I received a mail today from MR reader Bruce Graeme.  Here it is.
GW

Lawrence Auster defines “the unprincipled exception” as:-

The unprincipled exception is a non-liberal value or assertion, not explicitly identified as non-liberal, that liberals use to escape the suicidal consequences of their own liberalism without questioning liberalism itself.

Alternatively, the unprincipled exception is a non-liberal value or assertion, not explicitly identified as non-liberal, that conservatives use to slow the advance of liberalism or to challenge some aspect of liberalism without challenging liberalism itself.

However, recently, in his post On the difficult issue of how to talk about race, Auster himself applied the liberal “unprincipled exception” in full force to challenge some aspect of racism without challenging racism itself.

He claims that “in order to defend the white race and Western civilization, we don’t need to make it sound as though race in itself is the highest value.” ... “we simply need to recognize that whiteness is an indispensable facet of what white people and Western society are and have been.”

Then he continues saying that “through all of American history until the mid 20th century, the leaders of our society frankly believed in the white race, they took it for granted that America was a white man’s country and should remain so.”

Further applying this principle he concludes: “To make the case for the preservation of the white race and white civilization plausible, it must be justified within a moral framework. When race is treated as a value in itself, it inevitably declines into cruder forms of racialism that are wrong and that will be automatically rejected.”

The problem, however, is that due to this liberal “unprincipled exception” the very definition of ‘whiteness’, has changed so much over time, that the racial quality it stands for has declined.

In the early 20th century most immigrants were not considered white (Italians, Irish, Greeks, Jews, and many others). The Immigration Act of 1924 was aimed at limiting the Southern and Eastern Europeans who were immigrating in large numbers (setting quotas on immigrants from certain European countries), as well as prohibiting the immigration of East Asia.

Whiteness implicated that one was of Northern European descent! But by applying the “unprincipled exception”, ‘whiteness’ nowadays can almost be won legally and may well result in the absorption of the “white” race by “colored” races which would actually mean a corruption of society.

By applying the “unprincipled exception”, the concept “white race” has extended so much and has become so empty of content, that - following Auster’s footsteps - it has no value any longer as a guiding factor of civilization and even implies that, ultimately, the world can be seen as only being composed of simply black and white races.

Bruce Graeme

And here is my reply:-

READ MORE...

You’ve heard of political science, sociobiology, political economy, etc.  You may even have heard of “biopolitics”.  But what you probably haven’t heard of is “political biology” as an academic discipline unifying political science with biology.  This would be strange indeed—given that the origin of political science was in the theoretic implications of human nature as explored by Hobbes, Locke and Hume, among many others—were it not for our familiarity with The Culture of Critique.  There are, after all, only about 1300 web search hits for “political biology” of which nearly 400 are references to the Third Reich.

So, here we are, centuries after the foundation of political science, searching for grounding in something other than sophistry due to the forces of political biology.  Imagine a pathogen that managed to preferentially infect the brains of medical researchers such as Lister or Pasteur.  Such is our misfortune.

Even the few furtive attempts to recover some sapience such as sociobiology have been cursed by the advent of political substitutes such as evolutionary psychology which place even social interactions at arms length and political movements further yet from well-founded thought.

So it comes as some relief when political scientists such as Frank Salter foray into the enormous gaping hole in our thoughts to fill in a tiny conceptual outline or two.

Could it be that a recent (2005) paper, BIOLOGY & POLITICAL SCIENCE.  FOUNDATIONAL ISSUES OF POLITICAL BIOLOGY by Mircea BOARI Department of Political Science, University of Bucharest will ..provide more healing of our intelligence, so wounded by the Jewish intellectual movements of the 20th century?

A few excerpts follow…

READ MORE...

By Diamed

There is a minor sub-set of people I talk to who know all the facts about racial IQ gaps,  differential fertility rates, criminal propensities, immigration levels, the whole shebang – and yet, because they do not think racially, they are not in the least concerned about the future.

Could it actually be that they are right? Here are a few arguments that seem to support them.

A) The economy can only support so many unskilled workers. Once business- and economy-fixated people notice their quality of life going down and make the connection to unskilled immigrants ... once they start going unemployed, facing sky-rocketing taxes or property values, over-crowded roads, etc, then, regardless of their own race, they’ll decide that immigration must stop.

Even assuming businesses will continue to import Third Worlders so long as it makes them a profit (albeit at the expense of the country at large) that is still a finite number. At some point every possible job dumb people can do will be filled, and it would not profit the business to hire any more. This still leaves a large segment of the population that can live off the 100 IQ and up niche jobs. The economy can’t replace all whites, so whites will still do just fine under this new population mix.

B) By failing to deliver the very progress it touts, liberalism - the age of pity and excuses and handouts for minorities - is losing sway. Home-schooling and private schooling is up, people are skeptical about global warming, practically every state in the US has concealed carry laws now, a “three strikes and you’re out”, get-tough approach on crime, and state after state is banning affirmative action. With good laws, whites can live around bad races because the latter are kept under control.

READ MORE...

“What I do want to talk about is, essentially, the Anglo-Saxon identity crises, the source of Anglophobia, the sort of spiritual disorder that I believe Anglo-Saxons are suffering from. What I want to start with is the nature of the disorder, move on to talk about the deep roots of the disorder, and then conclude by discussing a possible remedy for it.

First of all, the source of the nature of this crises seems to me is in the official description called constitutional patriotism, or civic nationalism, which translates in real terms into the idolatrous worship of the state and the corporate system - in practical terms.”

So began a speech by Prof Andrew Fraser given last March at the Inverell Forum, Australia’s famously incorrect annual celebration of dissident opinion and free speech.  The Forum organisers produce DVDs of each of the speeches, and it is thanks to MR reader John Fitzgerald that the Fraser speech is now in transcribed form and I can quote from it.

In the first part of the speech, Fraser traces the roots of white racial consciousness through the period of slave-owning in the American South, the development of white skin privilege and white equality, and the emergence in the North of the fundamentals of modern human rights.

“In Australia,” he asks, “how can you run an immigration policy on the basis of discrimination between white and non-white, especially once you start to play around with the notion of white, because white is not synonymous with Anglo-Saxon.  Afterwards you get massive numbers of Italians, Greeks and Lebanese Christians.  Are they white?  Just where is the boundary of whiteness?  So then it became human-ness that really counts.  And so you have what came to be known as the non-discriminatory immigration policy.”

Now, Fraser had begun by using the term “spiritual disorder”, so it should be no surprise that from here on the speech focuses heavily on the, as he sees it, broad failure of Christianity in the crisis of Anglo-Saxon identity.  “It’s a mistake,” he tells us, “to do what a lot of people on the right would do; blame it all on the Frankfurt School, or the Jews or, as I hear here, the Illuminate.”  Fraser roots the entire process in the Papal revolution which confined the action of kings to the secular world.  “The world becomes flattened, “he says, “God is a being, we are beings, he is an infinite being, we are finite beings ...  In that kind of context God, because he’s infinite, becomes very remote and only accessible to us through his will.”

READ MORE...

Black Oak Media, based in Cherry Valley, IL, is a worthy example of cultural dissidence which has been publishing quarterly since winter 2007.  In the editors’ own words:-

Black Oak Media is the spearhead of a direct assault on innocuous, monolithic consumer culture, and represents an atavism of a primal, human-centered worldview that unapologetically embraces all ranges of emotion and experience.

We are beyond Left and Right.  We stand against Nihilism and the corruption, pollution, decadence, and fragility of the modern world.  We stand for the farmers, artisans, small businesses, artists, entertainers, entrepreneurs, and hard working men and women that once made this country great.

We believe that folk culture must replace “popular culture,” since popular culture is no longer produced by the common people but produced for us?brightly packaged and neatly trimmed?by elites who live over a thousand miles away from their constituents.

Life isn’t an airbrushed model on a glossy magazine cover.  Los Angeles and New York City do not represent our culture.  Here at Black Oak Media, we believe that the people who live in “Middle America” have something to contribute.  Our culture is not something that is marketed to the public from distant boardrooms; it is the artistic expression of our hopes, dreams, and fears. It is something meaningful that does not ride waves of trends or conform to market interests.

Black Oak Magazine is published on-line and can be downloaded for free.  The Winter 2009 edition (pdf) features a four-page interview with Tom Sunic.

1. That the off-script longeurs and foot-in-mouth bloomers we expect from president Obama waste no time in coming, and quickly sour his honeymoon with the white American voter.

2. That “change” is quickly revealed to mean blacks being “served” by white volunteerism in various forms, with whites supposedly gaining from “seeing through their own prejudice”.  And no, it doesn’t fly.  Not for an instant.

3. That white America will begin to suspect that mainstream political America as a whole has no use for it whatsoever beyond its votes and taxes, and its “contribution” to the ethnic spoils system.

4. That the economic rigours of the year ahead cause many more white Americans to question the value of the neoliberal system, of the banking system, of fiat money.

5. That Hollywood can’t make a buck out of its anti-white “entertainment”.

6. That the falling value of university endowments cuts into the best efforts of university faculty to damage and discriminate against White students.

7. That when white Americans think of Israel they remember the Gaza Strip, not “America’s best little buddy”.

8. That when White Nationalists speak of racial politics they remember they are being heard by intelligent and discerning fellow whites.

9. That more White Nationalists will reject the anti-political notion that all they need is less Jewish power and more white racial consciousness.

10. That White Nationalists will discover that freedom and justice, as much as love, are theirs, and theirs alone, to espouse.

Happy New Year to you all.

By Diamed

As a moral principle, it is fatuous to say nothing can be done if it means having to hurt someone.  This objection is ridiculous - when the benefit outweighs the cost there is no reason not to hurt someone.  That’s the way the world works right now.  However, potential racists, especially women, may find this moral hold-up simply overpowering.  They would like things to be different, they would like everything we promise, but they’d rather all lay down and die … they’d rather close their eyes and wish all their worries away, than harm a single other person.

As a thought experiment, couldn’t we at least try to soothe these people and coddle their ridiculously oversensitive moral compasses?  If we could save the whole world without harming a single person, surely then they would start helping us and join in the salvation and survival of our own people?  The people who are largely their friends, lovers, fellow-believers at church, classmates, family, and the progenitors of their culture?  Even in this soon-to-be-majority minority America, whites will mostly stick to themselves, and de facto segregation is present everywhere.  Whites want what we have to offer.  They guiltily indulge in the joys of monoracialism and monoculturalism, keeping it secret from everyone how comfortable and happy they feel in the company of their own.  Overly effeminate, or simply raised with the ridiculous squeamishness of the modern world, their objection isn’t our ends but our means.  For those of us who realize the ends justify the means, this is just nonsense.  For those who don’t, it is a brick wall they cannot cross.

Let’s take this in context.  As we speak, 40,000 Americans die each year to car accidents.  Americans as a collective have agreed that the death of 40,000 Americans, many of them children or teenagers just starting the brightness of their lives, are worth sacrificing each year to the convenience of being able to drive everywhere.

The economy would be hampered without trucks and cars carrying large loads to places quickly, and each year, therefore, we sacrifice 40,000 virgins to the dark car god in the sky.  Whether people consciously or unconsciously decide their deaths are “worth it”, their blood is on our hands.  Under a different social system not a single one of them would have to die.

READ MORE...

Secret of the Lusitania: Arms find challenges Allied claims it was solely a passenger ship

Her sinking with the loss of almost 1,200 lives caused such outrage that it propelled the U.S. into the First World War.

But now divers have revealed a dark secret about the cargo carried by the Lusitania on its final journey in May 1915.

Munitions they found in the hold suggest that the Germans had been right all along in claiming the ship was carrying war materials and was a legitimate military target.

1) Woodrow Wilson cons his way to the Democratic nomination.
2) A ‘lone nut’ sparks WW I.
3) Most of the royal houses of Europe go the way of the dodo.
4) Gears are set in motion for Zionism.
5) Trotsky starts the pattern of mass murders in the Soviet Union leading to the Holomodor in 1932.
...

I think I better stop there because truth is no defense.