Majorityrights Central > Category: Thread Wars

The famous white cliffs.  No bluebirds though.

No people should be required to define itself to prove that it exists.  Arguing for its non-existence at a time when the nation’s borders have been opened and millions of strangers are pouring in is a deeply immoral act.  But in the white world there is no shortage of sick minds who don’t know or care about morality, and are not actually interested in proofs anyway.  They don’t ask for definitions because they are interested in a substantive answer.  They ask because they think definition is impossible, and they will have an easy victory.  Their sole objective is to win, and no speaking of truths, no explanation of the facts will impact them. That is one of the defining differences of left and right, actually.

Getting on for twenty years ago now I started thinking about a working definition for the English, and found the task not so difficult after all.  I have employed the resultant form of words many times over the years.  At first there was quite a high rate of challenge.  But the definition always prevailed.  No one even dented it.  Now I find that the madness and delusion of my interlocutors has deepened … is deepening ... and their conversation has become ever briefer and weaker.  I used the definition again today and added some notes to back it up.  There was no challenge.  This was it:

A suggested definition of the English people

Subject to gene-flow from neighbouring territories, the English are the people wholly related to the non-immigrants, non-Irish and non-Jews present in England on 22nd June 1948, when the HMT Empire Windrush sailed into British territorial waters.

Notes

i. The format is governed by descent from within the group.

ii. The named excluded groups have their own particular ethnicities. Their progeny are not necessarily excluded from the gene flow as per (iii) below if one parent meets the definition.

iii. The selection of 22nd June 1948 is to distinguish between naturally-arising variation in the population and politically-engineered change, the latter being deemed an artificial impost denying the very existence of the English. Naturally-arising variation must be accommodated because gene flow from neighbouring territories is one of the four modes of genetic variation in Nature (the other three being selection, mutation, and drift).

iv. The same format can also be used for the Scots and Welsh just by swapping the relevant terms English and England. For British nationality combining the three peoples, the term British would be swapped for English and the phrase Great Britain would be swapped for England.

v. A separate definition would be required for the Northern Irish.

The full complexity of east-west relations according to Western reactionary opinion

There are times when the absence of an ethnic nationalist worldview in those who proclaim themselves nationalist (but not specifically, say, National Socialist, or traditionalist, or fascist) really limits communication.  What, after all, is our common frame of reference?  David Lane’s minimalist Fourteen Words accurately summarise the existential essence of all nationalism.  But the formulation is reductive, and can in no way function as an holistic ideology functions, ie, it cannot situate us in a pre-existing, broad-scale system of life-affirming truth by which a people may orient itself in Time and Space.  It is because of the systemic nature of an (actually very rare) epochal philosophy that it can, first, unify a political constituency and, second, energise a mass re-organisation.

But we do not possess that philosophy today.  We are, in consequence, caught in a pre-revolutionary cycle that cannot complete.  We have no unifying ideological standard around which to rally.  Along comes a large but perfectly uncomplicated political question, and we lack the framework to determine where justice lies.

Today such a question is: Do the people of Ukraine have a right to fight the violent imposition of Russian empire, and to struggle for national autonomy?  No ethnic nationalist should have a moment’s difficulty answering that.  But, instead, a substantial majority have lost their heads completely in contemplation of a second question: How dare America and the West challenge Russia’s security needs?  Of course it is a false question.  A need for expansion is not a need for security.  The theft of natural resources, farming produce, and even children is not a requirement for the creation of buffer zones.  It speaks of ancient tribute.  But Muscovy is an empire with an origin in its own payment of tribute to the Asiatic aggressor, and thus even into our time it has remained an empire with an historical culture of entitlement to further empire, and the wealth thereof.  That, not security, is the well-spring of Russian foreign policy.

Explaining this to the holders of “right-wing opinions” is a challenge.  Indeed, it feels like I’ve been challenging the dominant and reactionary pro-Russian sentiment and anti-American prejudice of on-line nationalists and trad-cons since the very first jolt forward of the first T72 in Vladimir Putin’s fateful full-scale invasion of 24th February 2022.  They don’t like it.  They don’t listen.  Their judgement is overwhelmed by anger at the globalist machinations of the Western hierarchy, and they don’t look any further.

READ MORE...

The following exchanges occurred today at The Conservative Woman.  TCW is a Christian conservative site which is quite restrictive on what it allows to be said about Christianity.  One is free to say all manner of things that would earn an instant dismissal on any pee-cee/woke liberal-left medium.  But critique Christianity at TCW and it’s curtains.  Which raises the interesting possibility that, actually, it is faith which does not brook falsification.  Anyway, I seem to be getting better, or maybe less clear, at speaking to Christians since this time I haven’t been banned.  Though, as the final remark shows, obscuration brings its own problems!

The exchanges were on this thread, which happily combines the Church of England, education and anti-racism.

Roger Bennett

I think it would go a long way to solving many of our problems today if true Christians could regain control of the C o E, it feels the time is fast approaching when that must happen or a new religious group will be founded. Perhaps when they ban the bible will be the necessary catalyst.

Guessedworker : Roger Bennett

Christianity has its ideational roots in Second Temple Judaism. The radical universalism that plagues us on our own ancestral soil today originates there.

Roger Bennett : Guessedworker

The branch can grow a long way away from the roots and its seeds may grow a new tree always influenced by the original roots as different as necessary to suit the new times for its healthy survival.

Guessedworker : Roger Bennett

But not in this case. Matthew 5: 17 & 18:

17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them.
18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

Christians have a duty to follow Christ’s teaching in regard to the prophets of Israel as in all things, and Israel in this respect holds out only sameness for the Other. However, the truth of peoples is not that sameness but the worth and uniqueness that is the gift of aeons of human descent, and which marks all peoples, Jew and gentile alike. The produced gentile, be he saved from sin by G-d or not, and the natural man under the singular obligation to protect and preserve his kind will always struggle to coexist in one Christian body.

No doubt, it is a dichotomy which demands a terrible judgement upon one or the other. Today’s Church is making that judgement upon our ethnic kind. I would prefer to judge the Church instead.

Roger Bennett : Guessedworker

It all depends on what your personal interpretation of what God is which decides on how you view the bible, whether it is a collection of the best ideas for the time of its creation to be taken as a guide to inform and consider or whether it’s an inviolable work of some omnipotent being.

Guessedworker : Roger Bennett

I agree in part. Obviously, the faith system which is best fitted to a people is the one which emerges over time from its own sociobiology.

At that point a critical (I think, female) voice entered the exchange.

Moonsphere : Guessedworker

And yet we find that Jesus performed acts of healing on the Sabbath, which was considered a breach of the Law. So you can’t hang the entire weight of the OT on passages which don’t have the tensile strength to support your argument.

We find that the Old Testament has within it Laws of Reciprocity - “an eye for an eye”, etc. These are Silver Rule formulations (so-called as they mirror the relation between Moon and Sun).

Does a Golden Rule abrogate a Silver Rule? Or does it bring it to a higher level of perfection?

Guessedworker : Moonsphere

What is more important to a tribe made hyper-ethnocentric by repeated existential crises ... the formal command to rest on the seventh day or the preservation of a brother’s life? Is a man to refuse to help his brother because of the formal law? What did the early oral and written Law say? Given the nature of Halacha as it has emerged in Rabbinic Judaism, this question must have been considered and resolved. I put it to you that the resolution would have been for tribe over scripture.

At this point in the Roman occupation the tribe’s religious life was in total ferment. There were hostile and competing sects seeking to inherit the religious future from Second Temple Judaism (which was dying, and was finally sundered by the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD). However, all of them carried the ideational imprimatur of Second Temple Judaism. Peter’s Jewish aspect of the Christ Cult is lost to us now. But it had been harsh enough on the question of breaking bread with the gentile for the Incident at Antioch to cause a schism. So one might speculate that tribalism was, as now, the central value, and that value was expressed in early Christianity, including Pauline Christianity, as the recruitment of the gentile in working for, and making himself subject to, the tribal cause. This is the essence of the Christian soul seeking not the good of his tribe but salvation from a great weight of sin by the grace of the Judaic G-d. This is how liberalism’s universalist dicta come down to us.

I am not a Christian. I am an Englishman. I have no faith potential. I have a portion of intellect. I can plainly see that universalism is a curse on my people. I cannot see how Christianity can be reformed to exclude it, but perhaps that is the path English Christians must explore at this time of the designed death of our people.

Redthommo41 : Guessedworker

Your last paragraph - Bravo

I can identify with much of your last paragraph in that I am a Christian (Catholic) and a very proud White Englishman. Sadly, on intellect, you have the beating of me. Although I have an MBA and can manage the kant with the cleaner the same as I can with Senior Board and the titled.

We, the White English are a hardy breed and IMPO White English and Christianity are intertwined into our fabric.

I would read more of you but I must admit (with the greatest respect) I cannot understand 75% of your posts. Word salad.

Guessedworker : redthommo41

Thanks for the response, Tom. I keep getting told off for obscurantism (basically). When thinking Christians - a demographic not unknown for its past interest in angels and pinheads - tell me likewise perhaps I should try to be more concise.

It remains difficult to impossible to debate the objects of faith.  What is one to do?  Well, we know that debating with the believing radical left is fruitless.  But the believing right has commonalities which ought to count for something.  These do occasionally bear on the faith question.  Perhaps I’ll continue to get better at talking to these folk and even explaining to them where a non-trivial part of their plaints actually originate.

Today, a nice piece by the writer Frank Wright appeared on the state of affairs appeared at what we must now call TCW but was, until a few weeks ago, The Conservative Woman, virtually the last surviving British “right-wing” site at which a free man can sound off.  Frank is awake, to put it really rather mildly.  He seems to model that rare conservative estate which is one step away from nationalism, and which is too well rooted to be susceptible to the customary scarecrow tactics.  His piece, titled “The more normal you are, the more the Regime hates you”, and is well worth a read.

Very rarely, the writers of pieces above the line venture below and converse with the hoi polloi.  But Frank was kind enough, or crazy enough, to get himself into a conversation with me, which went something like this:

UKCitizen • 6 hours ago
Unfortunately they found it is difficult to generate widespread resentment among the normies so they needed to create as many divisions as possible to make being normal a minority. Can’t control and gain power from a content and happy populace.

guessedworker  UKCitizen • 6 hours ago
“They” were the gentlemen of the Institute of Social Research in Frankfurt University. Their creation was Critical Theory, and they and it have since proved to be a curse on our race.

Frank Wright  guessedworker • 4 hours ago
I’d argue for Bernays and Lippmann as the engineers of consent, perfecting a method of the attachment of emotions to symbols by means of the creation of false events.

guessedworker  Frank Wright • 4 hours ago
Perhaps they are both creatures of subversive persuasion rather than subversion as such. Convincing people to act in some way is fundamentally less dangerous than forming them from childhood for that action.

Frank Wright  guessedworker • 3 hours ago
I’d argue they created the modern personality.

guessedworker  Frank Wright • 3 hours ago
You can argue it, but I would question your theory of Mind.

Frank Wright  guessedworker • 2 hours ago
Go on then.

guessedworker  Frank Wright • 2 hours ago • edited
OK, well, first, I applaud your clear-thinking. You are right that the sum of the acquired is the nidus of our sorrows. I only wish more of our people understood that the way out, so to speak, is through our own immersion in the formative influences of the day. But there are many sources and levels of influence. We can never be pure nature. We always carry the mark of what does not actually belong to us but, subject to its difference from nature and its reliance on a state of psychological lightness and/or suggestibility, structures us. But not all influences in that regard are equal.
The question you are really asking me is: how do we measure the structure for its fundamentality. Half of my answer is that there is the Jesuitical sense, there is the propaganda sense, and there are degrees in between. The degree to which we are made the possession of what we are not varies accordingly. But there is another half, which is the solidity and internal connection of the subject. Human beings can, under negative familial circumstances, suffer from a lightness of being which opens them out to, as they say, “support the latest thing”. They have no personal richness, no source of internal self-validation. Three or four generations of that will produce societal insanity in every way, from elite decadence and corruption to general criminality and psychopathy.
Lippman and Bernays dealt in the shallow end of the pool, softly drowning the weakest of us on a daily basis. But Jesus, Paul, Thomas Aquinas, Descartes, Locke, Voltaire, Marx, Freud, Adorno, Hirschfeld, and a cast of Enlightened and Marxised thousands have worked weakness into our very bone, and it is that weakness which, ultimately, we have to find the philosophical means to address and restore to health.

Frank Wright  guessedworker • 2 hours ago
I think there is no means by which man can transcend himself, which is the very essence of the progressive idea. I do not think man has progressed morally at all, and think efforts made to demonstrate this an illusion.
What I am on about with the Bernays stuff is that we have become more machine like as this machine becomes more integrated into our lives. This is not an accident. In fact, I’d argue the self is to a greater degree dependent on or addicted to the updates in worldview, feeling, orientation and so on provided by mass media. We have fallen in love with our own reflection, but it is not cast in some impassive mirror - it is a vision granted by Satan’s window, that spellbinding instrument through which all our thoughts are delivered.

guessedworker  Frank Wright • an hour ago
Man’s essential self is not his received/constructed self. His fallenness from his essential self into his received self is the general form of “the problem”. The individualised and marxised/universalised received self of today is simply what must be transcended.
How this might come to pass is the substance of my own intellectual enquiry, which I write about, in so much as I am able, at my own website. Is transcendence possible? Yes, if we accept that there is always this struggle between presence-in-being and absence; and we all, individually and as a people, traverse the line between the two. We are not fixed. That is the human condition. What vivifies our kind ... what clarifies our will to increase ... that is what lights our way towards presence. We may, as individuals, traverse the distance in a manner in which we never can as a group (and certainly never can as “Man”, all men), but the general good of facing the right way is really the object of the common struggle. Our systemic philosophy, our politics, should lead us that way.
It is interesting to have a real conversation with someone, even though we are only lightly touching on the potentials and points of interest. Thanks for bearing with it and not reflexively shooting off into the emotional defence of prior certainty.

Frank Wright  • an hour ago
Well I never. I will try to give your arguments the response they deserve- on your own site - at another time. I’m on the phone, have a cold (it’s not AIDS honest) and can’t give you the reply your thinking merits right now.

Frank Wright  • an hour ago
I can’t find your website. Do give me a link. I’m interested to talk to you about these ideas.

guessedworker  Frank Wright • an hour ago
My site is majorityrightsDOT com. You will find the work of many others there, from all walks of the dissident right.

I don’t know if Frank will show up here.  But it would be good to explore his position in greater detail.

I have been waiting for some days for regular ConHome contributor Robert Halfon, a Jewish Conservative MP married to a Brazilian woman, and serving chairman of the Education Select Committee, to post a piece about his current report into the condition of white working-class children in the education system.  Halfon is a decent enough man as MP’s go, and his report does exhibit compassion and concern for this failing constituency.  It acknowledges, for example, that the system is guilty of neglect.  Halfon particularly deplores the current hard-left turn to Critical Race Theory.  He wants some rather obvious if also tepid action to assist the white child-victims of the education system.  But, of course, he can’t admit that the problem runs much deeper than that, and the condition of these children is more existential.

ConHome is edited by another Jew, the Catholicised Paul Goodman, who allows on the site any hard-left criticism of the Conservative government, and even milque toast, sub-Farage civic nationalist criticism of immigration.  But naming the native victims, now that’s one step too far and summary excommunication will follow.  Nevertheless, ConHome is the primary right-of-centre party-affiliated UK site which permits readers’ comments, so the war for freedom of expression has to be fought.  The circle of the say-able has to be widened.

Mr Goodman, or one of his gentile co-workers dedicated to the great Conservative cause of corporate whoring, will very shortly be rushing to narrow it again ...

Verry

It’s not simply neglect. It’s not even that the educational establishment and the teaching profession have sought to level to the ground what English children can know of their own history, culture, and peoplehood. It’s also that multiracialising the English homeland and life experience is a producer of the draining and destructive phenomenon of culture shock. Any native people made subject to colonisation, and then deserted and attacked by its own authorities wielding pure, malignant lies about equality and racism, will lose the golden thread of relation and meaning in its life. The resulting anomie, self-estrangement, powerlessness and hopelessness IS culture shock; and it will manifest in the education of the children and in their later lives, deepening with each generation.

You politicians have attempted murder.

... on a recent thread at Spiked!, contesting with a certain John Piggott.  Ted is probably a middling academic at one of the Cal universities.  He has a very nasty dose of liberal disease.

The discussion began four days ago, following a thread comment by Ted which concluded thus:

If we want to honor Marx and Nietzsche, we should recognize that they were savvy enough to see the ideals of 17th century liberalism sliding into dotage, falling prey to the kind of technological tribalism we see in colonialism, class capitalism, and Orwellian nationalism. They lit a fire to show us how we’d strayed from the path, and if foolish and venal followers took that fire and burned down half the world, Marx and Nietzsche are no more to blame than Christ is for the brutalities done in his name.

Well, writing off nationalism in that blanket way is the proverbial red rag, so:

John Piggott  Ted Wrigley • 4 days ago
Equality has its conceptual origin in the requisite condition for the gentile to facilitate a declaration of the Messianic Age. It was never and can never be a real human possibility for the simple reason that Nature harbours no equality, rather as she harbours no straight lines. The attempt to concretise it as a socio-economic reality does violence to the proverbial crooked timber of human being.

And the exchange proceeded thus:

READ MORE...

A cautionary tale for policemen

Bennett found Boulder in the atrium hall of the hospital, sitting with a plastic cup of black coffee and a white DI from Notting Hill named Liz Dakin.  The news on Holly was 50% burns, 50% chance of pulling through.  The next 12 to 24 hours would decide if the damage to his internal organs was too extensive.

According to Dakin the first fire appliance arrived at the scene literally within seconds of the fireball erupting at the back of the property.  The emergency call was timed four minutes earlier at 01.40 hrs.  Someone had waited for the appliance to arrive before bricking Holly’s window and following up with a petrol bomb.  The first officers arrived six minutes later.  A sweep was conducted to no effect.

“Whoever did it wanted the fire put-out before it had a chance to take hold,” said Boulder.

“But not before it had a chance to maim or kill John Holly.  Is everyone else from the building OK?” asked Bennett.

“All evacuated safely,” Dakin told him, “We have to conclude that the attacker’s intent was to minimise danger to the others sleeping in the building, even at risk to himself.  There was just the one intended victim.  It’s most unusual.”

“It sounds most professional to me.  Aside from the brick and the petrol bomb has he left any evidence?” Bennett asked?

“Forensics are in.  Maybe some DNA will survive on the bottle fragments, but it’s a long-shot.  They’ll check on the way in to the rear of the property and out again.  The ground was reasonably soft.  There will be soil transfer.  There should be at least a partial boot-imprint … a few fibres.  He had to hop over a six foot high wall and two adjoining fences to access the ground outside the victim’s flat.”

“CCTV in the area?”

“There’s always a chance.  But it’s pretty much residential,” she said, “From that wall he could turn right and at the next cross-roads walk totally unrecorded for three or four hundred yards in any direction he liked.  If he was meticulous, he could probably get the best part of half-a-mile and still not be caught on any camera.”

“What about the voice on the emergency call?” asked Bennett.

“Haven’t heard it yet.  I expect it will be Cortana or some other virtual interface.  Interviews of the other residents and door-to-door will be starting in a couple of hours.  Uniform could do a finger-tip search of the immediate surroundings, I suppose ... bins and skips in the area checked in case he dumped his lighter.  Might turn up something but, y’know, there again.  There will definitely be a local appeal, though.  Forensics on the victim’s laptop and phone will be done … re-done, sorry.  Family and friend interviews … workplace.”

“That was a club in the Fulham Road, apparently.  Barman, but only part-time.” said Boulder.

“Oh OK, thanks.  So we’ll build up a victim profile.  Whatever you and DS Boulder can give us, please do.”

“When you got here, guv, I was just explainin’ to DI Dakin that it’s political,” Boulder announced.

READ MORE...

A cautionary tale for policemen

Charley Tout MP still loved the morning ritual of leafing through the London editions.  He had them all delivered early to his flat.  Websites were OK, but he didn’t have time to go looking for politically relevant articles.  Searching placed altogether too much reliance upon Herr Heisenberg.  The dead-tree product, however, gave him everything right there at the breakfast table, and set him up nicely for a day’s political chess.

This morning, though, he was only really interested in one of the nationals, and that, of course, was the Daily Mail.  A tad disappointingly, he hadn’t made the front page.  But there he was in a good position on page 3.  “Minister fights far right legal attack on free speech” it said.  “EXCLUSIVE by Kimberley Pruett for the Daily Mail” it said.  Charley read the body of the text with mounting satisfaction.  When he reached the end he went straight back to the beginning and read it again.  She had done everything he could ask for.  Absolutely everything.  He was a happy man.  He reached into his left-hand jacket pocket for his pay-phone and scrolled down to her number.

DCI Bennet was not a happy man.  On arriving at the station at 8.00 am as usual, Sgt Dutta had pressed that morning’s edition of the Daily Mail on him.  For his benefit it had been opened to page three and pre-folded.  “Oh Christ, what!” exclaimed Bennett.  He took the paper to his office, sat down and surveyed the damage.  Though written from a ridiculously unreasonable angle, the article was unmistakably about the Holly business.  It was high on dog-whistling and low on case details.  But it specifically mentioned Peckham Police.  Someone somewhere had leaked to the press.  If that someone was in the station, it wasn’t him.  But it could be one of the other two detectives or anyone else who had some contact to the case.  Realistically, that meant Boulder, Eilam, or Brook.

That said, in his experience no one with a functioning brain cell leaks to the media in a clumsy and discoverable way, and no one owns up.  Investigations are almost always a waste of everybody’s time, and do more harm than good, since suspicion does much of the work of guilt itself in corroding the relationship of officers and managers.  Still, it was to be expected that someone upstairs or at Curtis Green would want enquiries to be made.

READ MORE...