Before and after the White American Revolution

Posted by Guessedworker on Monday, 28 September 2009 15:52.

This is a suggestion from Bo Sears.  One subject that sorely needs some attention is the kind of organisational requirements European-American nationalists need in place at each stage of the process of regaining control over their people’s lives and destiny - WAR for short!  Bo suggests that there are three such stages:

“1. Now, while we are weak.

2. Later, when we grow much larger in number.

3. And later still, when the actual winning of power and the type of government we might set up come under consideration?”


Now, there is the small matter of fashioning revolution of the mind between nos 1 and 2, and a revolution of the more obvious sort between nos 2 and 3.  So organisation has to change accordingly.  Analysis of the current dispensation, short and long-term strategy, and the means of dissemination of ideas all enter into the first period.  Mass mobilisation, whether it is in a political, migrational or military form applies to the second.

But let’s have some more detailed thoughts.


Faith no faith

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, 27 September 2009 00:32.

As happens sometimes here, a thread given over to one subject has been rudely assaulted by another ... the perennial, insoluble, irresistible problem of ... well, God.  So with belated apologies to Soren, whose thread God offended against, I’m relocating the unequal struggle here.  Just in case the Blighter has any fight left in Him.

In danielj’s intellectual armoury lies the following by no means rusty and unsharpened assertion:

Belief in empiricism isn’t merited by the plain fact ... Why should I accept the debate on your terms?

Now, this way of looking at the empirical enemy recognises the hard and unpalatable fact that ever since that night in Oxford when the Bishop was slain by a mawnkey, religion has been in full and undignified retreat.  We all know the story.  I don’t need to reproduce it here.  The reverberations of that night, and of the publishing event that preceded it, still reach down to us today, a century and a half later.  Although evolutionary science has won every battle since, the faculty of faith is nothing if not enduring.  It doesn’t give up.  It can’t.  It is as much a part of the human genome as the strict and methodological intellectualism it disdains.

So we have daniel’s response to all the long years of being told that Christians are dealers in self-deception.  It is to assert that the scientific method - the pursuit of the predictive - is predicated on belief no less than belief itself.  Now, I am not much interested in how this conclusion is reached.  It must, after all, only be a matter of faith.  It cannot, by its own admission, be true.

And there is the little local difficulty.  Daniel’s stratagem has the effect of rendering all truth hollow and meaningless, though this probably isn’t his intention.  We are not taken back to some sweet life of the mid-Victorian past, filled with simple and good, hi-fidelity hearts.  We are transported to a truthless world, and Man cannot live without truth.  Truth is more necessary, more visceral and humane, more of our lives than faith or beauty ever was or, most certainly, ever will be.

But that is what happens when the terms of the debate are dictated by Christians, and all categories are reduced to mere belief.

Well, let’s keep them separate here, at least.  The committment to ontology and the committment to teleology are separated by qualitative differences.  They employ the qualitatively different methods of, respectively, proof and prayer, and journey along qualitatively different lines.  Ontology predicates experience > hypothesis > predictiveness > truth.  Teleology predicates thought > idealism >  faith > beauty.  Truth and beauty are not equals.  Truth leads to enlightenment.  Beauty leads only to itself.

To make truth and beauty both matters of belief is disingenuous and rather unEuropean.  It has something in common with the semitic attraction to postmodernism, and the equally semitic promulgation of the Sociobiology Wars of the 1970s, 80s and 90s.  It is inappropriate for us.  Let the faithful reflect, if they can possibly bring themselves to, on the spirituality of superfice which eschews the subtle and difficult, the psychological, and grasps instead at bibles and prayers, salvation and eternal life, and all the beautiful exordia of self-deception and moral frailty that once cost “witches” their yet more beautiful lives and brought destruction to the sons of men in a way that blood and soil never did.  Let them reflect on the responsibility they all share of bearing a powerful psychological driver through life without visiting harm upon others, as one would with the sex drive or with male aggression.  Let them learn to withhold it from the world, keep it private so public life, public progress and intellectualism can proceed, naturally enough, not on daniel’s relativistic terms but on their own.


Distributed Electronic Barter System Archive

Posted by James Bowery on Saturday, 26 September 2009 17:54.

I’ve previously written here about an actual, real live, in-existence, software package for distributed electronic barter using military grade encryption.  Well, as part of the archiving of my files from the soon-to-be-defunct geocities free webhosting service, I realized that this software package might become otherwise unavailable, so I’ve archived the latest version here for those of sufficient technical talent.

That is all.


What it is to be human, part 2

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, 23 September 2009 00:58.

Now I am returning to the issue of consciousness and the absence of self with which I began Part 1 of this post.  It is only my own view, and it isn’t original.  It is also entirely open to challenge by anybody who understands these matters better than I do - and there must be many.

It is usual in Western thought for the question of the self to be treated as an epistemological issue.  But what I am really setting out to do in this series is to recover from the sloppy psychological models of the past - all that couch-talk about the unconscious, the subconscious, the collective unconscious, and so on, for those workings of the mind which proceed in us quite without our assistance, and over which we presume sovereignty.  I’ll begin with a thumbnail sketch of the hardware, so to speak, of the mind.  Some observations about the much more interesting and altogether too, too fallible software will follow in the next post.

Neurologically, all sentient organisms have one or more systems which project the consciousness of self, insomuch as that hologrammatic thing can be said to exist.  These are not coterminous with the divisions in the human brain and nervous systems but, largely excepting thought it seems, are distributed across them.  They activate different areas of the brain.  They are separate from the visceral nervous system.  I contend that they have evolved out of the most nascent awareness of sexual division, selection and self-maintenance.  In other words, the survival strategy of sensing, to borrow the old German Idealist term, “the thing that is” beyond the organism itself is the only reason for human self-awareness and self-interest.

The “hardware”

READ MORE...


And did those feet in ancient time…

Posted by James Bowery on Sunday, 20 September 2009 16:12.

image
The Telegraph reports that:

(Prehistoric Britons) were able to travel between settlements with pinpoint accuracy thanks to a complex network of hilltop monuments.

These covered much of southern England and Wales and included now famous landmarks such as Stonehenge and The Mount.New research suggests that they were built on a connecting grid of isosceles triangles that ‘point’ to the next site.

Many are 100 miles or more away, but GPS co-ordinates show all are accurate to within 100 metres.

This provided a simple way for ancient Britons to navigate successfully from A to B without the need for maps…

According to historian and writer Tom Brooks…

‘‘So advanced, sophisticated and accurate is the geometrical surveying now discovered, that we must review fundamentally the perception of our Stone Age forebears as primitive, or conclude that they received some form of external guidance.”

I await Thomas Cahill’s new edition of The Gifts of the Jews: How a Tribe of Desert Nomads Changed the Way Everyone Thinks and Feels wherein he describes the “external guidance” received by the Stone Age forebears of the Britons as the wanderings of Abraham with his son Isaac bringing the light of their advanced culture to the ignorant savages.


League of American Nationalists

Posted by James Bowery on Friday, 18 September 2009 16:40.

Starting at about 10 minutes into the season premiere of “Sons of Anarchy” (a biker gang), titled “Albification” is the following dialog:

Law enforcement officer: I’m guessing this isn’t about cigars.
Town father: Ethan shares a common interest.
Ethan: The Sons of Anarchy have been supplying weapons to gang members for over a decade.  Its time it stopped.
Officer: (picking up business card handed to him) “The League of American Nationalists”
Ethan:  (shifty eyes, and inflection avoiding racial agenda) The League represents an influential group of businessmen who are tired of criminals undermining local enterprise.
Officer: (with an “I’ve got your number” expression) Right.  And how many black and Latino businessmen in your influential group?
Ethan: (with an OK you’ve got my number deadpan): None.
Officer:  I know who you are.  (then looking at the obviously ex-con bodyguard of Ethan’s) White hate.
Ethan:  Quite the opposite, deputy chief.  (with a “he doth protest too much” unctuousness) We are separatists, not supremacists.  We are God fearing patriots.  And in a time when black radicals are in power in this country we are desperately trying to remind our citizens of their founding beliefs.
Officer: (again, with the “I’ve got your number” expression) That all white men are created equal. (pregnant pause with no retort from Ethan)  What the Hell do you want from me?
Bodyguard: Call us what you want.  We’ve got the same goal:  Stop scumbags from arming scumbags.
Ethan:  We just want you to know, we are at your disposal, if you need us.
Officer gets up and walks out.

This “screenwriting” is chock-full of little pieces of, uh, propaganda that deserve careful dissection and examination.


Doing the Basic Math For Net Asset Tax As Proposed by Bowery In 1992

Posted by James Bowery on Tuesday, 15 September 2009 13:57.

The proposal (first made in 1992) is relatively simple:

Replace all taxes on economic activity (such as the income tax) with a single tax on the net, in place liquidation value of household assets, at the risk free interest rate (nominally around 3% or the long-term average of the short-term Treasury rate). Homestead is exempted (intended to include home and tools of the trade for self-employment—nominally around $300k/family in 2009). Businesses are not taxed, only their owners.

Use this calculator to find out how various households fare under various assumptions.  The output is the change in the household’s after tax income.  If it is positive, that household prefers the NAT over the present system.  If negative, that household prefers the current system.  In the default example, the household before tax rate of return on assets (its investment skill) is set to a relatively high 11.11% to show that even Warren Buffet may prefer the NAT if he is as good an investor as his mythology would have us believe.  Set that rate of return lower to see what happens to Warren, Bill and their buddies if they’re not as good as they’re supposed to be according to modern myth.

Current Income Tax Rate (ITR)
Proposed Asset Tax Rate (ATR)
Proposed Homestead Exemption (E)
Household’s Current Before Tax Rate of Return on Assets (ROROA)

 

Earned income is different from total household income (the current tax base).

“Income” means the same thing here as it does in the 16th Amendment authorizing the taxation of “income from whatever source” which includes not only wages but also dividends, capital gains, rents, net-sales, interest, etc.  In other words, “income” means the return on all investments including the investment of one’s labor for a return (commonly called wages, salaries, or “earned” income).  In this example the total household “income” (taxable under the current income tax system) is its “earned income” plus its rate of return times the household’s assets.


Murder, Mumia And Michael Stone:  The Theory, Practice And Consequences Of Blanket Dismissal

Posted by Guest Blogger on Sunday, 13 September 2009 19:15.

by Alexander Baron

In 1999, I developed a theory that I called The Wizard Of Oz Syndrome to explain the cause of state repression. Although the phrase is not original – I thought it was ! - I believe that the ideas expounded therein show us the root cause of the problem: individuals in the service of the state are never but never held personally accountable for their actions, so they can and do, do whatever they damn well please, which often as not is make the lives of innocent people a misery.

Ironically, the one place where this doesn’t happen is the new China. Although China is most definitely a repressive society by Western standards, its government takes a dim view of civil servants who exploit or endanger its citizens, and severe punishments – including public executions – have been meted out to transgressors.

The inspiration for The Wizard Of Oz Syndrome was sad, and at times painful, personal experience. The inspiration for the Theory Of Blanket Dismissal was also personal experience, though thankfully of a marginally less painful kind, the kind of pain that comes from banging   one’s own head repeatedly against a brick wall.

So what is this theory? Although I didn’t mention it by name, I touched on it in a speech I delivered in Central London on September 17, 2005 when I alluded to some beliefs in the political sphere as revealed truths, because “No amount of reason, evidence, logic or rational argument will ever convince the true believer otherwise.”

The Theory Of Blanket Dismissal is something which extends far beyond the purely political sphere, including at times most damagingly for some people into the field of police work, criminal and related investigations. I am not alluding here to the phenomenon of cognitive dissonance, which is thoroughly documented – though painfully ignored time and time again. I am talking about something that goes far deeper.

To illustrate this theory, and how it works in practice, I propose to examine two high profile murder convictions, the case of Michael Stone in the UK, and that of Mumia Abu-Jamal in the United States.

READ MORE...


Page 148 of 337 | First Page | Previous Page |  [ 146 ]   [ 147 ]   [ 148 ]   [ 149 ]   [ 150 ]  | Next Page | Last Page

Venus

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Categories

Contributors

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Immigration

Islamist Threat

Anti-white Media Networks

Audio/Video

Crime

Economics

Education

General

Historical Re-Evaluation

Controlled Opposition

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Europeans in Africa

Of Note

Comments

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Sat, 01 Jul 2023 20:39. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Wed, 28 Jun 2023 22:58. (View)

timothy murray commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Wed, 28 Jun 2023 00:52. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Tue, 27 Jun 2023 23:03. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Mon, 26 Jun 2023 22:34. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Mon, 26 Jun 2023 19:08. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Sun, 25 Jun 2023 16:59. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Sun, 25 Jun 2023 16:21. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Sun, 25 Jun 2023 15:19. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Sun, 25 Jun 2023 10:18. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Sat, 24 Jun 2023 23:23. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Sat, 24 Jun 2023 23:15. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Sat, 24 Jun 2023 22:41. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Sat, 24 Jun 2023 21:26. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Sat, 24 Jun 2023 21:23. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Sat, 24 Jun 2023 21:07. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Thu, 22 Jun 2023 18:14. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Thu, 22 Jun 2023 10:17. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Thu, 22 Jun 2023 10:07. (View)

Kierkegaard commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Thu, 22 Jun 2023 07:50. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Thu, 22 Jun 2023 06:00. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Thu, 22 Jun 2023 02:31. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Thu, 22 Jun 2023 02:14. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Thu, 22 Jun 2023 00:53. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Wed, 21 Jun 2023 22:22. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Mon, 19 Jun 2023 18:43. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Mon, 19 Jun 2023 00:34. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine?' on Wed, 14 Jun 2023 12:25. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A year in the trenches' on Wed, 14 Jun 2023 03:39. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A year in the trenches' on Mon, 12 Jun 2023 12:10. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A year in the trenches' on Mon, 12 Jun 2023 11:07. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A year in the trenches' on Mon, 12 Jun 2023 10:52. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A year in the trenches' on Mon, 12 Jun 2023 03:43. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A year in the trenches' on Mon, 12 Jun 2023 02:13. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A year in the trenches' on Mon, 12 Jun 2023 01:12. (View)

Majorityrights shield

Sovereignty badge