True, as we look through Being itself, through time itself, and look into the destiny of Being and the extending of time-space, we have glimpsed what “Appropriation” means.  But do we by this road arrive at anything else than a mere thought-construct?  Behind this suspicion there lurks the view that Appropriation must after all “be” something.  However:  Appropriation neither is, nor is Appropriation there.  To say the one or to say the other is equally a distortion of the matter, just as if we wanted to derive the source from the river.

What remains to be said?  Only this:  Appropriation appropriates.  Saying this, we say the Same in terms of the Same about the Same.  To all appearances, all this says nothing.  It does indeed say nothing so long as we hear a mere sentence in what was said, and expose that sentence to the cross-examination of logic.  But what if we take what was said and adopt it unceasingly as the guide for our thinking, and consider that this Same is not even anything new, but the oldest of the old in Western thought:  that ancient something which conceals itself in a-letheia?  That which is said before all else by this first source of all the leitmotifs of thinking gives voice to a bond that binds all thinking, providing that thinking submits to the call of what must be thought.

The task of our thinking has been to trace Being to its own from Appropriation—by way of looking through true time without regard to the relation of Being to beings.

To think Being without beings means:  to think Being without regard to metaphysics.  Yet a regard for metaphysics still prevails even in the intention to overcome metaphysics.  Therefore, our task is to cease all overcoming, and leave metaphysics to itself.

If overcoming remains necessary, it concerns that thinking that explicitly enters Appropriation in order to say It in terms of It about It.

Our task is unceasingly to overcome the obstacles that tend to render such saying inadequate.

The saying of Appropriation in the form of a lecture remains itself an obstacle of this kind.  The lecture has spoken merely in propositional statements.

Martin Heidegger, “On Time and Being” translated by Joan Stambaugh, ISBN:0-022-32375-7, p 23-24

I present this for discussion by those more familiar with continental philosophy than I because I have a hunch it is as important as it pretends.

A couple of days ago the BBC News website informed us that a “Romanian mayor has been strongly criticised by Jewish groups after appearing dressed in a Nazi uniform at a local fashion show.”  Radu Mazare is mayor of Constan?a, the Black Sea port and the oldest living city in Romania (having been founded around 600 BC).  He was, he explained, inspired to wear the costume by the film Valkyrie.  But it’s not an explanation that the “offended party” requires:

Dr Efraim Zuroff, a Holocaust historian and the director of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Jerusalem, expressed “insult and outrage” at the mayor’s appearance.

In a letter to Mr Mazare, he wrote: “It would be hard to adequately describe the depth of the pain that your appearance caused, not only to Jews and other victims of Nazism, but to any person of moral integrity who knows the history of World War II.

“Today it is well-known that the Wehrmacht played an active role in the mass murder of European Jewry and many other innocent victims.

“By dressing in a Wehrmacht uniform, you are expressing totally unwarranted support and nostalgia for an army which committed the most terrible war acts of genocide.”

Dr Zuroff suggested Mr Mazare could make amends for his “incredible lack of judgement” by bringing an exhibition on the crimes of the German army to Romania.

So, is this the speech of a beautiful but tortured Jewish soul lying flayed and bleeding on the ice-cold alter of German history?  Is he making manifest that great testament to human evil which is the G-d-given lot of all Jews?  Or does he merely have a practical mind?  Never mind the insult and outrage, and even the “pain” of a depth “it would be hard to adequately describe”, is all he really wants to keep Christian Europe’s head-down in the moral mire?  Might one conclude that, far from being a Chosen vessel of Man’s redemption from evil, Dr Zuroff is a ruthlessly opportunistic race huckster ... the kind of man who might not be above employing that indescribable Jewish “pain” in a trick:

(Thanks to reader KD who sent me the link to this video.)

We saw something very like opportunistic trickery with Prince Harry’s fancy dress back in January 2005:

READ MORE...

by David Hamilton

More than 6 million babies have been aborted since the Abortion Act 1967 came into force in Britain and around 75 million in the USA! There are 500 abortions every day in England and Wales and the figures show 67% of are carried out before the 10th week, and 89% before the 12th week. There are about 190,000 abortions a year in England and Wales. The official practice is that an abortion can be performed up to 24 weeks and needs the consent of two family doctor’s. The woman can seek a second opinion or go private. It is usual in cases when the child is likely to be disabled or not expected to have a high quality of life.

The debate is between liberals and feminists on rights, but is never on the woman’s duty to our posterity: the needs of our ethnic group are ignored. The two sides argue where the rights lie, couching the argument in rational terms. But what about our natural instincts? What about our emotional bonding with our people and the consequent responsibility for one another and the continuity of our people?

READ MORE...

I want to use this brief post to express my thanks to MR reader Gina.  Here’s why.

She mailed me a few days ago to let me know that she had discovered during a visit to Manchester that MR is blocked by the web-filtering software used on one or other local authority network.  Internet filtering is something we’ve known about for quite a while.  It’s three and a half years since Johan Van Vlaams warned us about its coming.  At the time, the software was still being explored by the purchasing bodies (who are mostly central and local government bodies).  It was immediately apparent that this blog might be bracketed with the more stereotypical nationalist and dissident sites.  And, indeed, it was not very long before the first case of MR-blocking reached our ears through the auspices of erstwhile commenter Effra (WJ Phillips) who reported that we were blocked from the PCs in his local library.

Frankly, blocking the public’s access to any political site that doesn’t encourage law-breaking or otherwise break the law itself is a vexing issue - and not just for the website operators.  The censors, too, are exposed to the possibility of making errors of judgement.  Inevitably, it is not straightforward to identify a consistent and defensible basis on which sites can be blocked.  Official dislike is obviously not enough, though it’s the danger, of course.  An opportunity always exists for the ban to be challenged and overturned, and I am pleased to report that, in one Manchester local authority’s area at least, that is what has happened with us.

When Gina mailed me on 11th July, I asked her where the PC was located.  She did not immediately respond, but set about contacting the person in Manchester responsible for the decision to list MR among the sites deemed unsuitable for public viewing.  Today I received another mail from her with a message appended from the relevant Systems & Technology Manager.  It read:

Thank you for your enquiry about the web site majorityrights.com

After looking at the site we have agreed that the site should be unblocked. This should happen within 5 working days.

This is a very small victory.  But it is also gratifying and instructive.  We should not accept the dispensations of a hostile bureaucracy.  We do not merit the labels our opponents apply to us.  Ask why “antiracist/nonracist” thought so ill of us, or why Robert Lindsay considers Prozium and every White Nationalist “a maggot”, and you will receive no coherent reply.  Defending prejudice, as the social constructionists so love to tell us, is an impossible task.

Thanks Gina for doing a little bit to defeat the prejudice under which we labour.  You’ve set a good example for the rest of us.

by David Hamilton               

The one thing former Conservative MP K Harvey Proctor constantly warned of was a white backlash.  To keep the indigenous people under control the Caste has devised various underhand and undemocratic methods. The idea was to manage the population into a sort of utopian state. But ideologies need an enemy, and that was “whites”.  We were all held responsible for the slave trade, which meant only a heavily-censored version of slavery with the main dealers – the Arabs - left out of the account.  We are, after all, only allowed to think “correct” thoughts.

What Alan Clarke, the former Conservative government minister and famous diarist, lauded as “the British military spirit” and a matter of honour and pride is scorned as yobbery by the Establishment.

The people who were the backbone of our traditional military prowess are slandered and misused. They are misused because they are not wanted in the armed forces, where they should be cherished as heroes ready to defend our country and control our borders to repel the current invasion. Our troops are held in contempt and not even provided with adequate equipment to save their lives.

People who have committed youthful misadventures but who naturally belong in the forces are barred. At one time young men who were at risk of being sent to young offenders institutions were given the opportunity of joining the military. To the traditional aristocratic-ruling warrior class, they would have been ideal recruits possessed of potential noble virtues.  Now those virtues are now left unexplored, and the young are left in their criminality.

A classic example of how these virtues are presented as wrong or even low-class was in the Daily Mail of 5th July. In this deceitful piece of fiction – a real hatchet piece - the scribbler Niall Firth linked several disconnected phenomena.

Neo-Nazis are plotting a ‘spectacular’ terrorist attack on Britain to fuel racial tension, Scotland Yard’s counter-terrorism officers fear.

Senior officers have increased their surveillance of suspects to monitor their ability to carry out a deadly attack aimed at causing a ‘breakdown in community cohesion’.

The chilling warning comes after last month’s startling gains by the BNP in the local and European elections which many fear may ‘embolden’ violent Far-Right extremists.

READ MORE...

Attractive female sees foreign male walking down the street eyeing her.  Female sees native male observing this and doing nothing.  Female evolutionary brain circuits tell her: “Native male either does not want me or is fearful of this foreign male – either way, I test the waters with the foreign male.”  Female eyes foreign male back.  Foreign male’s evolutionary brain circuits sees the female’s reaction and now checks the native male’s reaction.  Native male’s evolutionary brain circuits observe all of this and triggers instinctive fight or flight response.  First instinct:  Challenge foreign male to fight.  The native male’s higher brain functions capture and play out the scenario:  He beats foreign male and although his evolutionary brain circuits tell him, and the female, he passes the test, he himself has participated in building a civilization with the rule of law – law that now protects the foreign male from such fights.  Gangs of police, dishonor and ultimately rape at the hands of gangs of foreign males in prison are to be his fate.  Foreign male sees native male’s fight or flight response short circuit.  Female see’s native male’s fight or flight response short circuit.  Evolutionary brain circuits in both decree:  Native male is a coward.  Make him watch this...

And, so ends civilization: Not with a bang, but a fuck.

On its website Jobbik Magyarországért Mozgalom, the Movement for a Better Hungary, is displaying a ten-minute video of police violence against its apparently legal and peaceful demonstrations held in 2006.  The video was made for handing out as a DVD to members of the European Parliament at the debate on Iran in which one of Jobbik’s three MEPs, Dr Krisztina Morvai, was making her maiden speech.  It has appeared in various places across the nationalist internet.

We cannot know whether provocations have been edited out.  But based on the evidence of the video it is quite shocking to see what these repulsive creatures in police uniform are willing to do in broad daylight to fellow Hungarians.

The “better Hungary” the party is striving for is one in which government serves the interests of the mass of Hungarians, rather than the elites, foreign interests and ethnic minorities.  Economically, it offers an anti-elitist, anti-neoliberal vision.  The minorities issue seems to come down to the problem of the Roma.

But there is, for Dr Morvai, also a Jewish Question.  She is, as it happens, married to a Jew and has three daughters by him.  The marriage itself appears to be over, though the couple remain together for the children’s sakes. In any event, Morvai famously created a stir when she remarked on a conservative Hungarian internet discussion group:

“I would be glad if those who call themselves proud Hungarian Jews in their spare time would play with their tiny little circumcised tails instead of abusing me. Your kind expect that if you fart our kind stands at attention and caters to all your wishes. It’s time to learn: we no longer oblige! We hold our heads high and no longer tolerate the terror your kind imposes on us. We are taking our country back!”

What a woman!

With thanks to Anarcho Anglo:

READ MORE...