Majorityrights Central > Category: Blogs & Blogging

As an addendum to the episode of JR’s “Scroob” post, which is now gone from the page, I am publishing the last two emails between JR and myself on the subject, plus JR’s response to criticisms he received in the thread.

First, a reply to me from JR.

Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 1:07 AM

Leaving it is better than taking it down.

Reader’s support is not the main issue.  MR attracts over 2000 readers a day.  Few of these leave comments.  Who’s telling you to take it down?  Crypto members of the tribe, those fearing that it may lead to nordic nationalist philosophy and some who haven’t understood what the hypothetical thought experiment is about.

And it’s not just about one person.  The situation is fairly generic; there are many scroob’s commenting at MR.  If there weren’t implications for the big picture, I wouldn’t bother posting on a single commentator.

The most dangerous part of it, for members of the tribe, is the list of their serious crimes that need to be exposed.  You bet members of the tribe will try to do something to not be seeing such an expose.

And the post isn’t about tribal exclusion.  It’s a thought experiment.  Let me clarify the thought experiment in a comment and see if they still have things to object to and offer rational objections.

I will shortly be preparing a response for the entry.  Trust me, it’s for the long-term good, and the path won’t be smooth.  There will be plenty of bumps along the way.

And here is my response to that.

Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 9:21 AM

JR,

Since we started this conversation yesterday I’ve had mails from other MR writers, reacting exactly as I did when I saw the post, and asking whether we are coming apart at the seams.  Some “thought experiment”!

It should be very obvious that the blog isn’t a place where hypothetical thought experiments like this can be conducted on the readership, as if it was a lab rat bred for vivisection.  I can’t stand around and watch this rat cut up and thrown away, JR.

MR exists to examine all the issues pertaining to the fate of our people - not just one.  Those issues flow as four great dynamics, like four wheels on the tumbril taking us to the Place de la Révolution.  On each wheelhub is painted a word: “Globality”, “Profit”, “Equality”, “Final Solution”.  The motives of every individual labouring in the machine of our destruction is contained in those four words.

In its very small way, MR has contributed to the understanding of that from every angle: the political, the philosophical, the scientific, and the angle of the JQ.  There is far more here than the narrow and absolutist reading of the last of those, about which you have become so passionate.  Such committment always contains a seed of destruction because it does not respect limit.  You, for example, have reached the stage of “intellectual hygeine” now, throwing to the winds people who you charge with secret attachments and agendas - not only Fred, who is my friend as you are, but others we know and countless more we don’t.

Our people will not ... can not unite behind such a view.  The inevitable effect (on intellectuals, particularly) is that they will be splintered into groups competing for attention and going nowhere.  In other words you act, honourably enough, out of a fear that our progress will be frustrated by Jewish agents.  But your zeal does the agents’ work for them!

MR is an organ of synthesis, the requisite condition for which is equilibrium.  That is the only basis for our intellectual momentum, and for attracting the able to contribute their very valuable and welcome thoughts here.  That’s what we have to maintain, even above our committment to free speech.

Since you won’t act on my requests, which was my preference rather than taking the post down myself, I will have to do it this morning.  In its place I will publish these two mails plus your comment from the thread.  It will be interesting to see what productive thoughts the thread engenders.

Kind regards,

GW

READ MORE...

From a real one-issue blog that I hadn’t heard of until today:-

The UK Telegraph is the only main stream media to run something about Goldman Sachs’ threat to file a lawsuit against me. That’s pretty standard for the U.S. press and media to ignore the stinky and powerful Oger in the room. In fact, the U.S. main stream media, with a few exceptions, only runs stories about Goldman Sachs that seem either written by or approved by the Goldman Sachs Public Relations Department.

Why have none of the major papers or news programs not dared to ruffle a feather at Goldman Sachs, when this company is ripe for reporting. A simple look at who comes out of Goldman and where they go is enough to make for a full length movie. In any event, here is the U.K. Telegraph article ...

And here’s the meat of the Telegraph story:-

Goldman Sachs hires law firm to shut blogger’s site

Goldman Sachs is attempting to shut down a dissident blogger who is extremely critical of the investment bank, its board members and its practices. The bank has instructed Wall Street law firm Chadbourne & Parke to pursue blogger Mike Morgan, warning him in a recent cease-and-desist letter that he may face legal action if he does not close down his website.

Florida-based Mr Morgan began a blog entitled “Facts about Goldman Sachs” – the web address for which is goldmansachs666.com – just a few weeks ago. In that time Mr Morgan, a registered investment adviser, has added a number of posts to the site, including one entitled “Does Goldman Sachs run the world?”. However, many of the posts relate to other Wall Street firms and issues.

According to Chadbourne & Parke’s letter, dated April 8, the bank is rattled because the site “violates several of Goldman Sachs’ intellectual property rights” and also “implies a relationship” with the bank itself.

GS is the supplier of bankers for senior federal government positions.  But it also sits at the heart of the web of global financial power.  As Mike Morgan says, “Yes, I am short Goldman Sachs stock. I believe this company is evil and should not exist. We need to begin to break up companies that have as much control over world finances as Goldman Sachs.”

I received a mail today from MR reader Bruce Graeme.  Here it is.
GW

Lawrence Auster defines “the unprincipled exception” as:-

The unprincipled exception is a non-liberal value or assertion, not explicitly identified as non-liberal, that liberals use to escape the suicidal consequences of their own liberalism without questioning liberalism itself.

Alternatively, the unprincipled exception is a non-liberal value or assertion, not explicitly identified as non-liberal, that conservatives use to slow the advance of liberalism or to challenge some aspect of liberalism without challenging liberalism itself.

However, recently, in his post On the difficult issue of how to talk about race, Auster himself applied the liberal “unprincipled exception” in full force to challenge some aspect of racism without challenging racism itself.

He claims that “in order to defend the white race and Western civilization, we don’t need to make it sound as though race in itself is the highest value.” ... “we simply need to recognize that whiteness is an indispensable facet of what white people and Western society are and have been.”

Then he continues saying that “through all of American history until the mid 20th century, the leaders of our society frankly believed in the white race, they took it for granted that America was a white man’s country and should remain so.”

Further applying this principle he concludes: “To make the case for the preservation of the white race and white civilization plausible, it must be justified within a moral framework. When race is treated as a value in itself, it inevitably declines into cruder forms of racialism that are wrong and that will be automatically rejected.”

The problem, however, is that due to this liberal “unprincipled exception” the very definition of ‘whiteness’, has changed so much over time, that the racial quality it stands for has declined.

In the early 20th century most immigrants were not considered white (Italians, Irish, Greeks, Jews, and many others). The Immigration Act of 1924 was aimed at limiting the Southern and Eastern Europeans who were immigrating in large numbers (setting quotas on immigrants from certain European countries), as well as prohibiting the immigration of East Asia.

Whiteness implicated that one was of Northern European descent! But by applying the “unprincipled exception”, ‘whiteness’ nowadays can almost be won legally and may well result in the absorption of the “white” race by “colored” races which would actually mean a corruption of society.

By applying the “unprincipled exception”, the concept “white race” has extended so much and has become so empty of content, that - following Auster’s footsteps - it has no value any longer as a guiding factor of civilization and even implies that, ultimately, the world can be seen as only being composed of simply black and white races.

Bruce Graeme

And here is my reply:-

READ MORE...

Ian Jobling put up a post two days ago at The Inverted World attacking Kevin MacDonald once again.  I thought it was about time someone put a friendly hand on Ian’s shoulder and asked him what the hell he thinks he’s up to, so I visited the thread and posted the comment below.  Because of the likelihood that it will never make the page, like one or two others on the JQ I’ve offered, I am posting it here.

Ian,

What, exactly, do you think you achieve by attacking MacDonald and boosting this crude hatchet job by Lieberman?  I, along with an awful lot of others, do not understand you.  We want to.  We try.  Some of us wonder whether you have a Jewish wife and Jewish children.  Otherwise, you simply do not make sense.

Your “message” requires that the many Jewish socio-political products that are so singularly damaging to the organic life of European peoples have absolutely no ethnic dimension.  It’s all just a big accident, and nothing to do with what Nathan Abrams described in his famed JC porno article as “the tradition of subversion”.  Not only are we supposed to believe that the said socio-political products, for example:-

Classical Marxism
Revolutionary internationalism
Critical Theory
Postmodernism
Freudianism
Second-wave Feminism
Second-Wave Libertarianism
Gay Rights/LBGT Rights
American Civil Rights
Human Rights
White Privilege/White Abolitionism
Agitation for open borders and mass immigration
Neoconservatism
Academic race-denial
Encouragement for white race-mixing
Exploitation of the official holocaust narrative
Israel Lobby
Internet pornography
Negative imagery of whites on film and TV
Anti-white bias in media reporting

... have no genesis in Jewish ethnic interests, but Jews have no group interests at all beyond the interests of all humanity!  Is that it, Ian?  Is that all you have been able to construe from the last century or so of European-Jewry relations?

Not good enough.  Jewish competitive ethnocentrism has to be identified or it cannot be restrained.  For, it does not moderate itself in the absence of external restraint.  In fact, the blood libel that is the exploitation of the holocaust, together with the promiscuous usage of the “anti-semite” trope, exists in large measure precisely to vitiate restraint, and to grant Jewish ethnocentrism free rein.

If you can’t acknowledge that, you are right back on Square One, chained to the spot. You are not a free-thinking man at all.  You are what Richard Dawkins described as an “extended phenotype”.  You have allowed yourself to become a vehicle for weakening and confusing the work of saving our people from dispossession and decline.  (Lieberman, by the way, denies any such exigency.)

Now, Ian, before you rush to apply to me the usual semitic soubriquet, it happens that I don’t hold the view that there is a Single Jewish Cause for our people’s woes.  I’m the goddamned moderate that you claim to be.  But I’m no Jewish extended phenotype.  It’s plain to me that we cannot free our people from their suicidal torpor if we give in to fear on this Question and tell them lies.  We cannot lie one minute to those we claim to love the next.  That isn’t how it works.

Make up your mind who and what you are, Ian.  You are needed.  You are talented.  Go to your duty.  Jewish ethnocentrism will get on fine without you.

UPDATE

And Ian gives his response:-

READ MORE...

Apparently, you and I are criminals.  Or possible animals.  I never got to find out which.

Yesterday at midnight in multicultural Greenwich - the Observational one, not the beatified Mr Ginsberg’s - erstwhile MR luminary JWH alerted me to a rather Sub-Condescending thread at GNXP.  Ever the sharp-eye, he had already posted on it at Western Biopolitics (which, if it isn’t already a staple read for you guys, darn well should be).  He thought I should get up to speed.

So here’s the gist.

Godless Capitalist, co-founder of GNXP and the attack-dog of South Asian cognitive elitism in the Kwa, took it upon himself to contribute to a GNXP thread on Steve Sailer’s self-promoting VDare review of Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam’s book, Grand New Party.  THE political book of 2008, apparently.  Anyway, I will return to it shortly.  First, let’s deal with gc.

Now, both Douthat and Salam - a “Bangladeshi-American” like Razib Khan - are editors at TheAtlantic.com.  Douthat had put up a couple of posts on Sailer’s review, the threads to both of which degenerated into the usual, pointless argument with difference-deniers and the kind of mental dross which manages to make every third word “racist”.

On July 10th Razib - he, we must presume, of the vindictive inter-racial porn link - posted a short entry headed Sailer on Grand New Party.  The thread to this post also got a bit stuck on sticking it to the racially-aware white American - but in that special GNXP way, since the Sub-Con cognitive elitist’s promulgation of human difference is what makes him cognitively elite.  In this spirit Razib unburdened himself of the under-capitalised observation that:-

i don’t think ethnic nationalism is malevolent as such. but it has been pathologized among white americans to such an extent that a disproportionate number attracted to white (as opposed to irish or scottish or whatever) identity tend to have bizarre and unattractive personalities.

Now, a dispassionate, socially scientific mind encountering this unpleasant point of view for the first time might, having established that black racial consciousness and Jewish hyper-ethnocentrism are flourishing all over, ask itself whether “ethnic nationalism” has really been pathologized, or just white racial consciousness.  And if it is the latter, why?  And by whom?

Well, by Razib and gc, for one.  Er, two.  Here’s the latter’s response to his pal:-

READ MORE...

Incompatibility is an issue somewhat at the heart of the analysis on these pages.  But incompatibility came back to haunt us on Thursday when an argument developed between an automatically updated software component and the basic system we run.  The updated component won and took us off-line.

My apologies for that, and the inordinate amount of time wasted while I looked for a solution in all the wrong places - not, I hope, a characteristic of anything else that goes on here.  Anyhow JR resolved the problem within three hours of getting involved, and here we are again.

Thanks for keeping faith with the blog.

Three days ago the Guardian ran some knocking copy on the Telegraph’s failure to take down London Assembly member Richard Barnbrook’s blog, which is tucked away in a distant corner of the paper’s website:-

Richard Barnbrook, the British National party’s London Assembly member, has used a blog on the Daily Telegraph’s website to blame immigrants and their sons for knife and gun crime among young people in the capital after a spate of murders.

Under the headline “Blame the immigrants”, the posting on My Telegraph, a platform which allows readers to publish their own articles, Barnbrook claims the perpetrators are protected by a government eager to secure the “Ethnic Block-Vote” and says immigrants “will not be allowed to terrorise our kids any longer”.

“I have had enough of political correctness,” he writes. “I have had enough of people being afraid to actually say what they really want to say. Yes ... it is the immigrants.” He continues: “The real crime is on the streets, and it is the young people who are being attacked every day now by knives and guns. Most of it is being done by immigrants or by the sons of immigrants who have been protected by a despicable government desperate for the Ethnic Block-Vote.”

The Telegraph defended itself by attacking the Guardian mods itchy trigger fingers.  The battle raged back and forth, effectively making it impossible for the Telegraph to take down Mr Barnbrook’s blog unless he goes completely mad.

So, what’s the quality of the material he’s posting?  Well, as yet there are only three offerings on the page.  The first, Tombstone Politics (these MyTelegraph links are very slow to load - please be patient), is a tad self-referential going on reverential.  But if refreshingly sincere is what you want, that’s what you get with this guy:-

Only the dead make the news but there are hundred who are stabbed but only just live.  Their lives are wrecked though in many cases.  This is liberalism…...these are the great values of the left…......they smoke drugs and your children get slaughtered in the streets.  It makes me sick.  It drags me down into tombstone politics when I would rather be building a better society.  It has become so normalised that people think they have to accept it.  Well I am going to change it….I am going to clean up the streets, because our society has had enough of their dirty values, their dirty ideas, and their dirty politics.

I will bring this up in the London Assembly but I doubt those Members will care.  They can’t even bring themselves to call me Richard.  Everyone is on 1st name terms except me.  For me it is Mr Barnbrook like they are talking to their Bank Manger or the man in charge….and thats just it….I am the man in charge….because I get out into the street and meet real people.  I know how awful their lives are.  I know they worry that their kids might get hacked to death for a mobile phone…..I know who people are

READ MORE...

Many internet sites that focus on the problems and dangers caused by the massive immigration into Europe of nonWestern and mainly Moslem peoples reject contributions by people who do not support Israel.

“Fjordman” is a well-known contributor to several of these sites and he has written an article that sums up the arguments why Europeans should support Israel. (Why Europeans Should Support Israel, Created 2007-03-12 07:49 Published on Brussels Journal.

I find “Fjordman’s” arguments in favor of making support for Israel a priority unpersuasive.

“Fjordman” asserts there is a powerful “anti-Israeli and sometimes outright anti-Semitic current that is prevalent in too much of Europe’s media”. “Fjordman” does not define what he means by “anti-Israeli” or “anti-Semitic” nor does he provide any examples of what he obviously wants his readers to believe are twinned thought-crimes.

Since expressing hostility against Jews, Moslems, or nonWesterners in general is subject to legal penalties in many European countries, I am not surprised that “Fjordman” evades his duty to provide examples of the alleged current.

READ MORE...