved to one small country we might have the numbers to take over and run things or at least influence things enough so that in the long run we will..” I like it! What I have been long advocating (including here at MR) is catching on ... 47
Posted by CS on May 25, 2011, 07:04 AM | # Leon Haller. Your WN migration is a good idea and I’ve thought of the best country yet. The country of Malta. English speaking. Only 400 000 people. A British style election system which means we only need to win in a little more than half the country to control the whole thing. And, IIRC the current leader made vague remarks about wanting to preserve the white race. In other words, it isn’t like Iceland where I’m pretty sure 99% of the population are flaming liberals. Perhaps being so close to Africa gives them a lesson in race realism. As for South Africa, If the whites had half a brain, they should have created their own white homeland for whites only, a mixed area to deport white liberals to, and grant the rest to the blacks to drive into the ground before handing power over. 48
Posted by anon on May 25, 2011, 07:26 AM | # Malta, Guyana, and Belize are all I can think of. Falklands if they were independent, but the Argies would attempt a grab the next day. Eventually the English will so overwhelm western Spain and southern France that we may consider a coup d’etat par bricolage. 49
Posted by CS on May 25, 2011, 07:40 AM | # The smaller the population the better. It means we need less of our people there to control things. 50
Posted by Leon Haller on May 25, 2011, 08:35 AM | # Re Malta, it’s good to think outside the box, but there are problems. The core issue is susceptibility to (politico-demographic) conquest vs longer term strategic viability. Malta might be easy to conquer (or not), but hard to ‘hold’, and especially use for our purposes. I need to think more about this. Issues to consider: 1. What is the goal - to achieve a pleasant living space (‘pleasant’ from a WN view), or to establish a viable outpost for ultimate racial survival? 2. Is it actually possible to conquer Malta through politicized immigration? For example, what are their current immigration policies? Are they EU, and can any EU citizen simply move there? How long must one reside in order to become a citizen (and thus acquire voting rights)? 3. Even if WN immigration could happen, and be effectuated “under the radar” such that in time Malta came to have a WN majority (comprised of WN immigrants, plus WN native Maltese), how much room is there to grow? Is Malta militarily defensible without substantial population growth? 4. How attractive is Malta to putative immigrants? To do this requires a country with potential to grow its economy in tandem with its growing (WN) population. This is not some “Burning Man” style vacation, where a bunch of WNs all descend upon and take over some remote venue, simply because its sparse population means that such a takeover is possible. The issue is viability. Can the Maltese economy permanently support a large population increase? I suspect most WNs, especially of the pioneer type who would find emigration/conquest appealing, need to work (sell their labor) to support themselves and their families. Is such work available? Could it be, as WN immigration generates a critical mass of laborers and consumers? 5. Are there not better alternatives - places linguistically superior (ie, where a lot of people already speak English, the white language that is most common, even as a first language, and obviously as a second); with ecological room to expand; that might not notice WN migration for quite a while (I suspect the Maltese might figure out what’s what very quickly, and possibly apply the brakes); with an already advanced economy, that either is or could be agriculturally self-sufficient, and that, with the right capitalist policies, could be made to expand rapidly in order to accommodate new labor entrants; preferably that already has a hi-tech defense establishment, even if small compared to the US, China, Israel, etc? No place that I can think of is perfect, but I continue to advocate Australia. They have a small population, still whiter than most white countries; it is the whitest English-speaking place, except for Scotland, Wales or Ireland; it is geographically remote, which has psychic advantages; it has a modern, if small, military (what matters are pre-existent defense skills, networks and institutions that can be rapidly expanded, that don’t need to be built up from scratch); it has a developed economy, with relevant infrastructure, and lots of mineral resources, which could grow with the population; their elites are already pushing immigration, albeit Asian - how could they refuse to admit lots of whites? Obviously, we all have more thinking to do. But I do believe my larger prognostication is valid. Before whites wake up to their impending extinction, nearly every white nation will have a nonwhite majority, at which point white patriots will be faced with the choice of fighting civil wars (with all the economic damage that entails) to reclaim territories lost or ceded during the decades of the Immigration Invasion (“conquest by colonization”) - wars whose outcomes are by no means certain - or simply passively to accept that collectively our race is going extinct, while individually continuing to live personally tolerable lives (until the very end, at which point the last remaining whites, the ‘recalcitrants’ who refuse to accept nonwhite domination, and who have not thrown away their genes in miscegenation, will likely be exterminated). Which path do you really think most whites will take? 51
Posted by anon on May 25, 2011, 08:37 AM | # The advantage with Malta is that, whereas in the other small nations the only possible strategy is assimilating and attempting to raise progeny to enter the political class, a significant number of adult white nationalists in residence on the island could move public opinion in favor of an unfriendly littoral border and the institution of a whites-only (and eventually eugenic) policy. I don’t know if Normal Lowell is a worthy character to have at the helm, however, in view of his grandiose self-promotion (“The Book That Changed The World”). Nonetheless this is one of the precious few practical ideas we have to kick around, and it ought to be discussed without the usual belligerent intransigence that crops up whenever the notion of relocating in body is raised. 52
Posted by Leon Haller on May 25, 2011, 08:44 AM | # I should have ended with “And thus we need our own viable country, a place where whites, and ideally WNs, are in the majority, and which is economically attractive now, and could be more so over time, and which is militarily defensible.” I fear that without a Racial State, the white future is extinction by demographic inundation, non-replacement white birthrates, and always increasing miscegenationist pressures. In your hearts, you know I’m right. 53
Posted by anon on May 25, 2011, 08:55 AM | #
Not on an island of 100+ sq miles, LOL. It would be an experimental model—if it succeed, whites will look with longing upon the better way.
“Welcome to Belize.” English - check. Living space - check. Lax government - check; black-run at the moment but the return of Said Musa, a Palestinian who established tight visitation rules for Israeli tourists and expats, is not impossible. Good economy - check. Agricultural self-sufficiency - check; the Mennonites already do everything. Problems: negroes at the capital, presence of British military, and recidivist threat from Guatemalan government. The negroes actually could be neatly contained in Belize District and the rest be made to relocate to Honduras or expatriate to Kwa with government assistance. I have often dreamed of setting up a business with the explicit aim of assisting black Belizeans to migrate to New York City or wherever, the faster to cleanse Belize of the dusky dross. You better belize they would jump at the chance, too. What is this called in sociobiology? Where one species induces another to attack the living space of another to secure its own. Many nations do this already—Iran for example has paid gulf Arabs to return to Iraq, and of course the chosen subsidize the internal movement of blacks everywhere in our living space. I would drop any capitalist ambition as Central America is already a sewer and Belize’s ecosystem must be protected at all costs. But I suppose with Germans and provident American Germanics a sustainable, micro-capitalist biosphere could be built; certainly better than what petty Latin capitalism is doing to the place. Would also have to contend with the Chinese already worked deep into the local economy, sponsored by their wealthy diaspora organization based in China. As far as immigration policy, foreign ownership regulations, and room to spread out, though, the place is unmatched. But real political influence would hinge on assimilation and a second generation raised with the purpose of capturing local and, as soon as possible, national government. 54
Posted by anon on May 25, 2011, 09:16 AM | #
—Vijay Prozak, 2004 55
Posted by Jay on May 25, 2011, 11:35 AM | # What do we call a person who is prepared to sketch out plans for a nation, but has no experience with even creating a white neighborhood, a white cul-de-sac, or a white township? Good question. Dreamer? Deep thinker? Futurist? Fantasist? Anti-white? White anti-white? Misdirection specialist? Just a singer sending out a soothing rhyme and lyrics? Pied piper? Whence cometh all those who dream a nation yet cannot point to an on-the-ground experience with a successful all-white colony, school, neighborhood, or institution of some kind? How is it that their fantasy is discussed by adults as if it were some version of reality? 56
Posted by Armor on May 25, 2011, 01:27 PM | # Jay: “What do we call a person who ...” What do you call today’s western governments? They are more genocidal than competent. You don’t need any technical competence to stop immigration, expel immigrants, allow freedom of racial association, and postpone our governments’ plans to reduce white people into tiny minorities in the near future. 57
Posted by Jay on May 25, 2011, 04:21 PM | # Armor, asking about the qualifications for white nation-building necessarily involves asking about the experience persons might have creating a white neighborhood, a white cul-de-sac, or a white township. The white Atlantic Islander persons who crossed the Atlantic on the Mayflower (1620) had developed experience in governing their own conduct on mainland Europe, and possessed the experience needed to develop a white English colony in the midst of forests and savages. The great white founders of the First American Republic had governing experience, military experience, and agricultural experience long prior to meeting in the Continental Congress and proposing the United States of America (1777). Even the lesser founders of the Second American Republic (1789) had some nation-building experience. But none of them published wishful visions of a future white country without any experience in doing similar things on a local level. Your conversion of the question into its reverse reveals a Levantine slipperiness you should use to explore the real world. 58
Posted by anon on May 25, 2011, 05:46 PM | # Jay, Shameless though it be to give oneself up to political fantasy for an hour or to, it is no less shameless to come on with the usual accusations of ethnic disloyalty or of being foreign, as you have done with no provocation. You say we’ve no experience establishing so much as a white cul-de-sac. Well, you know even that much is explicitly prohibited under British and American law. It is psychologically normal to look beyond immediate constraints to some removed place and state in which one enjoys greater freedom. However absurd people here may be, we are each one struggling to simply “find a means to cohere”, as Pound exhorted the English to do in wartime. If our proposals be specious, let us know in friendlier fashion, without the needless litany of ad homines. 59
Posted by anon on May 25, 2011, 05:53 PM | #
This would be quite easy if white nationalists weren’t the type to be more satisfied calling their fellows Jews than making contacts for real-world alliances. 60
Posted by Leon Haller on May 26, 2011, 06:53 AM | # Interesting re Belize, anon. But I’m sticking with Australia. Small population, large landmass, clean and easy to defend, after armament and naval buildup, many Middle Australians would probably welcome more whites going there in lieu of Asiatics, already First World, etc. I really do think this is more promising than Jimmy Marr’s Northwest Frontier (the old Aryan Bastion being theorized already by the late 60s). The ZOG might still let our people go, but not with any of their territory! 61
Posted by CS on May 26, 2011, 04:32 PM | # Maybe we should spend another decade accusing everyone on this website of being a jew. 62
Posted by CS on May 26, 2011, 04:58 PM | # Australia has 22 million people. It already has a large and growing number of wogs. That means to ensure control we’re going to have to get more than 22 million people over there. The only way that would happen is if there is widespread abandonment of already existing white countries by whites which is something that might happen but only decades down the road. Belize is full of wogs as well. AFAIK there are hardly any wogs in Malta now. We make a deal with the Nationalist government in power there already. You let us in on a case by case basis. We join your party, we vote for you, we donate yearly to your political campaigns, we work for you for free during election campaigns. It’s a two party state over there. They won by less than a couple thousand votes last time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maltese_general_election,_2008 I think they’d be open to it. We vote and work to make the country a desirable place for functional white people and less attractive to wog parasites and libtards. We don’t dress up in Nazi uniforms and parade in the streets. We don’t talk about eugenic programs. We don’t talk about the Goddamn jews who will probably be looking for any excuse to invade and kill us all. We don’t even publicly admit what we are tyring to accomplish. In fact, mainly what we’re tyring to accomplish is simply to keep Malta white. Once we secure Malta, we start working on another country. Your single vote goes a hell of a lot further in Malta than Australia. We concentrate in certain districts and we can probably get our people nominated and elected as MPs pretty quickly. There’s 69 MPs divided by 300 K voting population means one MP per 4400 people. 63
Posted by Leon Haller on May 27, 2011, 07:22 AM | # CS, I like your creative thinking, but consider my earlier query: 1. What is the goal - to achieve a pleasant living space (’pleasant’ from a WN view), or to establish a viable outpost for ultimate racial survival? By all means, if WNs could stealthily create a WN ethnostate on Malta, and if jobs were available in sufficient quantities, then taking it over demographico-electorally could be a really cool project. Think how great it would be to interact with WNs on an open and daily basis. Like a giant clubhouse or something. I certainly would consider migrating there, especially if I were married, and could find employment. But an outcrop of tiny islands like Malta is completely insufficient for our ultimate purposes (and we might just as easily be able to conquer through numbers an island elsewhere, say in the Caribbean or South Pacific, if a racialist clubhouse country is all we wanted). The Racial State will not be a Club Med, but a last outpost of Western civilization in a dying and hostile world - as well as, ultimately, the launchpad from which future generations will reclaim our territories lost through elite betrayal. To survive, we must grow, and the WN state will be governed with racial goals uppermost, the first of which is to expand our numbers through natural (and eugenic) increase (someday, someday, another book project of mine will be Christian Eugenics), as well as appropriate Aryan immigration. We also need to be large enough to be able to accommodate sudden, large population increases. Moreover, Malta is extremely densely populated, and highly ethnically homogeneous. I strongly doubt they would want a bunch of immigrants, white or not. And what the hell language do they speak?! Remember, a big chunk of WNs are either English speaking, or know English as a second language. We must think about this practically, from an individualist perspective, but one geared towards an ultimate collective goal. The difference with Australia is that it is a real country, with room to expand (despite the harsh Outback, which may contain untapped resource wealth - certainly more than tiny Malta), but not an ancient one. Aussies, like Americans, are more white-racial as against white-ethnic. Look at how English patriots are riled up over Polish immigration, something that would only bother me a bit. European countries might prefer white to nonwhite immigrants, but I suspect majorities in most don’t want any immigrants. I think Aussies would be quite welcoming of whites, much as I welcome white immigrants (except Jews) to America. Finally, we don’t have to get a number of immigrants to Australia equal to their population, as many Aussies might well support at least the basic WN goals of ending nonwhite immigration, and expelling illegals. As more of us go there we will form a bloc, constantly agitating for more white immigration (like Latinos in the US). Eventually, as our numbers keep rising, we will keeping increasing the number and severity of our racialist demands. 64
Posted by CS on May 27, 2011, 05:39 PM | #
Both. I don’t believe whites wil go extinct anytime soon. Yes we’ll be severely reduced in numbers over time but there will always be white people who’ll want to have white kids. Of course they’ll be minorities in their own countries so that will suck to varying degrees depending on the composition of the non-whites.
Precisely. It would be awesome to be in the majority and openly interact with other WNs on a daily basis. We could have our own print and TV media, our own businesses, the list goes on and on.
I’m not suggesting we stop at Malta. Once we secure Malta we find another target. Perhaps Belize or another small country. It will be too hard to take Australia unless there is a mass exodus of whites from Europe or America because non-whties have made those countries intolerable to live in. Moreover, Malta is extremely densely populated, and highly ethnically homogeneous. I strongly doubt they would want a bunch of immigrants, white or not. And what the hell language do they speak?! Remember, a big chunk of WNs are either English speaking, or know English as a second language. We must think about this practically, from an individualist perspective, but one geared towards an ultimate collective goal. They speak English and look like Italians. It used to be a British colonly. I think the nationaliss who are the only people we care about there will be happy to have us as our votes, money and efforts will help keep them in power. I mean white people tolerate having millions of niggers and spics come into their countries. I doubt the Maltese will be too upset by an influx of white people who don’t commit crime and contribute to the economy.
Australia is a good choice in that the whites their are way more racist than the ones in Canada, Britian and New Zealand. It is simply too large for us to take right now. Seriously, we might not even be able to “conquer” Malta even if the government there is a-okay with what we want to do.
While the Australians are more “racist” than other English speakers, there is a huge number of libtards there and since many of the non-white immigrants are Asians who pretty much behave themselves, it is going to be a very hard sell to get enough whites there with the program. 65
Posted by Leon Haller on May 28, 2011, 09:35 AM | # Too much for me to respond to right now, CS. But this might interest you from the SA exchange: Cara, I am ever busier, and will not respond to all these questions until the points I raised in response to your earlier comment are properly addressed (eg, you seem to have no knowledge of your own national history, of brave pioneers and bloody battles for living space and self-determination). Bear in mind one crucial matter: the Boers are going extinct, as are whites everywhere, it’s true, but you are descending into Hell much sooner than we are, and your end (and the extinction process itself along the way) will be much nastier than ours. Your future is Rhodesia, where whites are being alternately murdered or just left to starve after all their property was stolen by their kaffir-communist government. Our future in the US is California, where whites have been demographically conquered, and are being dispossessed of their wealth through liberal government spending (which is really interracial wealth transferral, though on a much slower scale than you are experiencing in SA) - and where white youth are intermarrying with nonwhites and miscegenating at rapidly accelerating rates, at least in the major cities. But I guess having one’s precious beyond price (white) genes absorbed into a mongrel genetic cesspool is still preferable to being butchered in one’s own home by feral kaffirs. Now believe me, if I had the power, I would grant instantaneous asylum in the US for any Boer (or indeed, for any Aryan anywhere, except known criminals, disease bearers, homosexuals, and leftists). I would do this out of in part selfish concerns. I want America to be made whiter, if possible. That would be good for my country. Admitting the entire Boervolk into America would also be great for individual Boers - but terrible for the Boer nation collectively. Your ethnoculture would not survive more than one single generation here. Then it would be absorbed into white America, in turn to be absorbed into mongrelism. But at least it would be a mostly peaceful process. A final point. The Racial State (TRS) as I am envisioning it most certainly will not simply be a “whites only” society - a modern, Western democracy minus muds. For attention must be paid to its projected viability over the long-term. TRS will have tremendous economic freedom, far more than any place today except maybe Hong Kong. Such freedom is necessary to maximize economic growth, which in turn will feed armaments production and acquisition. But otherwise it will be extremely militarized, both in terms of the percentage of GDP devoted to defense spending, and the constant combat training (in the form not merely of lessons in killing techniques, but also of assigning pre-warfare “shadow” positions to all persons, so that upon the outbreak of war, each individual will already have a known place in the military hierarchy, supplementing the standing, professional soldiery) individuals of both sexes, from ages 16-60, will receive and participate in, as well as socially regulated and authoritarian. Specifically, it will be rigorously eugenic, as well as formally oriented around maximizing white fecundity. School curricula will be designed around a core patriotic consensus, teaching not only standard subjects like reading and math, but also explaining to the children the reality of racial differentiation, the horrors of multiracialism, and the necessity for harsh measures to ensure white survival. Of course, this is the briefest outline of TRS, but you are certainly correct that society will not be nearly as free as in the modern West. It will also not be morally and culturally degenerate, nor headed to extinction. 66
Posted by CL on May 28, 2011, 03:17 PM | #
Leon, Could you clarify what form or forms of rigorous eugenics you support? Some forms of eugenics seem incompatible with the idea of maximizing white fecundity. The American eugenics movement of the 1920’s lined up behind the idea of sterilizing some poor white girl from the American South, and that’s not my idea of maximizing white fecundity: http://www.hsl.virginia.edu/historical/eugenics/3-buckvbell.cfm
67
Posted by CS on May 28, 2011, 04:35 PM | # Cara like many whites are pretty much a write off. Even if blacks killed her entire family she’d probably still be a liberal and not want to separate from them. I’ve already put in my time and I’m done dealing with idiots like that. If I’m wrong and she does a 180 down the raod I’m willing to let her join us. As for eugenics, it is something we should do and only can do when we have control at the national level. A policy I’d be fine with at the start is to sterilize people who have no business having kids, (complete idiots and criminals) and subsidize the costs of child care of those we do want to have more kids (people with high IQs and excellent health). As for those we want to sterilize, if they aren’t willing they have the choice of leaving the country and having as many kids as they want somewhere else on someone else’s dime. 68
Posted by anon on May 28, 2011, 07:31 PM | #
Yep. Their kind revels in self-limitation and minimizes self-destruction. What sort of animal does that? A sick and backward one, like my grandmother’s loony macaw that plucks out its own feathers. 69
Posted by Leon Haller on May 30, 2011, 05:22 PM | # CS, An article on current state of Australia (actually a whole special report this week). http://www.economist.com/node/18719530?story_id=18719530 Of course, the asses at The Economist have no understanding that “correlation does not equal causation”, that changing the White Australia policy may have correlated with today’s good economy but did not cause it, nor of the idea that public policies can only be assessed through time - and thus that the final verdict on the effect of the recent immigration liberalization is likely to be quite different from what it might seem to be today. Wisdom is what’s lacking, and wisdom is finally all. 70
Posted by CS on May 30, 2011, 06:06 PM | # Leon, Australia is doing quite well economically no doubt about it. However, it is simply too large population wise at this point for us to conquer demographically. We’d be lucky to be able to take over Malta with its 400 000 population. If we do take Malta easily, then sure let’s try for Australia. Something else we should do is try to do is make some serious money legitimately through business so financing certain projects isn’t an issue. 71
Posted by Graham_Lister on May 30, 2011, 06:46 PM | # Hello Cara, No-one likes to think of themselves as a ‘bad’ person but the ultra-liberalism ideology of modern world is a form of insanity, which if unchecked, will see the cultural and ultimately physical elimination of whites. Have you read “Disgrace” by J.M. Coetzee? The character of the daughter, in that rather interesting novel about the ‘new’ South Africa, simply accepts that blacks are in charge and if that means her own rape and impregnation by blacks then so be it. Now no-one wishes to be a hate-filled bigot but simply being a realist about certain issues doesn’t mean you’re a bad person. Look even people like the radical black psychiatrist Dr. Francis Cress Welsing has stated that racism is a behavioral system for white survival, on both conscious and unconscious levels, to ensure their [our] genetic survival by any means necessary. Now there is truth in that statement. The more that naive whites become fanatical ‘anti-racists’ the more they are digging all our collective graves. Next entry: White People Are Cool 2: Who Wants Whites To Race Mix? Previous entry: The end is nigh, you better believe it |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. Salvatore Quinto commented in entry 'More on the Indian beauty question' on 05/24/12, 12:47 PM. (go) (view) Trofigiogelry commented in entry 'Top Wog embraces his Inner Englishman' on 05/24/12, 12:31 PM. (go) (view) DiefleleziG commented in entry 'Tiger Tiger' on 05/24/12, 12:18 PM. (go) (view) Martha Barreda commented in entry 'Sunic interviews Fraser' on 05/24/12, 12:12 PM. (go) (view) Classic Sparkle commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 12:07 PM. (go) (view) Adalberto Deavers commented in entry 'The compassion of the court' on 05/24/12, 12:00 PM. (go) (view) Optigmata commented in entry 'More thread wars' on 05/24/12, 11:08 AM. (go) (view) payday loans commented in entry 'ANTI-JEWISM: The Deadly Plague of White Nationalist Slave Morality' on 05/24/12, 10:27 AM. (go) (view) Verlene Zumwalt commented in entry 'Ireland Worshipping at the Holocaust Shrine' on 05/24/12, 10:16 AM. (go) (view) Cobus commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 05/24/12, 10:14 AM. (go) (view) pay day loans commented in entry 'Heidegger: The West Texas Translation' on 05/24/12, 09:59 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 09:49 AM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 08:54 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 07:41 AM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 07:18 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 06:53 AM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'The facial proportions of beautiful people' on 05/24/12, 06:48 AM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'The facial proportions of beautiful people' on 05/24/12, 06:47 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 06:32 AM. (go) (view) Guest commented in entry 'The Torment of the Mulattoes' on 05/24/12, 06:17 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/24/12, 03:05 AM. (go) (view) Lee John Barnes commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 02:31 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 02:03 AM. (go) (view) Captainchaos commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 11:08 PM. (go) (view) Captainchaos commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 09:13 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 07:47 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) 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 Jimmy Marr on May 10, 2011, 08:18 PM | #
Hot news from Hollow Earth.