Majorityrights Central > Category: Activism

From the hubris of objectivism to the implicative force of Mulatto Supremacism

READ MORE...

The DNA Nations - 2020 Update

A reading through of this update of a preliminary document of the DNA Nations concept to provide the basic specificatory structure to follow up for those who care for the curation of our diverse kinds of people. While our focus is on European peoples, curation for the preservation of our kinds - genus, species - and potential coordination on the basis of genetics, the concept does not preclude negotiating with mixed kinds, does not prescribe violence, exploitation in any way shape or form and does not preclude non-Europeans from curating their kinds for preservation and working out the means for their coordination with European kinds as well

The DNA Nations - 2020 Update

An implicit union of unions and coalitions thereof based on DNA criteria.

Euro-DNA Nations

James Bowery’s “Laboratory of the States” platform proposes sovereignty through free choice, as people may “vote with their feet” to establish human ecologies through controlled experimentation. The control would be established through freedom from association—that is, the freedom to not associate with others. However, under the current circumstances, efforts to instantiate these deliberately organized “human ecologies” are best conducted in an implicit manner. Indeed, under the circumstances, they must be largely implicit (for example, regarding laws which prohibit realtors from mentioning race to buyers or sellers). Bowery suggests promoting abstract terms such as “our valuation of freedom of choice”. Later, the communities should be able to enforce explicit freedom of and from association.

This freedom from association is corollary to individual freedom of choice and association. Rather than trying to overthrow the the liberal zeitgeist of our epoch, Bowery maintains that we ought to hold liberals to their principles. We will respect and grant their valuation of freedom to go/and or be associated with whom they like and we as European peoples expect the same freedom of choice to go/ and or associate with whom we like.

As far as European Americans and other European diaspora go, Bowery has, since his initial proposal for the laboratory of the states platform, concluded that rather than state-sized units, county-sized political units are more optimal—the sheriff and county being the most viable and manageable scale of organization in defense against the nation-state apparatus in its death throes.

I would argue that the initial state is rather a step toward unionization – a virtual and rules based association, though not made formal as a political action group to begin, just an informal union of unions based on voluntary DNA groupings.
 
Furthermore, Bowery argues that strong valuation of freedom of choice is a distinctly Western characteristic and therefore precious. I concur. He elaborates farther that it is imperative to maintain the unique human ecologies that evolved with this Western characteristic of individual freedom of choice. I concur as well.

This freely and deliberately chosen state/county human ecology is very different from the deeply situated, naturally evolving human ecologies of Europe and Russia, where our people have evolved over tens of thousands of years in relation to particular habitats. It is surely critical for us to maintain these ecologies as well. We would not want to be without either the freely chosen state/county-sized ecologies of European diaspora derived by choice within a lifespan, nor without the truly deep, historical ecologies of our European and Russian nations. These are both goods that we would want to maintain, and yet they are very different concerns. This focuses WN on the task of coordination.

We wouldn’t really want to give up either, but how to coordinate these two goods? This is where a Euro-DNA-based nation begins to look like a potential means of coordination, allowing for various expressions of our native Europeans while never losing sight of their essence.

There is a third crucial matter to coordinate. If a nation of European descended peoples is to have an economy big enough to fund a space program and other large projects, it is likely to need a size larger than the average state (let alone county) to provide for a sufficient economy; and if, as Conner adds, nations of European peoples are to hold up to the growing power of China, they will need to be large.

Thesis: The Indigenous Euro-DNA Nation would provide a means for coordinating smaller States/Counties, both freely chosen human ecologies and those of deep, historical evolution, while providing the means for pursuing a mutual larger manifestation as well.
Given the anti-White hegemony that European peoples are up against from above, along with the turmoil and throngs of anti-Whites that they are up against on all fronts, an endogenous approach is the most practical for the coordination of European peoples sovereignty.

By endogenous here, we mean from the inside out. That is, in proposing autonomous, sovereign nations of European peoples, we should begin with those who would like to be a part of it first—begin by focusing on what we can do as opposed to what we cannot do. It is endogenous also in that the nation is corporeal, literally of the people—their native European DNA being the prime criterion for inclusion. That would be in contrast, though not in opposition, to other WN nation building efforts using an exogenous (from the outside-in) approach, such as the Northwest Front.

There are clear practical advantages of a native Euro-DNA Nation that begins as a formal declaration of a wish as confirmed by voluntary signatories. Firstly, signing-up would only mean that one is expressing a wish to be a part of sovereignty for European peoples. It does not require relinquishing one’s current citizenship.

Nor does it mean antagonizing non-Europeans. We may extend the DNA Nation concept and its freedom of association to them as well. But just as the conscientious are concerned for the preservation of genus and species, pervasive ecology, so too is it perfectly legitimate to look after our European kind.

For whom it may concern, the indigenous Euro-DNA Nation focuses from the start on our most precious concern, our DNA, while not encumbering us with present obstacles to land-situated nations. The Euro-DNA Nation would be non-situated in the beginning (and to some extent always).

However, DNA without land, without habitat indefinitely, would be problematic for a number of reasons. Therefore, it must be an objective of the Euro-DNA Nation to establish sacrosanct Euro-DNA Nation “lands” eventually; the plurality of lands is a deliberate usage. In fact, more safety and resources would be provided if these lands are non-contiguous and disbursed throughout the world. Naturally, WN would seek to re-establish our traditional territories as European, particularly those in Europe, but would also seek to secure sovereign territory in North America, South America, Russia, Australia and New Zealand. Nevertheless, in not being strictly contingent on obtaining land, the nation is rendered more flexible and more practical so that it can start with land claims of any size, even small claims.

Once coordinated as such, its ultimate viability may strive to cover the largest land-masses possible. Thinking about these issues first as a means of coordination with Bowery’s “Laboratory of the States” platform, and in line with that, the DNA Nation being freely chosen would allow people to select various native European sub-categories (if they match), some distinct, some perhaps blended in various ways and degrees. Considering the problem secondly in terms of how to coordinate WN of in its largest possible size, it also provides a highly practical means to instantiate a goal for protracted expanse, as it is highly flexible in its ability to cover territory.

The DNA Nation is also practical in that it does not require unnecessary risk and engagement on the part of participants. Signing-up does not render one complicit with illegal activity of any kind. It only means an expressed wish for sovereignty from non-native European coercion, and to be with persons of indigenous European extraction.

Separatism is a first step, Separatism is the ultimate aim, and Separatism is always possible.

If you wish to express a wish that you might one day be a part of this union of unions that is the Euro-DNA Nation, you may sign up; and specify particular category/union as you wish. DNA proof will ultimately be required for consideration of membership.

The Native European-DNA Nation sign-up along with its subcategories will be provided.

Note 1: The freedom of and from association promoted by the Laboratory of The States/Counties is conceived by Bowery to be an implicit choice. In his estimation, explicit Whiteness does not work. Taking the example of the draconian legal constraints placed on American realtors regarding the mere mention of race to buyers or sellers provides a salient example of how hazardous explicitness can be. However, the explicitness of the DNA registry does not contradict the implicitness strategy due to its being voluntary and not representing a legal status, but rather an expression of a wish. Discretion is nonetheless advised.

Daniel Sienkiewicz

READ MORE...

by Leon Haller

A purpose of sites like MR is, or ought to be, the sharing of practical strategies to advance white EGI. Methods of dispute resolution in a White Republic, the ‘unencumbered self’ and its relation to race-liberalism or postmodernity, the existence of God, etc, are all interesting matters. But discussing them hardly directly aids our cause.

Our primary task remains, as ever over the last half-century, mass racial awakening. Too few of our racial kinsmen are even aware that an intellectually respectable (or indeed any respectable) movement in opposition to white extinction exists and is growing. We must let them know we are out there - and each of us must do so again and again and again ...

Repetition of one’s core message is the heart of mass ideological change.

Rather than having to bother with thinking up a new comment for each article we might read online, wouldn’t it be smarter to have something pro-white already prepared, and then simply paste it into the comments sections of literally as many race-relevant (or even just political) articles as we encounter? Copy/paste, login, hit ‘Post’ - et voila! It is certainly easier than laboriously writing or spraying pro-white graffiti (not that that isn’t important, too).

I started writing a comment on a Yahoo board earlier today (I have posted thousands of pro-white comments in mainstream places over the past dozen years), and ended up producing something longer than I had anticipated. My comment, which responded to an article on current political divisiveness, is hardly ideal (esp insofar as it was written quickly and ‘straight’, with no reflection), but re-reading it it seemed adequate for Americans to use to further the awakening process. Of course, I welcome the suggestions of others (perhaps MR could eventually have a file of repeatable comments for mass distribution depending on the article types at issue - American, UK, continental Europe, crime, general race, race science, immigration, etc). The point is for people to be ‘proselytizing’ to the very maximum extent. I don’t wish to belittle the discussions at MR or similar sites, but isn’t the ultimate purpose of those discussions to change the real world?

Herewith a comment from me:

READ MORE...

Do we hear governments, the mass media, and academia calling for Japan to bring in millions of non-Japanese people and assimilate with them because they’re “not diverse enough”?
Why are they doing this in ALL and ONLY White countries?
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.
____________________________________________________________
No one says a neighborhood that is 100% black needs more diversity.
No one says a neighborhood that is 100% asian needs more diversity.
No one says a neighborhood that is 100% oriental needs more diversity.
They are already 100% diverse.
All white neighborhoods and only white neighborhoods always need to be more diverse. White neighborhoods only stop needing to be more diverse when there are no white people left in them.
Diversity is a codeword for white genocide.
__________________________________________________________________
Anti-whites say there is this RACE problem. Anti-whites say this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.
Anti-whites say the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.
This is a policy of White genocide.
“Anti-racist” is code-word for anti-white.
Diversity and Multiculturalism are codewords for WHITE GENOCIDE

_____________________________________________________________________
We have massive immigration into all white countries, and it is only being forced on white countries. We have forced integration of all these non-whites. Anti-whites call themselves anti-racists and promote intermarriage and condemn people who oppose intermarriage. And then they talk about a brown future in formerly white countries.
YOU ANTI-WHITES are part of this program of genocide against my race, the white race.
We must never protect White people in their view. They are anti-white.

___________________________________________________________________
Asia for the Asians. Africa for the Africans. White countries for everybody. It isn’t an African problem. Nobody is flooding Africa with non-Africans and giving them affirmative action, special rights and privileges and free health care. Only white countries are doing this. Only white leaders are supporting this. Only white children are suffering from it. It is genocide.
ANTI-RACIST IS JUST ANOTHER CODEWORD FOR THE ANTI-WHITE
DIVERSITY == SYSTEM OF WHITE GENOCIDE-BY-ASSIMILATION!!!

___________________________________________________________________
Funny how the “Melting Pot” agenda is being pushed in EVERY white nation on the face of planet earth.

No one says “Japan” needs to become a “Melting Pot”.

No one says China, Africa, Mexico, Haiti, or Israel should be deluged with massive random, foreign populations to demonstrate how “moral” they are, or to “enrich” their sorely lacking culture.
It’s a program to eliminate white people from existence, plain and simple.
It’s a form of Genocide under International Law.

_____________________________________________________

Anti-Whites say there should be no White Countries ✓
Anti-Whites say there should be no White Towns ✓
Anti-Whites say there should be no White Neighbourhoods ✓
Anti-Whites say there should be no White Schools✓
Anti-Whites say there should be no White Classes ✓
Anti-Whites say there should be no White Sports ✓
Anti-Whites say there should be no White Anything ✓
Anti-Whites say there should be no Whites
Anti racism is a code word for anti White.

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.

Earlier today I came across this video at BDF posted by Chuffer, a good, reliable nationalist and ex-BNP member, and a regular participant in the BDF bear-pit.  The theme of injustice and betrayal is not new to us, of course, though it is certainly a pleasure to see it so well structured.  But the street interview section is important, and especially refreshing to see.  There are the authentic voices of the English working-class who have been been subjected to eighteen years of relentless Lawrence propaganda.  And they know it.

Still, one wonders why they exhibit such a resigned attitude, and not more fight.  Then one remembers how deserted these people are.  Not the politicians, not the press, not the Church, not the schools, not the law ... no part of civil society spares them a word of acknowledgement.  It truly is the most complete betrayal imaginable.  And yet, as this video shows, the Lawrence propaganda almost certainly now exercises more influence over the minds of the traitors than it does the betrayed.

Readers who have followed or been involved in the recent travails of British nationalism will know that, while the “parallel party structure” appears to be moving forward within the BNP, there are indications that the jump to a new party is not far away:

A meeting was held on the 22nd. October, 2011 and attended by over 200 delegates. Please see picture below. The meeting voted to form a New Party by orgainising groups throughout the UK, such as The Brent Group, to recruit members and build a strong membership with which to launch the New Party.

Andrew Moffat together with Arthur Kemp, have been working behind the scenes preparing the foundations for the New Party. The bank account has been completed, a highly complicated and paperwork intensive operation. The Party Name, drawn from members suggestions, have been investigated. Many suggestions, including my own, have previously been registered. We could not launch the Party of course and have a legal problem on our hands over the name. A final shortlist of names will be published and the members will decide the name by democratic simple majority vote.

Such a move, of course, is high in risk.  Here’s someone for whom I have a lot of time explaining why to readers of British Democracy Forum:

It is pointless launching a new political party at this time, although I can see why supporters of Andrew Brons would want to have a replacement to campaign for his re-election when the European elections come round again.

It is pointless for the following reasons;

1. Getting either Andrew Brons and/or Nick Griffin re-elected to the European Parliament will provide no appreciable benefit for British Nationalism as a whole, unless of course the MEPs when re-elected, eschew the work they currently undertake within the European Parliament and instead use the large salaries and funding that they have to finance campaigning and electioneering here in the UK.

The European Parliament is a vast talking shop, largely composed of people who care not one jot what the two BNP MEPs have to say and those two MEPs have been completely ineffectual during their current tenure and will almost certainly continue to be completely ineffectual if re-elected.

2. Thanks to the mis-management of the BNP it it now greatly reduced in terms of membership numbers and more crucially, in terms of capable activists. It is now menaced by a number of new and newly revived rival nationalist parties, all of which have been swelled in terms of their strength by the exodus of disillusioned activists from the BNP. British Nationalism is now composed of several micro-parties (including the BNP, which has now been reduced to micro-party status) and when further elections come along, we will see them fighting against each other and splitting the nationalist vote in every ward or constituency where there is any sizeable amount of nationalist support. Therefore, for the foreseeable future, no British Nationalist party will get any candidates elected and it is therefore futile to launch another new political party at this time.

3. While nationalist policies remain popular with the public, this popularity rarely translates into votes at election time, and this is because, as a movement, we have no resources and no infrastructure of any significance. Therefore, even with a clear run and no nationalist infighting, in the best wards and constituencies in this country, we have only ever managed to get an insignificantly small number of candidates elected, and now under a sustained barrage of attacks from the establishment, virtually everything we formerly gained under the BNP banner is being lost.

READ MORE...

Does anyone know if a concerted effort is being mounted to plant Bob’s mantra across the MSM?  I happened to encounter a lot of it on this Telegraph thread about the short-lived racial segregation at Bjerke Upper Secondary School in Oslo.  Then at BDF I came across this quite powerful video, which is the work of a mantra-phile.

Anyone know anything about this?

And here’s another one:

Quite a few references to “the professional” Bob Whittaker, which I found superfluous but a target audience might not, I suppose.