Page 1 of 3462 pages 1 2 3 > Last ›
Mick Lately wrote:
This comment appeared in entry 'Sir Gerald Howarth stands by letter: Time for England to fight back' on 09/02/14, 12:46 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Though raised a Catholic, MacDonald is not a Christian.
Though seeing the necessity for moral orders and recommending moral community, MR is not a Catholic site specifically nor a Christian site generally.
It rather favors uncovering that which is reverence inspiring closer to E.G.I. indeed, and therefore discussions closer in regard thereof.
* I resisted the temptation to comment on Catholicism’s reputation of pedophilia.
This comment appeared in entry 'Sir Gerald Howarth stands by letter: Time for England to fight back' on 09/02/14, 05:06 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Leon Haller wrote:
Thank you, Prof MacDonald! That Western Man = Ethical Man has been my loudly proclaimed insight for decades. It is why I’m back doing doctoral work in Catholicism. WPs must find ways to reach the white majority by appealing to the true morality of WP, and the real evil of multiculturalism and race mixture. Merely discussing matters in terms of up/down assessments of EGI is never going to be a rhetorical winner among the majority of whites.
This comment appeared in entry 'Sir Gerald Howarth stands by letter: Time for England to fight back' on 09/02/14, 04:38 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Whereas the Whites in Los Angeles would never stand for this!
This comment appeared in entry 'Sir Gerald Howarth stands by letter: Time for England to fight back' on 09/01/14, 08:50 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Guest Lurker wrote:
What a bunch of contemptible filthy depraved cowards the English are to allow this. The lowest of the low. The police were actually complicit in aiding the rapists.
But at least you don’t speak German today. That’s what counts, right? You got what you fought for. Karma. Same goes for the Anglo-Americans. There really does seem to be karmic justice in this universe.
This comment appeared in entry 'Sir Gerald Howarth stands by letter: Time for England to fight back' on 09/01/14, 02:42 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Guest Blogger wrote:
“Wise men see outlines and therefore they draw them”
D: Don’t be silly. I can’t draw a conversation. I mean things.
F: Yes—I was trying to find out just what you meant. Do you mean “Why do we give things outlines when we draw them?” or do you mean that the things have out-lines whether we draw them or not?
D: I don’t know, Daddy. You tell me. Which do I mean?
F: I don’t know, my dear. There was a very angry artist once who scribbled all sorts of things down, and after he was dead they looked in his books and in one place they found he’d written “Wise men see outlines and therefore they draw them” but in another place he’d written “Mad men see outlines and therefore they draw them.”
D: But which does he mean? I don’t understand.
F: Well, William Blake—that was his name—was a great artist and a very angry man. And sometimes he rolled up his ideas into little spitballs so that he could throw them at people.
D: But what was he mad about, Daddy?
F: But what was he mad about? Oh, I see—you mean “angry.” We have to keep those two meanings of “mad” clear if we are going to talk about Blake. Because a lot of people thought he was mad—really mad—crazy. And that was one of the things he was mad-angry about. And then he was mad-angry, too, about some artists who painted pictures as though things didn’t have out-lines. He called them “the slobbering school.”
D: He wasn’t very tolerant, was he, Daddy?
F: Tolerant? Oh, God. Yes, I know—that’s what they drum into you at school. No, Blake was not very tolerant. He didn’t even think tolerance was a good thing. It was just more slobbering. He thought it blurred all the outlines and muddled everything—that it made all cats gray. So that nobody would be able to see anything clearly and sharply.
D: Yes, Daddy.
F: No, that’s not the answer. I mean “Yes, Daddy” is not the answer. All that says is that you don’t know what your opinion is—and you don’t give a damn what I say or what Blake says and that the school has so befuddled you with talk about tolerance that you can-not tell the difference between anything and anything else.
Metalogue: Why do Things Have outlines? (metalogue between father and daughter), Steps to an Ecology of Mind, 1972, p. 37, originally published 1953.
This comment appeared in entry 'Gregory Bateson on Pathology - Context and Relation' on 09/01/14, 04:44 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Beginnings of Ulster-Scots/Scots-Irish
The Appalachians: The Scots-Irish
From there the Hatfields and McCoys (families from these parts of “Appalachia”) feud is relevant to the fratricidal concern of the post.
“The Old Man” discusses the feud as a part of his family history, but the one or two shows which deal with it must be fished-out among one of these 54 shows. Mostly well worth listening to at any rate.
This comment appeared in entry 'Fratricidal Tendency' on 09/01/14, 02:52 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Guest Blogger wrote:
This comment appeared in entry 'Fratricidal Tendency' on 08/31/14, 04:54 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Guest Blogger wrote:
Crock of Shock: Liberal Responses to Vibrant Depravity
August 30, 2014 — Tobias Langdon
Life has been disturbing for liberals lately. An American journalist is beheaded by a jihadi with a “British accent.” “Shocking,” says the Independent. At least 1400 White girls are subject to years of rape by men “of Pakistani heritage” in the Yorkshire town of Rotherham. “Shocking,” says the anti-racist campaigner Yasmin Alibhai-Brown.
Yes, it’s another of those occasions when I wonder whether English is really my mother-tongue. I thought “shocking” news had to contain some element of surprise and unpredictability. But that doesn’t seem to apply here. Britain has been enriched by mass immigration from violent and misogynistic Third World nations. Is it surprising when an enricher with a British accent cuts someone’s head off? Is it surprising when other enrichers commit gang-rape?
Not to me. I think it’s utterly predictable. Recall that smarmy liberal phrase: “of Pakistani heritage.” This is part of the heritage:
In the first phase of the war, young men and Hindus, Awami League members, intellectuals, students and academics were targeted for murder. In the second phase of the war, women were singled out. It is thought that at least 200,000 women were raped by the Pakistani forces and their collaborators – 25,000 victims found themselves pregnant, so that is not implausible. There are eyewitness accounts of “rape camps” set up by the Pakistani forces. The numbers, and the names of rape victims, remain disputed. Sheikh Mujib, the first leader of Bangladesh, ordered the destruction of lists so that the shame would not follow the victims all their lives. … It is impossible to know the real death toll. The historian R.J. Rummel, who has looked as deeply into it as anyone, concludes that the “final estimate of Pakistan’s democide to be 300,000 to 3,000,000, or a prudent 1,500,000.” (The war Bangladesh can never forget, The Independent, 19th February 2013).
That was in 1971, when Bangladesh, then called East Pakistan, seceded from Pakistan: the two regions, separated by Hindu India, had become a single Muslim nation at the Partition of India in 1947. So that’s how Pakistani Muslims treat members of their own religion and race: mass murder, mass rape. How Muslims treat members of other religions was seen during Partition itself: mass murder, mass rape. Violence and misogyny are as inseparable from Islam as narcissism and mendacity are from liberalism.
Liberals are well aware of how Muslims have behaved in the Indian subcontinent. That quotation about the Bangladesh genocide is from the Independent. And liberals have just mourned the death of Richard Attenborough, whose Oscar-winning film Gandhi (1982) portrayed the violence of Indian Partition in vivid detail. Despite knowing all this, liberals permitted Muslims to immigrate into the UK in huge numbers. When these vibrant New Britons commit atrocities, the liberals are “shocked.” But that hasn’t been their only response. Denis “The Slug” MacShane got his priorities right: he thought of himself and his bank balance:
Rotherham’s former Labour MP has broken his silence on the child abuse scandal, from the comfort of the Dordogne [a region of France where rich Britons take holidays]:
Anyone interested in Rotherham child abuse might read p 156 of my Prison Diaries @BitebackPub—
Denis MacShane (@DenisMacShane) August 26, 2014
Or you could just read the 160-page report which covers the time Denis was the local Labour MP and seemingly oblivious to what was happening on his patch and the failings of his friends and allies on the local Labour council.
Far more insightful, and free. (MacShame Uses Rotherham Scandal to Plug New Book, Guido Fawkes blog, 27th August 2014)
MacShane was jailed in December 2013 for submitting fraudulent expenses as part of his tireless pro-Jewish, anti-fascist campaigning. The Jewish Chronicle celebrated him as “one of the community’s greatest champions” and said “we should mourn Denis MacShane’s fall from grace.”
While MacShane was championing Jews and their interests, what was he doing for White girls in Rotherham? Nothing, it appears:
Denis MacShane: I was too much of a ‘liberal leftie’ and should have done more to investigate child abuse
Denis MacShane, the former Labour MP for Rotherham, has admitted that as a “Guardian reading liberal leftie” he shied away from the issue of the oppression of women in the Muslim community. Mr MacShane, who resigned in 2012 over an expenses fraud for which he was later jailed, insisted no-one came to him with child abuse allegations during his 18 years in Parliament, but admitted he should have “burrowed into” the issue.
He told the BBC: “I think there was a culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat if I may put it like that.” Admitting he had been guilty of doing too little, he said he had been aware of the problem of cousin marriage and “the oppression of women within bits of the Muslim community in Britain” but: “Perhaps yes, as a true Guardian reader, and liberal leftie, I suppose I didn’t want to raise that too hard.”
He recalled having a “huge row” with another local MP and council grandees because they were complaining about a newspaper investigation into child sexual exploitation in Rotherham, which unearthed uncomfortable truths they did not want to hear. (Denis MacShane: I was too much of a ‘liberal leftie’ and should have done more to investigate child abuse, The Daily Telegraph, 27th August 2014)
MacShane is a dedicated opponent of Nick Griffin, the former leader of the British National Party. Griffin knew all about sex-crimes by Muslims and made a speech condemning it in 2004, a full decade ago.
What was the reaction of our liberal elite, including Denis MacShane? It put Griffin on trial twice, using secret recordings by the BBC as evidence of his thought-crimes but failing to get a conviction.
Meanwhile, the elite allowed the sex-crimes to continue. Have liberals apologized and admitted that Griffin was right? Of course not. Have liberals admitted their direct responsibility for the horrors in Rotherham? Of course not. In fact, a familiar figure called Sue Berelowitz has reacted with breathtaking chutzpah, confirming my belief that she belongs to the “community” championed by MacShane for so long:
‘Culture of denial’ leaving UK children at risk of serious abuse: Deputy children’s commissioner Sue Berelowitz says, despite Rotherham and gang violence cases elsewhere, police and authorities are practising ‘wilful blindness’
Children are at risk of serious abuse across England because of a culture of “wilful blindness” about the scale and prevalence of sexual exploitation across swaths of local government and in police forces, the deputy children’s commissioner warns. In a highly critical interview given in the aftermath of the Rotherham abuse inquiry, which concluded that hundreds of children may have been abused there over a 16-year period, Sue Berelowitz said she had been “aghast” at the examples of obvious errors and poor practice she found.
Berelowitz told the Guardian she had discovered that police and council officers were in some cases still either looking the other way, not asking questions or claiming abuse was confined to a certain ethnic group – such as Asian men – or a particular social class. Berelowitz is the author of a detailed report into child sexual exploitation in gangs and groups last year following a series of high-profile cases in towns such as Rochdale [involving non-White Muslims] and Oxford [involving non-White Muslims] as well as Rotherham.
On a recent field visit to a police force, Berelowitz was surprised to learn that the officers’ top search on their internal computer profiling system was “Asian male”. When she asked what would happen if the perpetrators were not Asian, the officer in charge replied that the force was “not looking for those”. “I was astonished. I said: ‘I think you better start looking.’” [...]
Berelowitz said she was shocked to discover that although “there had been progress” by authorities in the aftermath of the grisly series of gang-rape and trafficking scandals, “there are still instances of not looking, of wilful blindness. We have to be careful none of us is in denial about the terrible reality of what happened in places like Rochdale and Rotherham.” (‘Culture of denial’ leaving UK children at risk of serious abuse, The Guardian, 28th August 2014).
Grin when you’re spinning: Shocked Sue Berelowitz
Read Tobias Langdon’s full article at The Occidental Observer:
August 31, 2014 - 12:43 pm | Permalink
That’s the problem. So many White people want to be considered good people, admired by others. Paragons of goodness. We desperately want to be part of a moral community, to be seen by others as having an impeccable reputation, etc. The academic world is full of White people who want to be considered a saint. This is the intuitive basis for the idea that establishing groups on the basis of moral reputation rather than kinship is the key to understanding Europeans. And because our culture is dominated by hostile elites creating moral communities that are fundamentally opposed to our interests, it’s killing us.
This comment appeared in entry 'Sir Gerald Howarth stands by letter: Time for England to fight back' on 08/31/14, 01:59 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
JEWISH NATIONAL FRONT wrote:
LOL The shitlerite scum whining and sniffling over “poor, poor ‘Palestinians’”, believing the same lies the Marxist kike traitors feed you. You are race traitors. We, National-Zionists, will rid our government of all neocon and internationlist FILTH, and then restore Zionism to Israel, and work with European patriots. Why don’t you go work for that muslimah over at “Snippets and Snappets”? I’m sure you’d make GREAT friends LOL
By the way, I’m in Israel and I DETEST the vast majority of diaspora kikes. I don’t consider most of them Jews.
This comment appeared in entry 'Palestine – Peace AND Apartheid?' on 08/31/14, 03:48 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
*“Negotiation” more in the sense of ‘negotiating an obstacle’ than in trying to reason with people, though we will do that too where our interests are yet to be violated.
This comment appeared in entry 'Our football coaches weren't Marxists imposing black integration' on 08/31/14, 03:02 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Guest Blogger wrote:
A veteran Conservative MP has claimed that Enoch Powell was right to warn against immigration in his controversial “rivers of blood” speech
Sir Gerald Howarth says Britain has suffered from decades of political correctness
Sir Gerald said that he stood by the letter and said his views had been reinforced by the child sex abuse scandal in Rotherham, where gangs of Asian men groomed and abused children.
He said that it is time for England to “fight back” against political correctness, adding: “If you don’t like it, go live somewhere else.”
He added: “For 40 years we have been subjected to a left wing political correctness which has stopped the British people from expressing perfectly legitimate and reasonable views. More than 1,400 children in Rochdale have paid the price for decades of political correctness and now people are speaking up.”
Mr Powell delivered his ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech in Birmingham in April 1968, calling for the “repatriation” of non-white immigrants and claiming that the increased diversity would lead to riots. There is no suggestion that Sir Gerald advocated repatriation in his letter to a constituent.
Mr Powell was immediately sacked from the shadow cabinet after his comments by Edward Heath, the then Conservative leader.
This comment appeared in entry 'Britain's Camp of The Saints' on 08/30/14, 11:59 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Soren - you may well be correct but uKnLeo is sound, no need to attack him. Thanks.
This comment appeared in entry 'swift passage' on 08/30/14, 08:51 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
The Rotherham Pathology
August 27, 2014 — Kevin MacDonald
The horrifying scandal in Rotherham (previous versions covered copiously for TOO by Tobias Langdon) continues to unfold. A report commissioned by the city council stated that at least 1400 children were sexually abused over 16 years.
It is hard to describe the appalling nature of the abuse that child victims suffered. They were raped by multiple perpetrators, trafficked to other towns and cities in the north of England, abducted, beaten, and intimidated. There were examples of children who had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone. Girls as young as 11 were raped by large numbers of male perpetrators. This abuse is not confined to the past but continues to this day. … One young person told us that ‘gang rape’ was a usual part of growing up in the area of Rotherham in which she lived. …
Within social care, the scale and seriousness of the problem was underplayed by senior managers. At an operational level, the Police gave no priority to CSE, regarding many child victims with contempt and failing to act on their abuse as a crime. Further stark evidence came in 2002, 2003 and 2006 with three reports known to the Police and the Council, which could not have been clearer in their description of the situation in Rotherham. The first of these reports was effectively suppressed because some senior officers disbelieved the data it contained. This had led to suggestions of cover- up. The other two reports set out the links between child sexual exploitation and drugs, guns and criminality in the Borough. These reports were ignored and no action was taken to deal with the issues that were identified in them.
The authorities knew about it but did not act because of fear of being labeled “racists”:
By far the majority of perpetrators were described as ‘Asian’ by victims, yet throughout the entire period, councillors did not engage directly with the Pakistani-heritage community to discuss how best they could jointly address the issue. Some councillors seemed to think it was a one-off problem, which they hoped would go away. Several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so.
And, this collective attempt to remove the ethnic element continues. As James Delingpole notes, the BBC’s report didn’t mention ethnicity until 20 paragraphs in. Delingpole continues:
And even then, the embarrassing fact slips out only with the most blushing mealy-mouthedness:
By far the majority of perpetrators of abuse were described as “Asian” by victims. [Another BBC report stated “The inquiry team noted fears among council staff of being labelled ‘racist’ if they focused on victims’ descriptions of the majority of abusers as ‘Asian’ men.” Majority?? Perhaps 51% It would be much closer to the truth to say they were all Asian.]
Well hang on, a second. What this phrase seems to be hinting at is the possibility that the men involved weren’t “Asian” (note to US readers: Asian is UK PC-speak for Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, not orientals) but that the victims mistakenly took them to be so. Is that actually the case or not? …
[It happened] because the kind of politically correct, left-leaning and basically rather thick people that local authorities like Rotherham Council tend to have working for them are so paralysed by modish concerns about cultural sensitivity that they have made an obscene judgement call: better to allow at least 1400 kids to be hideously abused than to be thought guilty of the far greater crimes of being thought a bit racist or accidentally offending someone.
(And this isn’t an incident confined to Rotherham by the way. The same thing happened recently in Oxford, again involving men with decidedly un-Anglo-Saxon names, again over a long period of time because all the relevant authorities were scared of sounding the alarm in case they came across as racist)
When I told a friend about this, his immediate reaction was that White people deserve to go extinct if they allow this sort of thing to happen. Allowing industrial scale rape of your children by ethnic outsiders is simply inconceivable in a healthy society.
It’s hard to disagree with that. This is a pathology so extreme that it should really be considered a collective psychosis. And of course we see the same thing throughout the West — at its worst among northern Europeans.
In attempting to explain this, I have discussed the tendency of Europeans to form moral ingroups rather than kinship-based groups which are the norm in the rest of the world — a component of European individualism. It’s a very adaptive mechanism, resulting in high-trust societies relatively free of the corruption, nepotism and ethnically based strife so common in many parts of the world.
But when the reins of the culture have been captured by hostile elites that have decreed that multiculturalism is a moral imperative and massively incentivized their creation, it can lead to extremely maladaptive consequences as we see here.
Read full article at Occidental Observer..
This comment appeared in entry 'Britain's Camp of The Saints' on 08/29/14, 10:19 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
taylor swift wrote:
I do have sympathy for your condition: as someone who could not have and has never done anything original, you have to believe that everything comes from somewhere else. It is of course true that there is a trope or pattern fulfilled by the image: a glamour shot of Taylor Swift overlain with the text of a right-wing comment falsely attributed to her. This trope may well have come from 4chan/pol: so much the better for /pol! But you will try in vain to find that particular quotation at 4chan, or anywhere else, at least with a posting date previous to the one here.
Here, Soren waxes territorial over a silly quote laid over a picture of Taylor Swift. And pretending he was not at all inspired by the 4chan fad. Because he’s original, you see.
This comment appeared in entry 'swift passage' on 08/28/14, 11:41 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
I think there is every indication that Britain has reached its Camp of the Saints moment, where millions of immigrants from every corner of the globe are now making their presence felt in so many negative ways, housing, jobs, overburdened institutions, social cohesion, lost of identity, crime, and not least, a national void and sense of foreboding.
Our elites are showing no sign of let up, the rip tide of humanity landing on our shores (and through our airports) is applauded by the liberal establishment, and yet still the majority of natives cannot understand the logic of it all. The tipping point looms nearer by each single day.
In Raspail’s story the liberal elites cave at every turn, until only Switzerland remains as an armed nation of resistance, only for them to crumble in the final hour in the full glare of liberal guilt, France is lost, western civilisation is lost.
There is no indication in Raspail’s thinking that the white race is under threat of existence from a deliberate attack by unknown dark forces or who would undertake such a dastardly plan.
Raspail’s tale tells us western civilisation had lost confidence in itself and in some way had no right to determine its tribe’s own future, like rabbits in the headlamp’s glare, whites are paralysed to act in their own defence.
Perhaps Britain is at this stage in the cycle of mass immigration, for there is no real sign of resistance from the mass of the people, still less as to what will galvanise them into any future kind of action.
Furthermore, Raspail’s unfolding imagination does not extend to a narrative where Britain and America are engaged in fermenting a World war in which to bring about their New World Order, all of which throws Rumsfeld unknown-unknowns into the immigration chaos.
As I have commented before, it seems when the elites have accomplished their goal, their is no plan B as to what will replace it.
How and when will we know when all is won or lost?
This comment appeared in entry 'Can violence come?' on 08/28/14, 04:53 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Søren Renner wrote:
uKnLeo, I do have sympathy for your condition: as someone who could not have and has never done anything original, you have to believe that everything comes from somewhere else. It is of course true that there is a trope or pattern fulfilled by the image: a glamour shot of Taylor Swift overlain with the text of a right-wing comment falsely attributed to her. This trope may well have come from 4chan/pol: so much the better for /pol! But you will try in vain to find that particular quotation at 4chan, or anywhere else, at least with a posting date previous to the one here. Snark away, duckling.
This comment appeared in entry 'swift passage' on 08/28/14, 01:45 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Mick Lately wrote:
How much time is left for a political solution?
If politics fails then it’s war.
The prospective programme of mass (full) repatriation is getting more difficult all the time.
This comment appeared in entry 'Can violence come?' on 08/28/14, 10:47 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
its amazeing how stupid people can be white people have relly gotten to a point were they cant find black or other race women attractive. every one here know the first man and wemon were black and lived in africa even urwhite bible described animals native only to africa n im pretty sure they have melatonin in their skin( what makes people dark or light) or they would have been burned by the african heat n sun. when people started heading north they got lighter not much sun in europe foggy n some part. so there was no need for that much melatonin so people became lighter. u can even look up how snow rabbits became whit n how polar bears did the saye thing white man did. it proven fully on the animal level n we are animals n we do and did the same thing.i live in minneapolis n its winter 8 months out of the year min n i have fully black reletives comming out lighter n lighter im a 4th gen mn resident im bown but if i got to the south im light to them
This comment appeared in entry 'Physiognomy and Liking: My Experience' on 08/28/14, 10:24 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Ok, as assigned by Dr. Lister, I have commenced to reading-up on W.D. Hamilton.
I see that it is an embarrassing omission in my library (I had only read Hamilton as discussed by E.O. Wilson and others). Though glaring omissions in our library many of us have - I doubt that Dr. Lister has read William James or John Dewey, while he summarily pronounces Americans to be hopeless idiots.
Nevertheless, many things do come together with Hamilton, including much long standing discussion here at MR.
My hope is to be somewhat conversant on Hamilton, to facilitate worthy discussion, and with that, that it will be understood finally, that it is discussion and joint construction of knowledge that we seek at MR, not the presentation of myself as the expert, disseminating knowledge lineally to a passive third person audience of receptacles.
Regarding discussion by E.O. Wilson in critque of Hamilton, here is where I left off:
I think we should stick to the plan of summarizing EO Wilson’s argument, which is a good one for us - as opposed to Hamilton’s universalizing theory, Wilson provides for qualitative and incommensurate paradigms, including ways to talk about a White difference that makes a difference (yes, these terms apply to the article under discussion, wherein Wilson, et al critique and differ from Hamilton’s theory with a view of paradigmatic incommensuration).
This is a digression from my “homework” of reading Hamilton proper, but I wanted to touch upon where Wilson referenced Hamilton:
Among other radical criticisms proposed against Hamiton’s theory, the article states:
“Hamilton’s rule almost never holds
Inclusive fitness theory often attempts to derive Hamilton’s rule, but finds it increasingly difficult to do so. In a simplified Prisoner’s Dilemma the interaction between cooperators and defectors is described in terms of cost and benefit. For many models we find that cooperators are favoured over defectors for weak selection, if a condition holds that is of the form ‘something’ c/b
This result is a straightforward consequence of the linearity introduced by weak selection and has nothing to do with inclusive fitness considerations.
Inequality is Hamilton’s rule if ‘something’ turns out to be relatedness”..
With this material, one (e.g., me) might be incorrectly prompted to short shrift Hamilton
This comment appeared in entry 'An American Lectures Dr. Lister' on 08/28/14, 04:16 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Outstanding article by Greg Johnson:
Journalists Lie, People Die
Second Thoughts on Foley
My initial reaction to the beheading of American journalist James Foley by Islamic militants was horror and outrage. But then I learned more about Foley’s work, and my feelings changed. As Gregory Hood writes:
[Foley] had a specific agenda with his work–he was trying to expose the “atrocities” of the Assad regime and support the “democracy” movement. Foley may have been a freelancer, but his worldview was eminently predictable and pro-Establishment–trying to break down questions of race, religion, and identity into a game of good egalitarian democrats versus bad reactionaries.
Thus, he was quick to draw critical attention to incidents that the media would call Islamophobic, like when an American military officer made comments critical of Islam during a class on terrorism. He tweeted out articles that we would consider parody, asking if right wing terrorism was as big a threat as Al-Qaeda. And he aggressively, incessantly pushed for NATO intervention in Syria and arming the opposition to Bashar al-Assad . . .
Foley, in short, actively supported the toppling of the Assad regime and the arming of anti-Assad groups — which has led to the deaths of countless innocents — and one of those anti-Assad groups cut off his head.
So there is a God, after all.
ISIS are still savages. They are still the distillation of everything evil and rotten in Islam. They did it for the wrong reasons. But this time, they got it right.
Nearly 200,000 people have died in Syria’s civil war, which never would have happened if the United States were not in the business of bumping off enemies of Israel on the orders of the organized Jewish community which runs this country.
James Foley was not the architect of these policies, but he was more than just a passive supporter. He was not a general, but he was an eager foot soldier in service of the Judeo-American strategy of overthrowing secular nationalist Arab leaders like Saddam Hussein, Muammar el-Qaddafi, and Bashar al-Assad – in the last two cases by giving aid to Islamist militants, including al-Qaeda and ISIS.
There will never be liberal democracy in the Middle East, and supporting groups like al-Qaeda, ISIS, and the Muslim Brotherhood would not promote liberal democracy anyway. The best we can hope for in that part of the world are secular, authoritarian nationalist leaders like Saddam, Qaddafi, and Assad. Such regimes are also better for the freethinkers, women, and religious minorities who are being persecuted by Islamists.
But America’s foreign policy is not determined by American interests, or by Arab interests, but by Jewish interests. Secular Arab regimes are strong and prosperous, and Israel does not like strong and prosperous enemies. Thus they must be smashed. Not to replace them with “democracy,” which is impossible. Simple chaos will do, and simple chaos is what we have.
James Foley probably never shot, tortured, beheaded, buried alive, stoned, or ate the flesh of a Syrian. But by supporting the false narrative justifying the war against Assad, Foley helped make those atrocities — and the widening atrocities in Iraq — possible. He had blood on his hands. So his death satisfies my sense of justice.
It is a pity that more propagandists don’t die. It might encourage more responsible reporting. And, as with all wars, it is a pity that the foot soldiers not the generals take the brunt of the blowback. Because we might live in a better world if the warmongers get a taste of the terror, destruction, and death they inflict on others.
When William Pierce asked “Who Rules America?” his answer was not the president, congress, and judiciary, but the owners of the news and entertainment media. Because the media shape the consciousness and values of the public, they can raise up or cast down any political leader. The media promulgate the ruling orthodoxy, drum up hysteria for its witch hunts and crusades, and expose and destroy dissenters. They are not neutral or innocent or merely exercising “freedom of speech” (which they actively deny to dissenters).
Thus enemy journalists….
...complete article at Counter Currents
However, this confirms the hypothesis that William Pierce is a key influential figure on American White Nationalism.
Which means that any epistemolgical errors of his will be magnified in importance.
And in further confirmation of that influence, Tanstaafl recommends listening to American Dissident Voices (Following in William Pierces legacy)
... “in answer and contrast to Yockey’s critique of Darwinism and evolution, I had intended to discuss a recent episode of American Dissident Voices, William Pierce: Cosmotheism’s Hard Way. So in the meantime I recommend you listen to that episode, and ADV generally.”
In that regard, I must disagree with any general endorsement of American Dissident Voices
William Pierce’s proposed “religion” is apparently scientistic. It apparently fails to distinguish the logics of scientific objectivity from the relative interests of E.G.I. from which it can run counter.
Appalling in more ways than one.
This comment appeared in entry 'It has a voice already.' on 08/28/14, 02:15 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
The Taylor Swift quotes are fake, they originate from 4CHAN/pol/, here: http://boards.4chan.org/pol/
They post them on websites like Tumblr where liberals upvote and share them not realising that the accompanying quote is from Hitler/Mussolini or whoever.
<(DanielS - we can't talk about thread wars tactics here because they are watching. Sorry to be a pain).
This comment appeared in entry 'swift passage' on 08/27/14, 09:42 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
An interview with Salter is sought for MR.
GW is working-out an essay in preparation for the occasion.
Much direction is awaiting that event.
* While an interview with Salter may have been/ may be straight away in the offing, GW has been warned (contrary to your advice, which I believe to be correct, by the way) by a colleague, that he would advise Salter to stay away from Majority Rights. Which I believe is wrong advice, especially given our new platform.
This comment appeared in entry 'Gregory Bateson on Pathology - Context and Relation' on 08/27/14, 05:17 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
So what happened to the MR interviews being set-up and the proposed outreach to Salter?
This comment appeared in entry 'Gregory Bateson on Pathology - Context and Relation' on 08/27/14, 04:42 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Buzz Aldrin greets a “never walked on the moon” conspiracy theorist.
This comment appeared in entry 'A Conspiracy Theory of A Conspiracy Theory to Divert From White Male Dasein' on 08/27/14, 03:59 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Very good scoop, Soren, thank you.
(that shows taste and judgment)
This comment appeared in entry 'the cat and the song' on 08/27/14, 03:34 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
there is no nation in the world immortal
This comment appeared in entry 'The eternal nation in its rural hearth' on 08/27/14, 12:34 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
The no sex before marriage crowds are certainly weak-minded losers but the sexual revolution cannot be blamed for that one, only they themselves can be.
I know there are a whole lot of immature, whinnie emos and sad sacks on this planet but you are taking it to a whole new level.
The answer to the problems you mentioned is not “chaste women”, OP, not some rose-tinted glasses bullshit view.
It is removing systematically removing irrationality and emotional thinking from the legal system, not add more of that.
Women should not automatically get custody of children, except when it comes to breastfeeding, they are not intrinsically superior to men in that aspect cuz of their nurturing instincts, abortion and murder statistics in general prooves otherwise.
They should have no chance at getting childrens custody if they have no reasons for divorce, like a history of abuses or dangerous mental illness.
They should not have the right to their former husband´s house and money, in the case of the latter a notable exception would be if he specifically demanded that she quite her job and lives off him, in which case he is the one who stole her income.
Theft should be a crime, theft of a man´s house and income should be prosecuted as a serious crimes, banning a father from seeing his own children to achieve that theft should be prosecuted as fraud and act of psychological abuse toward both children and their fathers. Jail time.
If a woman gets married to a man whom she divorce the day he have finished paying her 100K student loans, she should be prosecuted for fraud and spend a few years in a work camp.
I.E. applying simple common sense.
Sara Bethany, it does not help when stay-at-home wives complains that their husbands aren´t making enough money to support their life-styles.
This comment appeared in entry 'Men are the losers of the sexual revolution' on 08/27/14, 12:32 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Mick Lately wrote:
Good comments. It seems like damage limitation by the Establishment via the media.
The radical solution to this is to uproot all the Muslim/Third World/Leftist parasite plants.
Mass repatriation and destruction of the whole corrupt New Labour/Common Purpose/Anti-Racist/PC edifice.
I strongly suspect that Gentile Marxists (academia/social work), Common Purpose (local councils), Freemasons (police) are all useful idiots for the Jews. These members, the individual infiltrators, may be considered expendable.
This comment appeared in entry 'Englishmen fight back - and win.' on 08/27/14, 04:52 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
A point to make today:
Our football coaches were not Marxists imposing integration with blacks.
Rather, they were objectivists imposing integration with blacks.
Consider “the great football coach”, Vince Lombardi, and his indignation with regard to “racism.” Vince Lombardi was not a “cultural Marxist.”
Vince Lombardi’s Unprejudiced nature
In 1960, on at least one team, a color barrier still existed in the NFL. But Jack Vainisi, the Scouting Director for the Packers, and Lombardi were determined “to ignore the prejudices then prevalent in most NFL front office in their search for the most talented players.” Lombardi explained his views by saying that he “... viewed his players as neither black nor white, but Packer green”. Among professional football head coaches, Lombardi’s view on discrimination was not de rigueur in the midst of the American civil rights movement.
An interracial relationship between one of the Packer rookies and a young woman was brought to the attention of Lombardi by Packer veterans in his first training camp in Green Bay. The next day at training camp, Lombardi, who had a zero tolerance policy towards racism, responded by warning his team that if any player exhibited prejudice, in any manner, then that player would be thrown off the team. Lombardi, who was vehemently opposed to Jim Crow discrimination, let it be known to all Green Bay establishments that if they did not accommodate his black players equally as well as his white players, then that business would be off-limits to the entire team. Before the start of the 1960 season, he instituted a policy that the Packers would only lodge in places that accepted all his players.
This same paradigm that flouts “equality” would insist on integration of “the best.”
Perhaps because I was never immersed in Marxist/Leftist literature, but rather was repulsed by radicals, their advocacy of non-Whites in particular, repulsed enough to be averse to embracing even its better critiques, I never saw “equality” as an issue one way or another.
But even though it may have had something to do with not circulating among Marxists and immersing in their literature, I never really heard many “leftists” or anybody, for that matter, talking about wanting “equality.”
It has been rightists who are overusing opposition of this term, adopting this paradigm and it is blueprint for disaster - setting matters into false comparison and necessary conflict/dominance-subordination, whereas our concern for separatism is to be negotiated in qualitative terms of differences that make a difference (qualitative non-sameness as opposed to inequality).
Coming back to “the point of the day”, objectivism and its most pointed corollary of turning issues into quantitative comparisons - equality/inequality - is what our football coaches were going by - not cultural Marxism - when they considered it unthinkable that blacks should be kept off the football team and eventually, that the cheerleaders should not cheer them on…and couple with them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDh1QuJ6JPY
This runaway objectivism and flouting of equality is the load of race mixing poison that our right wing brings to the equation. This part of the blame comes from our ranks, not from Jews.
This comment appeared in entry 'Are we to be cannon fodder for war on behalf of White plutocrats?' on 08/27/14, 02:58 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
The morning after. It has already been established how the media are are intending playing this earth tremor.
Columns are awash. It’s the ‘blame game’ on all the heads of the institutions involved, and who have failed to protect these girls. Yes, political correctness has been singled out as an important factor for failure to act, but there is no connection to liberalism or government.
The media is as one on this, deflect the blame onto the useless idiots. The social services and the police, who for years have been infiltrated by the long march. Common Purpose to give it a name.
Cameron and government will join in the chorus, and come out the other side squeaky clean. Same as 7/7, same as Drummer Lee Rigby, same as Anders Breivik (Anders Who?) All buried without trace.
They’ve got it all sewn up. Tight as.
This comment appeared in entry 'Englishmen fight back - and win.' on 08/27/14, 12:09 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Stephen Nieman wrote:
The article is filled with at least as many errors at it purports to expose.
1. The Septuagint is a compendium document provided by Origen in his Hexapla. Circa 250 AD. Not BC as is suggested.
A. The apostles could not have quoted for a compendium document which no record supports. Origen collated a ariety of manuscripts being passed around during his era. It is not known what influences were on these texts. Is it conceivable that the overwhelming influence of gnostic doctrines, ubiquitous during that era were without influence?
B. it is not unreasonable to query whether Origen edited his Greek manuscript to mirror known quotations by the Apostles.
2. The only record of the Greek translation of the Scriptures is supported by the Letter of Aristaeus. Circa 165 BC.
3. The letter clearly states that the Zeus was Jehovah. This can hardly be supposed as a witness to Orthodoxy.
4. The pre-Christian era Jews from the orthodox region of Babylon considered the Torah translation into Greek to be analogous to the raising of the golden calf.
Shall I go on? Your assertion that there was a unity among the rabbinic scholars in their desecration of the Hebrew Scriptures is really your weakest argument.
This comment appeared in entry 'Guns, Lies and Forgeries:A Bible Story' on 08/26/14, 09:55 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
This is just one of many reactions to the mass child abuse scandal report revealed today.
This one is from the Guardian. 26.08.2014
Rotherham abuse report: protection is what matters, not blame
As usual the comments section provides the bellwether of mass opinion.
These Guardian comments are overwhelmingly genuine left or right. Paedophilia reaches parts where others fear to tread. It seems the moderators simply do not know how to respond, they are letting most comments through.
Liberal political correctness is coming under the microscope as never before.
There will be much squirming in high places me-thinks.
It will be most interesting to see how the media respond.
This comment appeared in entry 'Englishmen fight back - and win.' on 08/26/14, 05:27 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
@7 BBC on the rack?
Watching BBC’s evening news the horrific revelation of sexual abuse on young children was the leader.
In recent months similar revelations have surfaced with charges of pedophilia against high profile celebrities, Rolf Harris, Jimmy Saville, Stuart Hall all receiving custodial sentences, mega star Cliff Richard is currently under investigation.
For months the BBC, (media) outcry has outdone all other previous outcries of vilification and accompanying hand wringing, notwithstanding demonic baying for the elixic password sorry!
At the beginning of the 21 st century there are two liberal No-No’s that tower above all else in the liberal calender, and they are racism and child abuse.
A wan looking arch (drip-drip) poisoner extraordinaire Mark Eastern was wheeled in front of the camera to inject more Machiavellian poison into the soporific British viewers psyche, the poor sod was going through hell but his bosses must have insisted he name the culprits. He held his nose and mentioned Pakistanis!
So there we have it, in the blue corner we have racism and over in blue corner we have pedophilia, on which side will the BBC fall or will they fudge the issue as usual.
UKIP’s Farage should drive a horse cart through the aftermath all of this, just in time for next years election.
My conspiracy instinct tells me the BBC is slowly-oh so slowly stoking up British hatred of the stranger - I wonder why?
Let’s take another look at that Pike letter to Mazzini again.
Hundreds of Muslims are leaving Britain to fight with the I-S.
This comment appeared in entry 'Englishmen fight back - and win.' on 08/26/14, 02:58 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
All cultures are equal - innit?
This comment appeared in entry 'Englishmen fight back - and win.' on 08/26/14, 02:02 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)
Page 1 of 3462 pages 1 2 3 > Last ›