How money issue could work in a nationalist economics

In response to the conventional economic slavishness of an article at the Telegraph titled “Only by tackling spending will we ever tame the debt monster” I posted a comment which sums up what little progress I have made in putting some detail on my economic ramblings.  It ain’t much - still the shell of an idea.  But it is an attempt to, if not actually resolve the problem of inflationary money supply that bedevils the notion of thin-air money as the creation of the state, at least identify a direction in which to look.

My comment is below the fold.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Monday, March 26, 2012 at 07:17 PM in Economics & Finance
Comments (89) | Tell-a-Friend

The Holocaust as Wimp Libel

The Holocaust is The Wimp Libel.

What is the Wimp LibeL?

It is the idea that the Holocaust happened out of nowhere, and the Jews did not have any power anywhere and had not been engaging in any ideological or ethnic warfare and bloodshed prior to the Holocaust.  That Jews were just a bunch of Woody Allen type violin players and peaceful bankers and lawyers and teachers.  There were no “tough Jews” with Mausers terrorizing the Ukrainian steppe in the 1930’s—no, none at all.

Here’s the good news, Jews.  You may be a lot of things, but “wimps” ain’t one of them.  Your Bolsheviks killed tens of millions of hardy Russians and Ukrainians, and some Poles, Estonians, Lithuanians and Latvians as well.

Continued...

Posted by Kievsky on Monday, March 26, 2012 at 10:57 AM in
Comments (23) | Tell-a-Friend

More thread wars

One ought to note the fact that three of the poor old Daily Telegraph’s threads have been occupied today by a very race-conscious commentariat.

The first was a news report about an announcement from the Conservative Party that, yes, they are going to “get tough” on immigration.  Again.  The relentless bile directed towards the natural party of government has been something to behold.  My efforts to expand the discourse were rendered redundant by a succession of commenters speaking even more expansively than me.

The second thread concerned another announcement, this time that a garden city is to be built in the Meriden area between Coventry and Birmingham.  There is only one reason why this breaking of the ground is necessary, and it has nothing to do with finding homes for young English couples who are first-time buyers.  There are few causes dearer to the English heart than the banks of green willow, and again the DT commentariat did a stellar job.

The third thread was to a leader supporting that announcement of the “immigration crackdown”, and again the speaking could not get much plainer.  It was my intention to reproduce some of the comments to illustrate what, even a year ago, would have seemed impossible for a national newspaper to let pass.  But there is so much of it, I wouldn’t know where to start.

Of course, one has to put this free-speaking, welcome as it is, into perspective.  The DT is unique in sometimes - not always - allowing pro-white sentiment of this order (followed by The Independent, but not very closely).  The other rags control comments with pre-moderation or, in the case of The Guardian, with really outrageous post-moderation.  Even at the DT, the wider subject matter produces a less nationalist readership, and threads can be hard-going for a racial loyalist.  Recent football threads and one on Friday about the sad F1 driver Lewis Hamilton offered little in the way of reward for statements of our Weltanschauung.  There is a long way to go to exercise any kind of real influence over public discourse.  But since the freeing of the discourse is a precondition for making politics, and the nationals’ threads offer the only way to reach tens of thousands of still pretty sleepy readers, one has to make the effort.

When I see commentary like that on the three aforementioned threads, it does encourage me to believe that the effort is worthwhile.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, March 25, 2012 at 06:53 PM in Thread Wars
Comments (49) | Tell-a-Friend

Civilization Takedown: Hunger Games and the Natural Duel Archetype

If you are not clear about the meaning of the term “natural duel”, first read and re-read “The Tale of Lin Tse” (with codification at Seven Points of Agreement Between Individuals (revised).)  As a warning to the majority, (the majority of Majority Rights’ commentariate being only one sampling): when you scoff at the culture—the socially honored routes to women giving birth and men giving death—that created to you, you scoff at your very being. 

As the fundamental conflict between expanding technological civilization and Earth continues unabated, I will, from time to time, continue to present some of the facets of that conflict toward what I see as an ultimate resolution bifurcating humanity into a eusocial species departing from the biosphere, and fully individuated man, no longer ”...stuck in between” to use E. O. Wilson’s words that unintentionally recall those of Nietzsche.

Read on…

Continued...

Posted by James Bowery on Sunday, March 25, 2012 at 11:41 AM in
Comments (132) | Tell-a-Friend

Immigration and Politics 2: The Tory Indian Summer

The 1950s and early 1960s together form perhaps the single most important period to consider when contemplating post-war immigration politics, and its corollary, the emergence of multiracial Britain. During this period many of the tropes that would later come to define (and confine) political and public debate first came to the fore. It was also the high tide of ‘post-colonial’ migration, in which liberal democracies would be inundated by coloured citizens of their former empires, an inundation that was largely unwanted and unplanned. The underlying question is: why did it happen, and why was it allowed to continue unabated for so long? 

In Britain a Conservative government was in again place by October 1951, a development which should have given cause for optimism to those for whom preservation of a racially-homogenous population was a priority. The prior period under Labour, from 1945 to 1951, had been characterised politically by official unease in the background and dismissive optimism in public. Now that Churchill was back in charge things would be different, there’d be an end to Labour-style wishy-washiness and the Government would finally get to grips with the problem before it became too late. Right?

But it didn’t turn out that way, and Andrew Roberts poses the necessary question in these terms:

[Given that Winston Churchill was more profoundly racist than most] how was it then that under his Premiership Britain began to take in ever-increasing numbers of immigrants from the West Indies, India, Pakistan and Ceylon? ... Certainly, there was no premeditated political programme, and no one argued that large-scale New Commonwealth immigration should be encouraged in order to make Britain a better place. [215]

...

Immigration from the New Commonwealth rose from around 2,000 in 1952 when Churchill became Prime Minister for the second time, to over 42,000 in 1955, his last year in office. It was during Churchill’s time in office that the line on the graph achieved its ‘take-off’ point [218].

The record shows that Churchill, for a variety of reasons, took no effective action to staunch the flow, nor did his successor Eden and neither did his successor, Macmillan, at least until very late in the day. Part 2 of this series attempts to answer Roberts’ question and, in the process, determine who else, besides the Conservative prime minsters of the day, is to be held responsible for the unfolding disaster.

Continued...

Posted by Dan Dare on Wednesday, March 21, 2012 at 05:22 PM in Immigration and Politics
Comments (45) | Tell-a-Friend

The French shooter

On March 11th, just a few days after Marine Le Pen finally reaches her target for mayoral signatures, allowing her candidacy for the Presidency to go forward, a psychopath begins a killing spree in Montauban.  He shoots the first of three non-white paratroopers, and makes his getaway on a black Yamaha TMAX, a 530cc scooter much prized by robbers.  A week later the same man, it is thought, but riding a white TMAX, attacks a Jewish school in Toulouse, coldly killing one adult and three children and wounding a number of others.  The authorities announce they are investigating neo-Nazi connections, but that line of investigation is soon dropped.

The area, meanwhile, has been flooded with security personnel.  There are over 7,000 hours of CCTV to check but, seemingly, few clues about the identity of the shooter - just that he understands guns, and he knows how to kill coldly and efficiently.  He may be filming his actions using a Go-Pro chest camera of the type sometimes used by skydivers.

Francois Molins, the public prosecutor in Paris, has declared the offences terrorism and seems to believe that the best chance of catching the killer is if he tries his hand again. 

France waits.  The presidential election campaign is on hold.  Sarkozy’s pitch for the NF vote - his talk about “too many foreigners” - has been dropped like a very hot brick.  The question everybody wants to know: do these killings hold any special horrors for Marine and her party, and for the patriotic French?

Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, March 20, 2012 at 07:49 PM in World Affairs
Comments (35) | Tell-a-Friend

Reminder - No to 70 million.

I’ve posted this twice before, this is another reminder. Any British citizens should sign the No to 70 million e-petition. As immigration restriction goes its as mild as it gets but better to send a message than none at all.

No to 70 million

The number of signatories has been creeping up slowly, too slowly! Come on you guys, you know what to do.

Posted by Lurker on Sunday, March 18, 2012 at 08:30 PM in
Comments (14) | Tell-a-Friend

Sun Consciousness and Fossil Fuel Unconsciousness

I believe that dependence on fossil fuels has made us worship false gods.

Namely, we ignore the sun.  The sun is sort of an afterthought; it’s in the background; it hardly ranks above electric light—it’s just the incandescent bulb in the sky that uses a time switch instead of a flip switch.

Yet we are particles from the sun.  Energy and mass being interchangeable, we are created from sun energy, both recent and ancient.  So ignoring the sun is really like ignoring God.

For whatever reasons, we have been told us not to worship the sun, that “savages and heathens worship the sun,” and perhaps that is why we have a habit of ignoring this all important heavenly body—the heavenly body, for us at least.

Continued...

Posted by Kievsky on Sunday, March 11, 2012 at 08:46 AM in
Comments (137) | Tell-a-Friend

Immigration and Politics 1: Labour, Nationality and Windrush

This first part is focused on the period between 1945, when the Labour Party won a landslide victory in the first wartime general election and 1951, when they ceded power to the Conservatives. It is a particularly interesting period from a number of perspectives, not just that of immigration. But what makes it particularly so for observers of immigration politics is the question implicit in Randall Hansen’s comment about:

... the remarkable absence of general immigration controls [on Commonwealth citizens Ed.] until 1962 despite the irrationality of keeping doors open for 600 million people, the manifest opposition of the British public and the Labour government’s explicit rejection of labour migration from the Commonwealth.  [5]

Why was this? In the following we will examine that part of the answer which pertains to Labour’s time in office; the remainder of the story will be taken up in Part II.

Continued...

Posted by Dan Dare on Sunday, March 11, 2012 at 03:12 AM in
Comments (36) | Tell-a-Friend

Immigration and Politics

Preamble and Introduction

Intended as a companion piece to the series on the introduction and pervasive influence of anti-discrimination and ‘equalities’ legislation in the UK The Crusade Against Discrimination this present offering will attempt to set out, in accessible and non-academic form, the political aspects of the post-war immigration into Britain. Accordingly little if any mention will be made of the immigration experience of the white settler countries, including the USA, nor that of continental Europe, although there is a great lacuna in terms of accessible, comprehensive and non-partisan literature regarding the latter. Perhaps a future project beckons. This one will focus entirely on Britain, and in particular its politics of immigration. Social, cultural and economic consequences are, for the most part, passed over except where, as in the case of the Notting Hill race riots, they can be shown to have directly influenced policy making.

The focus here is on the political actors, who did what, when and why; why particular decisions were reached, and why they were not. Debate has raged here, as well as on other nationalist-oriented discussion forums, about the extent to which the demographic transformation that is now underway, and specifically the immigration disaster that is at the root of it, has been the consequence of external agency or whether it has been mostly or entirely self-inflicted. I hope that some light will be shed on that question and that myth can be more readily separated from reality.

The piece will comprise several parts, each quite long and likely to appear at erratic and irregular intervals. My goal is to complete the effort by early summer when I will be taking on a major new project which will necessarily have to take precedence over my jottings here. But, we’ll see.

Part 1: Labour, Nationality and Windrush

Part 2: The Tory Indian Summer

Part 3: The Shape of Things to Come

Sources

As mentioned above, this is not intended for an academic audience, so I will be dispensing with the use of footnotes and in-line references will be sparse. In addition to the works listed in the bibliography below I have tried, wherever possible, to consult primary sources such as Cabinet minutes and memoranda, Hansard and other official documents which are available for public access in the National Archives (formerly Public Records Office, PRO). As a general point, if anyone wishes to verify the source for any particular statement or citation in the article I will be happy to provide it.

Alderman, G., Modern British Jewry, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1998)
Foot, P., Immigration and Race in British Politics, (Penguin Books, Harmsworth, 1965)
Geddes, A., The Politics of Immigration and Race, (Baseline Books, Manchester, 1996)
Hansen, R., Citizenship and Immigration in Post-War Britain, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000)
Hansen, R., ‘Migration to Europe since 1945: Its History and its Lessons’, in Spencer, S. (ed.), The Politics of Migration: managing Opportunity, Conflict and Change, (Blackwell, London, 2003)
Heffer, S., Like the Roman: The Life of Enoch Powell, (Faber and Faber, London, 2008)
Janner, G. and Taylor, D., Jewish Parliamentarians, (Valentine Mitchell, Edgware, 2008)
Patterson, S., Immigration and Race Relations in Britain 1960 - 1967, (Oxford University Press, London, 1969)
Phillips, M. and Phillips, T., Windrush: The Irresistible Rise of Multi-Racial Britain, (Harper Collins, London, 1998)
Roberts, A., Eminent Churchillians, (Weidenfeld & Nicholson, London, 1994)
Spencer, I.R.G., British Immigration Policy Since 1939, (Routledge, London, 1997)
Winder, R., Bloody Foreigners: The Story of Immigration to Britain, (Little, Brown, London, 2004)

Posted by Dan Dare on Saturday, March 10, 2012 at 02:21 PM in Immigration and Politics
Comments (2) | Tell-a-Friend

The mysterious virtue of homosexual politics

In recent days there have been around a dozen opinion pieces at the Telegraph site addressing the Catholic Church’s defence of marriage from the trespasses of “gay rights” activism.  I’ve participated in a few of the threads (plus one at the Indy which had to be taken down, so shocking is it to the fastidious liberal to encounter opposition).

My usual argument was that the female demand for male fidelity (monogamy) is a European sociobiological trait, so the protection and preservation of marriage as the most efficacious form of monogamy (for raising well-adjusted offspring able to make adaptive life-choices) is a highly important interest for our people.  The effect of its homosexualisation would be to reduce it to the status of a mere lifestyle choice – even more than it is already.  Young women, in particular, would no longer find in it that idealisation of love, sex and family which has drawn them up the church aisle, on their father’s arm, for centuries.

Plainly, homosexual activists are not open to conservative or religious argument.  Even the two most reasonable who did briefly acknowledge that there are more important things to society than homosexual equality never followed that line of reasoning through to its natural conclusion.  The rest of them - and there was an impressive number of homosexuals and leftists commenting on these threads - were hermetically sealed away from all reason.  They denied outright that the homosexualisation of marriage will have the slightest impact on its status.  But the quality of their advocacy generally – it’s arrogance and smugness, its frequent recourse to insult, its hatred of the Church and the Vatican, its refusal to acknowledge any merit in opposing arguments (some of which were unanswerable) – leaves one with precisely the impression that these people will sully and wreck whatever they touch.  The repute of marriage, already in decay, will never recover while they use it to prove their normality to themselves - which is all they are interested in.

It was my intention to go through some of the threads and pick out their more interesting arguments.  I have tried.  This is the result, and it’s not much because there isn’t much that can be used:

from being the minority though I may be in my sexual orientation I am part of a growing MAJORITY of Brits who have no problem at all with homosexuality. There is literally no way marriage equality isn’t going to pass, and when it does you people can all be quiet again.

Just skimmed your verbal diarrhoeal rant.  I’ve checked up, and you have indeed been on these forums for years, and pretty much everyone hates you.  You’ve been written about on blogs, and at all times people always have a problem with you.  You’ve been called a bigot, a homophobe, and intolerant - to just highlight a few terms.

What’s going to happen is this geoffrey1, equal marriage will be here in the next year or two, and nothing some warped and twisted bigoted homophobic intolerant keyboard warrior fanatical fundamentalist like you, .. will have the slightest impact.

Glad we have the Prome Minister and all major political parties on our side though - as well as the majority of the British public.

We’ve grown up in lots of ways.  The fact that society still has a bit of room left for homophobes like you makes me proud that we still tolerant alternative opinions.  But don’t get any ideas that you will be see as anything other than a vile and nasty homophobe and someone the majority doesn’t care to know.  Imagine what a sick world it would be if people like you were in the majority.  I expect you’ll go now and report back to your BNP buddies.

None of these remarks was made to me, incidentally.  I have not selected them because they contain insults.  They are merely representative of the quality of thought that, apparently, goes on in homosexual circles.  Yet these creatures are winning their war for the right to marriage.  Obviously, the reason for that lies elsewhere than in their ability to set out their case, which has no merit whatsoever.

Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, March 9, 2012 at 08:47 PM in Marxism & Culture War
Comments (45) | Tell-a-Friend

SPLC classifies Pickup Artists as Hate Groups now

Not from the Onion.

Continued...

Posted by Kievsky on Friday, March 9, 2012 at 01:29 PM in
Comments (4) | Tell-a-Friend

War of Mind

In a high tech society, if one group values education and the other values valor and heroism, whether in war or in sports (the substitute for war), the group that values education will dominate the one that values valor and heroism.

Continued...

Posted by Kievsky on Saturday, March 3, 2012 at 08:06 AM in
Comments (257) | Tell-a-Friend

A history of seeking to be

I am writing this very brief post to mark a particularly interesting thread-intervention by Daniel2 - the estimable Daniel Sienkiewicz of VoR - on the seemingly non-serious topic of hippies.

He wrote:

Hippies, as opposed to The Viet Nam War, were about a right below rights for the (White) male of the species to Be - that is, to have the right to exist on the basis of intrinsic, inherited value, as opposed to being allowed to exist merely on the basis of accomplishment, what they do or through proof in overcoming brutal rights of passage up to and including war.

The White male motive to be left alone was different from the Black Male motive which aimed more toward the power of rule.

Moreover, the White male motive was a stance against the military industrial complex - wars had become habit form for generations, and had done the White race no good. It was a movement against inhumane demands made upon White men, and a motive to be, by contrast. With male being is a corollary to the right of the White race to exist on the basis of pre-existent evolution.

I like this kind of historicization of a reactive but ineradicable struggle by white men to be.  It raises the interesting possibility that spontaneous movements such as the levellers, and popular rebellions such as the Peasants Revolt, religious effusions such as the Canterbury pilgrimage, cultural ones such as the opening of the American West, political ones such as the reception of Adolf Hitler by the German people, and so forth, may have had origins and their place in a grand, Manichean struggle between the forces of light and darkness, and of freedom and enslavement.  That the people, or some of them anyway, turned away periodically from the furrow of the plough and the heat of the furnace, from the tyranny of the materialistic and of near concerns, and from harm’s unjust way to seek the conditions necessary for a truly human existence, is a beautiful and encouraging thought.

That living then in a system of such undoubted corruption and emptiness only prompted them onwards to the next cycle of searching, so living now in just such a system will prompt us.  It is only a matter of time and circumstance.  Therein, then, lies a narrative of our liberation - though, of course, reaction is not enough of itself.  A true ontological model of Man must inform and guide the search for it to realise anything useful and permanent.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, February 29, 2012 at 08:22 PM in The Ontology Project
Comments (85) | Tell-a-Friend

The Ghosts of the Past

by Graham Lister

“Nationalism has no special relationship to political justice; but neither does it have a particular relationship to injustice. The most obvious thing about it is, after all, that it exists…and there are no objective criteria of what is a nation – but its subjective power is compelling. A nation, therefore, said Renan, is a great solidarity founded on a consciousness of sacrifice made in the past and on willingness to make further ones in the future”.

Bernard Crick from In Defence of Politics.

Nationalism has a rancid stench. It has been thought pivotal to some of the worse horrors of recent human history, yet it will not go away. If, as a character from Joyce’s Ulysses suggests, “History, Stephen said, is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake” then one of the most persistent phantoms haunting our nightly terrors is nationalism, particularly in the conditions of our freshly constructed ‘global’ village, built primarily through the medium of neoliberalism (the most successful ideology in history).

In the UK thinkers as wildly different as the ‘deep-blue’ conservative Roger Scruton and the Marxian theorist of nationalism (and Scottish nationalist) Tom Nairn both write with perceptive insights into the phenomena of nations and nationalism. Like any other ism, nationalism has its own internal spectrum. And due to its overall plasticity nationalism is hard to place within any conventional political axiality. It can take almost any political form and find support from anywhere in the ideological firmament – witness the radical-chic associated with various decolonization struggles – or indeed the burbling of the blessed Saint Michel (of Foucault) over the exciting new ‘political spirituality’ unleashed by the Iranian revolutionaries. However, some forms of nationalism are generally considered to have been radio-actively toxic.

Approximately eighty years ago, events occurred, which were obscure at the time, from whose dire consequences the world has not yet totally recovered. The location was Munich, capital of the historic Kingdom of Bavaria and second city of the recently formed all-German Reich. The time was five years after the end of World War I, when this new would-be imperial state had been defeated, and then both punished harshly and utterly humbled by the victors. What was to become the most extreme currency inflation in history had begun. By that autumn the Reichsbank would be issuing 100-trillion-mark notes; it took a pocketful of them to buy a US dollar.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Monday, February 27, 2012 at 06:25 PM in Books,  European Nationalism,  Political Philosophy
Comments (26) | Tell-a-Friend

Two hundred vigilantes in revenge attack on Moslem shops in Heywood.

So now the police, who did nothing about Moslem paedophilia for years, are gearing up to fight “the racism”.

Over this last week the MSM has reported on the trial at :Liverpool Crown Court of the first eleven of forty-seven Moslem Asians, mostly Pakistanis, charges with grooming white girls for prostituting among fellow Moslem men.  The charges against the defendants do not mention racism, and none of the reporting has suggested that a racist motive might be inferred from the identity of the victims.  On the contrary, the reporting has been both sparse and carefully calculated to be as “non-inflammatory” as possible.

It has not worked.

Rochdale violence raises fears over racial tensions in north-west England

Police vehicles damaged and officer injured in disturbances in Heywood, as planned EDL event fuels anxieties

Concerns over racial tensions in the north-west have increased after violence in Rochdale on Thursday night.

The disturbances appear to have been linked to the trial of 11 men of Asian descent accused of grooming vulnerable young girls in Rochdale. The trial is ongoing at Liverpool crown court, where the far right have held protests.

Tensions will be further raised in the region when the far right English Defence League (EDL) holds a demonstration in Hyde, where a white teenager was injured last month by a group of Asian men. Tameside council has expressed grave misgivings that the event could lead to unrest.

Two hundred young people congregated in Heywood, Rochdale on Thursday evening. A car and three police vehicles were damaged and an officer suffered bruising to his arms and legs during the disturbances.

At 10pm, Greater Manchester police effectively issued a curfew when they warned all parents in the area to make sure their children were home. An hour later, riot police had cleared the streets, but a takeaway shop had its windows smashed.

A 35-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence and police assault and a 14-year-old boy was arrested for causing danger to a public highway.

Of course, the story for the Guardian was always going to be “fears” for the Neo-Marxist Utopian Tomorrow.  But the story is also reported at Yahoo:

A group of around 100 people, including adults and children, congregated in the centre of the Heywood area of Rochdale, Greater Manchester, on Thursday night to raise “concerns”, police said.

Superintendent Chris Hankinson, from Greater Manchester Police, said a small number of people then began to cause trouble. The disorder is linked to a trial at Liverpool Crown Court relating to alleged grooming and sexual exploitation.

Officers were pelted with bricks and other missiles and two arrests were made after windows were damaged at a takeaway. One car belonging to a member of the public and three police vehicles were also damaged. An officer suffered bruising to his legs and arms.

Mr Hankinson, in charge of neighbourhood policing in Rochdale, told a press conference at Rochdale police station: “Those that seek to use what’s going on at the moment in Liverpool to further their racist agenda will be dealt with robustly.

… where the nature of the Liverpool trial is too painful for the politically fastidious to share with the Yahoo reader.  Fortunately, the comment facility has been carelessly left operational and, so far, over 1150 Yahoo readers have explained exactly what Englishmen think of their vibrant new countrymen.  The Guardianistas are right to worry.  Moslem grooming of white girls is thought by nationalists to occur wherever there are large Moslem colonies.  It can only go one way now.

Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, February 24, 2012 at 07:36 PM in Islam & Islamification,  Law & Order
Comments (170) | Tell-a-Friend

Daily Mail talking like White nationalists, or at least Paleoconservatives

Internationalism is one of the core principles of the Left. It abhors the nation state, which it sees as a foundry of bigotry, racism and aggressive nationalism.

The Left has always understood this: that if you manage to wreck a national culture and a national identity, you shatter the ties of history and nationhood forged over centuries.  Simon Heffer in the Daily Mail

Continued...

Posted by Kievsky on Friday, February 24, 2012 at 09:48 AM in
Comments (27) | Tell-a-Friend

A reasoned reply to Ronald Bailey

I received a mail this morning from one Friendrick requesting a “position statement” on the argument for the dissolution of white America presented by the science correspondent of Reason Magazine, Ronald Bailey.  Bailey has a pretty impressive CV, and obviously considers himself expert in matters of ethics as well as science.  But he is also a liberal, and the argument he has written is a wholly liberal argument, not an ethical or scientific one.

It is an argument relying on a particular reading of 20th century American immigration history.  Its principal thrust is that the definition of white America already expanded from “Nordic” during the 20th century, and will continue to expand in the 21st to include Hispanics (he means Mestizos).  Obviously, one could respond to this in equally historical terms, standing on the ground of the righteous white American deploring the effects of that expansion.  But that’s not intellectually aggressive enough, I feel.  One has to get at the faux-virtue of liberal principle and undo it by more powerful ethical arguments.

Bailey’s guiding principle is tolerance ad infinitum in the face of coercive change, and the “good” that diversity does to expand said tolerance.  It is the job of white America to deracinate to be tolerant.  Bailey writes of “the ever-broadening inclusive tolerance of the American social project” without ever stopping to consider whether peoples and races have the right to life, or the right to express their own interests, or the right of consent, or the right to self-defence, or whether it is intolerant to deny such rights solely in respect to one people and one race.  In the politics of the unfettered will such ethical considerations are assiduously ignored or, if they can’t be ignored, hurriedly buried beneath a flurry of weak and easily rebutted arguments.

I have responded to Friendrick’s invitation by visiting Reason and the thread to Mr Bailey’s article, and posting what is, I hope, a suitable ethical and even scientific argument.  Whether it qualifies as a position statement I don’t know.  But it will be interesting to see if any advocate of endless tolerance can undermine its position.

I doubt it somehow.

My reply is reproduced below the fold.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, February 22, 2012 at 07:42 AM in Immigration,  Liberalism & the Left,  Thread Wars
Comments (71) | Tell-a-Friend

Using high school kids and their little “R word” friends for the Repressive Tolerance agenda

Continued...

Posted by Kievsky on Tuesday, February 21, 2012 at 10:55 AM in
Comments (24) | Tell-a-Friend

Kai Murros: Moscow Speech 2010

Moscow Speech 2010

by Kai Murros

Dark clouds are hanging over Europe. The European people have been utterly betrayed by their elite. The magnitude of this conspiracy is unprecedented in human history, our ruling elite has turned out to be a mere corrupt lackey of global capitalism. These high priced paracites have stolen the Europeans their livelihood, their land, their future and their self-esteem. These prostitutes of the corporate world have also exposed Europe to an endles rampage of brutal beggars and forcefully denied Europeans any means of defending themselves.

We have become powerless, we have lost control over our lives, we are denied our place in this world and our spirit is waning. What once was ours has been taken away and given to greedy aliens, what we once held sacred is ridiculed and mocked by arrogant intruders, what once was familiar to us has now been degenerated into something strange and threatening.

For decades Europeans have been taught to hate and despise themselves, generations of Europeans have been brought up believing that the world would be a better place without them, they have been brought up to feel the crushing weight of the white man’s endless guilt. Europeans are constantly reminded that only through self-destruction can they pay for the sins of their civilization.

Continued...

Posted by Constantin von Hoffmeister on Sunday, February 19, 2012 at 02:52 AM in
Comments (93) | Tell-a-Friend

Population Matters

The current issue of The Ecologist includes an article around a forthcoming Royal Society report on population issues People and the Planet, which will be issued this coming April. As the Ecologist article makes clear, the battle lines are already being drawn over what is sure to be a heated and acrimonious debate, no matter what conclusions the Royal Society arrives at.

Population is ‘our biggest challenge’ says government chief scientist Sir John Beddington

The next world population milestone of 8 billion will come sooner than we think - perhaps as early as 2025 - yet we remain reluctant to debate the issue. A forthcoming Royal Society report may force us to.

While many commentators look ahead to 9 billion by 2050 there is a more immediate statistic that ‘frightens’ the UK government’s chief scientist: 1 billion extra people in the next 13 years.

Speaking at a joint WWF and Royal Geographical Society (with IBG) event last week, which looked ahead to the Rio+20 conference in June, John Beddington told an audience that half of that population increase would come from Asia and most of the other half from Africa. Based on the UN’s projections, he said Africa’s population would grow ‘frighteningly fast’ from 1 billion today to 1.5 billion by 2025-2030.

He went on to lament the issue of population as ‘under thought’ and ‘our biggest challenge’ as it exacerbates existing problems over access to water and other resources.

Source

...

Continued...

Posted by Dan Dare on Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 05:50 PM in
Comments (62) | Tell-a-Friend

Marxian Illustrations or Marxian Illusions?

by Graham Lister

If there was no difference between essence and appearance, there would be no need for science. - Karl Marx.

“Our discussions of non-purposive elaborations of functional claims suggest ways of filling that lacuna, but it is also necessary to point out that Marxists can be too sensitive to the charge that they perceive conspiracies everywhere. There is more collective design in history than an inflexible rejection of ‘conspiracy theories’ would allow, and richer scope for purposeful elaboration of Marxist functional theses than that posture recognizes. Thus while ideologies are not normally ‘invented’ to to fit the purposes they serve, a fairly deliberate and quite concerned effort to maintain and protect an existing ideology is not unusual. According to Christopher Hill, nobility and gentry in seventeenth-century England doubted they “would still be able to control the state without the help of the church”, and, therefore, “rallied to the defence of the episcopacy in 1641…for explicitly social reasons”. Ruling class persons of no special devotion to an Anglican God frankly professed obedience, and acted on that inspiration. Or, to take another example, when a high state functionary, reflecting on the unequal distribution of information in society, concludes that “this inequality of knowledge has become necessary for the maintenance of all the social inequalities which gave rise to it”, he may be expected to see the persistence of an educational structure which reproduces ignorance in the right places…But sentences beginning “The ruling class have decided…” do not entail the convocation of an assembly. Ruling class persons meet and instruct one another in overlapping milieux of government, recreation, and practical affairs, and a collective policy emerges even when they were never all in one place at one time.

There are, of course, many shades between the cynical handling of ideology just emphasized and an unhypocritical commitment to it, and a division of labour between lucid and engagé defenders of dominant ideas can be quite functional. If awareness of the true nature of the game penetrates too far down the elite, it could leak into the strata beneath them. There is always a mix of manipulation, self-deception, and blind-conviction in adherence to an ideology, the optimal proportions varying with circumstance.

All classes are receptive to whatever ideas are likely to benefit them, and ruling classes are well placed to propagate ideologies particularly congenial to themselves. But before an ideology is received or broadcast it has to be formed. And on that point there are traces in Marx of a Darwinian mechanism, a notion that thought-systems are produced in comparative isolation from social constraint, but persist and gain social life following a filtration process which selects those well-adapted for ideological service…There is a kind of ‘ideological pool’ which yields elements in different configurations as social requirements change.

Yet it is unlikely that ideas fashioned in disconnection from their possible social use will endorse and reject exactly what suits classes receptive to them. Here a Lamarckian element may enter, to make the picture more plausible. In Lamarck’s theory the equipment of the individual organism is somewhat plastic, for it changes under environmental challenge when it is put to novel use. Because of the delicacy of intellectual constructions, sets of ideas enjoy a partly similar plasticity: one change of emphasis, one slurred inference, etc., can alter the import of the whole. Such ‘Lamarckian’ possibilities are intimated in Marx’s review of the numerous uses to which a self-same Christianity is liable, and is it not because ‘Liberalism’ is an ambiguous term that its presumed teaching varies across space and time.”

- from “Karl Marx’s Theory of History – A Defence” by G.A. Cohen.

Let the discussion on ‘top-down versus bottom-up’ processes in the world of ideas and ideology begin.

Note- the act of quotation does not imply approval or agreement.

Posted by Guest Blogger on Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 05:30 PM in Activism,  Marxism & Culture War
Comments (22) | Tell-a-Friend

Review Call: Fighting for The Essence, by Dr Pierre Krebs

The excellent publisher Arktos Media Ltd has put out a review call for Fighting for The Essence: Western Ethnosuicide or European Renaissance? by Dr. Pierre Krebs.

Dr Krebs is a leading member of the Neue Kultur (the German New Right) and director of the Thule Seminar.  He is a doctor of French literature and also holds degrees in law, journalism, sociology, and political science.

Should anyone wish to review Fighting for The Essence for us, please contact me through the button under the header and I will arrange for a copy to be forwarded.

Arktos Media’s product description is as follows:

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 06:14 AM in Books,  New Right
Comments (151) | Tell-a-Friend

The Birth of the ‘New-Man’ under Liberalism

by Graham Lister

In the Anglophone world, in particular where it has been picked up by cultural studies, the term ‘body’ is a fairly reliable warning of hot air to come: a flashing sign for the sensible and time-poor to stay well away. But there are exceptions. One of which might well be The Coming of the Body by Hervé Juvin, in which premonitions of a new and radical regime of individualism under the aegis of the human body, as life distends and capital mutates to meet it, emerge (somewhat incongruously) from the French insurance industry.

Social agendas in the West are in flux, as new kinds of issues gain salience - pension provision, immigration policies, reproductive rights, marital arrangements. Juvin’s contribution belongs to the genre concerned with such issues; illustrated with an abundance of striking data, and delivered with an intellectual mordancy and crisp literary style that remain, even today, peculiarly French. The author might also be regarded as a very particular and local phenomenon. In the Anglophone world business and culture are typically strangers, yielding at best, earnest middle-brow apologetics at the level of Adair Turner’s “Just Capital”; but in France the intellectual executive is a not unfamiliar or strange figure. Operating within the insurance world, Juvin writes without any overt political attachments.

“The Coming of the Body” announces a time when the human body has started to pre-empt all other measures of value in the West, separating the experience of contemporary generations from that of all predecessors, and the rest of the world. The basis of this sea change lies in the spectacular transformation of life expectancy. When the Revolution broke out in 1789, the average span of life in France was 22. By 1900 it was just under 45. Today, it is 75 for men, and over 83 for women, and continually increasing. Quoting Juvin; “We have every reason to hope that one girl out of two born in France since 2000 will live to be a hundred years old”. This prolongation of life is “the present that a century of blood and iron has left us - the present of a life that has doubled”. It amounts to “the invention of a new body, against need, against suffering and against time; against the world too - the world of nature, which was destiny”. The gift is restricted to the rich. “An entire generation will soon separate Europe from its neighbours to the south, when the median age of its population passes 50 (towards 2050), while that of the Maghreb remains under 30”. If we were from the developing world we too would be desperately doing everything within our powers to make it to the West.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Tuesday, February 14, 2012 at 11:33 AM in Books,  Liberalism & the Left
Comments (86) | Tell-a-Friend

From an Interview with Gianluca Iannone

Robert Steuckers circulated me today with his Euro-Synergies URL to a short interview for Alternative Right with Gianluca Iannone of the Italian culturist organisation CasaPound.  The interviewer is the Tokyo-based Colin Liddell.  The two longest and most interesting answers given by Iannone are repeated here.

Founded in 2003, CasaPound is doing successfully what some in British nationalism consider to be essential at this time of nationalist disintegration.  Iannone explains:

CPI works on everything that concerns the life of our nation: from sport to solidarity, culture and of course politics. For sports, we have a soccer teams and academy, we do hockey, rugby, skydiving, boxing, Brazilian jiu-jitsu, scuba diving, hiking groups, caving, climbing. For solidarity, we have first aid teams, we do fundraising activities for the Karen people, and we provide help to orphans and single-mums. A phone line called “Dillo to CasaPound” (tell it to CasaPound) is active 24/7 to give free advises on legal and tax issues. On the cultural ground, we host authors and organize book presentations; we have an artist club, a theater school, free guitar, bass guitar and drum lessons, we created an artistic trend called Turbodinamismo, we have a publishing company, dozens of bookshops and websites. Politically we propose various laws like the Mutuo sociale (social mortgage), Tempo di essere Madri (Time to be a mother) or against water privatisation and so many more. Speaking about CPI is never easy because all these things are CASAPOUND. All of these represent our challenges and projects for now and the millennium.

Obviously, Casapound Italia is a formula specific to the current evolution of race-loyal, anti-liberal politics in Italy.  It demonstrates, however, that in principle there are viable alternatives to party politics.  For his part, Iannone evidently regards politics as a wrong turn.

The important thing is to generate counter information and to occupy the territory. It is fundamental to create a web of supporters other than focusing on elections. For election, you are in competition with heavily financed groups and with only one or two persons elected, you can’t change anything. Politics for us is a community. It is a challenge, it is an affirmation. For us, politics is to try to be better every day. That is why we say that if we don’t see you, it is because you are not there. That is why we are in the streets, on computers, in bookshops, in schools, in universities, in gymnasium, at the top of mountains or in the newsstands. That is why we are in culture, social work and sport. That is a constant work.

All that said, there is a caveat.  At best, Culturism is utilitarian.  It is not a revolutionary programme but a smoothing of the way for serious anti-liberal, anti-globalist activism.  It necessarily operates within the existing terms of public discourse.  It has no spine of its own.  It has to reach out.  It has to look and sound like its constituency.  Therefore, those who make their contribution through it must guard assiduously against accommodationism and the resultant loss of racial focus.

In a massively propagandised macro-environment like ours, Culturism only makes sense if there is a separate but complementary effort to redefine - and racialise - the terms of debate.  Then it has something to feed off, something to propagandise in return.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, February 12, 2012 at 06:21 PM in European Nationalism
Comments (56) | Tell-a-Friend