“Operations of thought are like cavalry charges in a battle — they are strictly limited in number, they require fresh horses, and must only be made at decisive moments.”
- Alfred North Whitehead, “Adventures of Ideas”

899 words

READ MORE...

Am I really seeing this?

1925 words

Before proceeding to disconcerting examples of media abuse and manipulation against us, let’s look at some background that Bill provided, of an England as it used to be:

“Yes. I’ve shown this before. Pity the music is not English but I still love it. Today its the BBC* (modernity) that gives us our culture so is it surprising we are what we are?” - Bill

We have touched upon this to some extent, but not as a focused topic: specifically, turning points where media pushed the envelope of liberalism. Bill cited the British program, “That Was The Week That Was.” I acknowledged his indignation with media pushing liberalism in that era by citing segments from The Beatles, “A Hard Day’s Night.”

There are other obvious examples from that time, notably -

Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner?

And in the late 80’s, the dam bursting with

Madonna’s Like A Prayer

..which, btw, was shown continuously in Eastern Europe prior to the fall of communism.

However, there are examples of liberal envelope-pushing that are promoted not so much to cross the line (though they do) but to put it across as Taken For Granted.

Where these tactics are effective indeed, Whites can feel all the more alienated and foreign in their sense of righteous indignation, as no shared social, let alone institutionalized, response is forthcoming.

This is perhaps more of a pre-Internet phenomenon, when non-interaction with media provided little recourse to discuss the shock of this kind of assault on White interests.

Yet, as we have had these experiences, of seeing galling transgressions of White interests in media or in day-to-day interaction, it may help to know that you are not crazy: yes, you saw this and it is outrageous to an extreme. With that, these experiences acknowledged, it may be possible to redress not only these episodic instantiations, not only patterns, but lynchpins behind their occurrence.

Contributing to the feeling of “did I really see that?” is having these shocking experiences shrugged-off by others (Whites), either simultaneous to the occurrence or in the attempted report of it as an outrage.

I would encourage commentors to list a few of these experiences of “did I really see that? Could this be true?” (typically treated by others as if nothing, the fault is in you).

READ MORE...

Am I really seeing that?

Did I really see that?

READ MORE...

by William Hanna / July 22nd, 2014

On 26 November 1947, when it became apparent to Zionists and their supporters that the UN vote on the Partition of Palestine would be short of the required two thirds majority in the General Assembly, they filibustered for a postponement until after Thanksgiving thereby gaining time to threaten the loss of aid to nations such as Greece — which planned on voting against — into changing their votes. U.S. President Truman — also threatened with loss of Jewish support in the upcoming Presidential election — later noted that:

The facts were that not only were there pressure movements around the United Nations unlike anything that had been seen there before, but that the White House, too, was subjected to a constant barrage. I do not think I ever had as much pressure and propaganda aimed at the White House as I had in this instance. The persistence of a few of the extreme Zionist leaders —actuated by political motives and engaging in political threats — disturbed and annoyed me.

On 29 November 1947 the UN voted for a modified Partition Plan — despite Arab opposition on grounds that it violated UN charter principles of national self- determination — recommending the creation of independent Arab and Jewish States with a Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem. The resolution’s adoption prompted the 1947–48 conflict including atrocities by Zionist terror gangs whose genocidal brutality was responsible for the murder of thousands of unarmed Palestinian civilians and the forced exodus of more than 700,000 others. At the time, the consensus of opinion was that Israel’s contentious creation had been permitted as a conscious and willful act of Holocaust compensation which included toleration of its crimes against humanity. Since then, Israel has steadfastly adhered to that successful tactic of blackmail, bribery, and bullying to suppress and silence — with accusations of anti-Semitism/Holocaust denial — any criticism of its blatant human rights violations and arrogant disregard for international Law.

The fear of being branded an anti-Semite is now a universal phobia which Zionist Apartheid Israel reinforces with Gestapo-style vigilance that has permeated through universities, corporate media outlets, and parliaments. This is most evident in the United States where the American Israel Public Affairs committee (AIPAC) is active on college campuses with a Political Leadership Development Program of pro-Israel activities including reports on faculty members, students, and college organisations critical of Israeli policies. The “miscreants” — exposed in AIPAC’s College Guide and the pro-Israel Campus Watch —are then subject to harassment, suspension, or even dismissal

READ MORE...

After fifteen years, Nick Griffin has stepped down from the party leadership in favour of Adam Walker.  His statement to that effect is here.  He will now take up the role, which I had never heard of before, of “BNP President on the Party’s governing Executive Council”.

Exactly why this happened now will doubtless be a cause of speculation in all the usual quarters.  But it doesn’t really matter.  For a brief moment in 2009 nationalism had a chance to make itself felt.  That was Griffin’s moment and he wrecked it by his own hand, most notably in his Question Time appearance. As the New Statesman observes:

From a peak of 58 councillors in 2009 it now has only two left. In 2009, the BNP won two MEPs, 940,000 votes and over six per cent in the European elections. This May, the BNP won 180,000 votes and barely one per cent of the vote.

Griffin’s leadership will be remembered for that wasted opportunity and for the divisiveness and paranoia which characterised his handling of senior party members in the aftermath.

Adam Walker carries himself more like a street activist than a (prospective) senior British politician.  He will not be burdened by high expectations.  But one wishes him well as one wishes British nationalism well.

by Neil Vodavzny

Ghost World asks “were things better then?” They certainly were less anonymous, with less anomie. Musically-speaking, the 60s saw cross-genre influences like never before, particularly across race. Soul/country pioneer Joe Tex came from a share-cropping heritage, and his preacher-man influence is heard in country-rock pioneers Burrito Brothers (Gram Parsons).

Great stuff, but share-cropping is the very pillar of Jeffersonian principles. The life, though hard and relatively poor, was by definition occupation-based breeding. The Georgic principles of vigour are the same whether applied to Black, or to White ranchers and cowboys.

Where you have a society based on breeding, you’re going to have more imagist, stereotypical scenes – more film-like. Ghost World has an allusion to Coons in an old advertising poster – a racial epithet that shocks the hip-set – what you might call a caricatural stereotype. On the other hand, a society without epithets is an Orwellian tyranny, so you takes your choice.

Whether things were better then or not, they were way more Georgic, and so true to the principles of America, Black or White. Joe Tex escaped the harsh poverty, but how many present day Blacks would give their eye-teeth for the chance of a share-cropping smallholding? Heck, they could invent a novel cotton-picking hip-hop genre – why not?

READ MORE...