|
|
|
Civic happiness or ethnic meaning More or less all my “thinking life” I have wondered at the third component in that little phrase in the American Bill of Rights, “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” How, I asked myself, could serious people raise happiness (the pursuit of), a product of many factors and passing circumstances, most of them not within the gift of politicians, to the status of an existential absolute? If one needed an explanation of how we children of the liberal age, when given the choice of wealth or goodness, choose wealth, choose materialism, hedonism, nihilism, it is pretty much enshined in those four words. To my mind, happiness as an abstracted and singularised human purpose leads away from itself. It does it by creating in the mind of the subject a cheap and cheapening, easily met standard for itself. For example, civic nationalists are satisfied with the lowest-hanging of political fruit - a few gestures in the direction of la patria, a flag, some symbols of military power, a bit of back-slapping with perfect strangers over some feigned shared value ... It means nothing. It is nothing compared to the sum at which the true nationalist prices the human meaning and worth found in the familial and in kind, in brotherhood, rootedness, belonging, trust, love, and the good of his people. These are, in reality, the psychological essentials. But, politically, they belong to another universe, a nationalist universe too discreet for non-nationalists to penetrate. Even ones who are psychologists. From a study published earlier this month in the Association of Psychological Science:
Comments:2
Posted by J Richards on Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:29 | # Damn Graham_Lister, it isn’t a single dam being damned, but a whole bunch. It’s damning on you that you can’t appreciate the significance of the damnification process here. You’re instead damnifying the study for an assumed fault, “ a tiny minority would admit in a semi-official interaction with strangers…,” whereas the authors would be damned if this is how they obtained the data, which almost certainly had to have been obtained in an anonymous survey. What brings damnation upon the study is that a measure that captures more of the variance in happiness will be better associated with happiness than a measure capturing less variation in happiness… Goddamn Duh! Ethnicity-associated issues capture a subset of everyday affairs whereas civic issues capture how society overall functions around one, and how society functions around oneself is obviously tied with how happy one feels overall. 3
Posted by Ajaxx on Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:08 | # Graham Lister is drawing a somewhat false distinction between “racism” and “ethnocentrism”. By his definition, “racism” involves judgments of biologically rooted inferiority/superiority. That is usually true, though it doesn’t have to be, does it? Blacks are certainly as a group highly racist against whites (and really everybody else they come into contact with), but I’ve known a few blacks in my life, and never did one imply that whites were inferior, at least in my presence. Several were resentful/racist, just under the surface, but more because of rather overwrought and malicious interpretations of personal events in their lives. Asians and Jews, on the other hand, in my experience do tend to be racist based on the notion that they are superior to other peoples (not all are like that of course, but many). I understand where Graham is coming from, and agree with what he wants, which is really very moderate and not at all objectionable. Basically, he’s just expressing the commonsense view from the Western past. Of course a bunch of nonwhites imposed on Scotland are going to cause a loss of social trust, a decline in national cohesion, fellow-feeling, willingness of everybody to pull together for a common goal, etc. Such an imposition, whatever its putative advantages, will probably experience corresponding problems outweighing them. “Good fences make good neighbors.” No lasting good comes from allowing really different immigration. Three problems, however. First, “racism” today does not simply imply connotations of inferiority/superiority. More usually, it connotes dislike (as suggested above), and a desire to persecute others on that basis. To reiterate, I can’t believe blacks anywhere really think they’re better than whites (except at pop dancing and certain sports). Second, “racism” today is also associated (unfairly, undoubtedly) with denial of sameness. I think it’s possible that Japanese are in some ways genetically superior to whites. That does not mean I think they could integrate as seamlessly into Scotland as could Germans, nor would I want to allow the attempt. But merely saying that being a Scotsman necessarily implies one is white - that race is an aspect of Scottishness - is to open oneself up to being called racist. And third, how is it possible to be ethnocentric without denying human interchangeability, the lodestar of the racial integrationists? Finally, the truth is that a lot of nationalism really is rooted not just in a desire to preserve the cultural heritage and quotidian folkways of one’s beloved fatherland, but also in a frank recognition that whites are, overall, superior to other races, and that racial integration thus lowers our nations’ human quality. As globalization marches on (and contrary to many here, I think the process, even if heretofore disproportionately directed from above, is, like industrialization, ineluctable), the historic ethnic differences between whites will continue to diminish, as they already massively have done since World War Two. Can anyone imagine a shooting war anymore between France and Germany? Whites everywhere are coming to realize that we are all fairly similar, at least relative to the nonwhite peoples. That is a racial insight into our common whiteness. The usefulness of GL’s ethnocentric realism is mainly for persuading essentially well-meaning but naively liberal whites of the need to stop further immigration, as well as totalitarian integration (let the now diverse communities of the West organize themselves their own ways, provided there is no harboring of terrorists or criminal mafias, of course). But outside of nice and white Scotland and a few other holdouts, we need a harder racial nationalism in order to build up the will for forced repatriations. This isn’t just about celebrating Christmas and the fifth of November. This is about national/racial survival. There will be no ethnocentrism and happily preserved communities in the long run unless the in/out group is also understood to mean friend/enemy. 4
Posted by Graham_Lister on Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:33 | # @Ajaxx Thanks for the thoughtful response. Firstly I was thinking about popular conceptions of what racism is from a white perspective. Obviously it is, in general, thought to involve some notion of inferiority/superiority rooted in biological differences but could also be expanded to include negative stereotypical prejudices directed to other identifiable ethnic/cultural/national groups etc. Even your resentful blacks example is rooted in what they would argue was the pernicious consequences of a false inferiority/superiority paradigm and even then the example you cited “well we are better at sports” arises from the logic of “whitey might be better at X, Y or Z but we kick your ass at activity A!” i.e. whitey is inferior, as a group, at something even if that something is being say a violent criminal (witness the celebration of extreme thuggery in ‘Gangster rap’). But you are right in saying that say Dutch, Danish, Irish et al., identities are implicitly white. An African with a Dutch passport is still an African (and vice-versa). At some level everyone knows this. For example, the Boers of South Africa are not Africans but Europeans that settled in Africa. Recall the incident when Teresa Heinz-Kerry (the very white Mozambique born and raised wife of John Kerry) declared with great solemnity at some election event that yes she too was also an African-American. Everyone who honestly responded upon learning of that daft statement did so with a mix of laughter and incredulity (both whites and blacks). So as you say the precise distinction between civic and ethnic nationalism is somewhat false – or rather it is under a wide range of circumstances – but the confusion is that at their extremes civic and ethnic nationalism can become distinct phenomena. This is particularly true, I am sad to say, of the USA. Certain forms of American nationalism might also have been implicitly white (especially in times of being 90%+ Euro) but this interpretation is rapidly becoming untenable – the whole society is founded from a mythos grounded in Enlightenment inspired ideas about civic society and liberal individualism. As America becomes more diverse the only route to argue as to why your legally present Bengali neighbour isn’t equally ‘American’ is in an overtly racist discourse. For Americans it is hard to argue that you are defending your ancient indigenous homeland or a distinct, non-universal, particular ethno-linguistic/cultural identity. So in the inorganic ‘proposition nation’ how cogently and coherently, in principle, can recent invaders object to others joining them – especially given that many of your initial ethnic-minority group were forcefully removed from their own homelands in chains? Even at a cultural level it is hard to maintain that say the jazz of Miles Davies or Dizzy Gillespie is not authentically American (if not, why not?). People see whites in Europe and America and think “well they are basically the same’” which is true in some obvious regards but American society is radically different from European ones in a myriad of rather subtle but profoundly important and deep ways. But returning as to why people eschew ‘overt’ displays of ethnocentric nationalism (or will not ‘in public’ admit to such feelings) it is rooted in ‘feel-good’ political correctness, which segues into emotionally driven politico-psychological dishonesty (why not ‘free-ride’ on civic nationalism whilst such a concept is, at an everyday practical level in most societies, implicitly built upon some form of ethnocentrism – after all how do say ‘Swedish values’ emerge into the world unless there is a distinct and particular Swedish people? All of the benefits, none of the ‘psychological costs’), and finally from an understandable fear for a radical loss of social status if one is even remotely connected to ‘racism’. So at all times one must ‘signal’ that you are not nor cannot be linked to any putative racist discourse/feelings. Call it middle-class and upper-middle class hypocrisy if you like but it’s a fact of life that any politician has to work around and understand. And let’s not forget our old friend in politico-cultural matters: ignorance – Mr & Mrs Average do not read Roger Scruton et al., on the topic of social-capital, now do they? Last thought - radically understood, maximally envisioned human interchangeability and the allied mythos of radical individual self-authorship is at the core of liberal theory. The implied ontology underpinning liberal social and political philosophy is wrong – dangerously and unsustainably wrong. Fungibility and plasticity must, and do, have very real limits. Think of this liberal world-view made hideous flesh – the sex-change operation – no amount of pseudo-medical butchery and mutilation can make a man into a women or vice-versa; truly such phenomena represent the extreme end of a highly damaging ideological delusion. The difficulty is that one cannot easily dispel a delusion with mere facts. Those within the delusion are simply ‘blind’ to anything that the delusion excludes. 5
Posted by danielj on Mon, 19 Dec 2011 14:12 | # As America becomes more diverse the only route to argue as to why your legally present Bengali neighbour isn’t equally ‘American’ is in an overtly racist discourse. Sweet. That should make it easy. One could also adopt the “aesthetics” tact and simply call those revoltingly ugly shit skins out on the privation of beauty they suffer. Ugly is unwelcome here. Or perhaps we could extend a stiffened foreman with an outward facing palm and simply exclaim “Not my people!” in a severe tone. One might even append a wagging finger to the declaration and gesture. We could also try an environmental approach and make the argument that we are an already crowded country and that America is a fully developed territory with no available space to accommodate any other persons. This is particularly true, I am sad to say, of the USA. Well! Play the Funeral March for us while you slurp your wine and bewail our fate in that beautifully measured and languid cadence that seems to indicate intoxication byschadenfreude rather than a genuinely empathetic, regretful sadness. 6
Posted by John on Mon, 19 Dec 2011 14:28 | # “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” is from the Declaration of Independence, and is found nowhere the Constitution. 7
Posted by Nick Dean on Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:41 | # ... and I think it was a term of art meaning works intended to the public good. 8
Posted by Graham_Lister on Mon, 19 Dec 2011 20:53 | # danielj Please do you think the ‘anti-ugly’ party will work? Seriously your objection to your new (100% legal) Bengali ‘new American’ neighbour is that he is too ugly…well there are many untenable suggestions around these parts but that takes the biscuit; it’s right up there with Neo-Nazi raves to educate yobs on ‘white culture’ and Kai Murros and his bizarre politico-fashion tips. Deeply, deeply unserious. There are of course many unattractive Euros in the USA (have you seen the obesity figures for the USA?). A political movement premised on being a supermodel is unlikely to gain much traction under any circumstances. You mention that pragmatic and practical issues are important, which is true, but you would still have to account for why new Euro neighbours are good and non-Euro ones bad. In the American context that might prove to be tricky. Equally the environmental approach might also have limited traction in the land of the free; after all is this not the unbounded ‘can do’ society that makes cities in the middle of the scorching desert? The language of limits and constraints, (environmental, social, cultural etc.,) is not really a familiar one to Americans. It is not completely absent but it is not particularly mainstream. It rather goes against the grain of quite a lot of American cultural history, yes? As a famous 20th century American said: “Impossible is just a big word thrown around by small men who find it easier to live the world they’ve been given than to explore the power they have to change it. Impossible is not a fact. It’s an opinion. Impossible is not a declaration. It’s a dare. Impossible is potential. Impossible is temporary. Impossible is nothing.” For good and bad that is a genuinely American sentiment – I doubt a Dane could make a similar declaration and not be thought of as a bullshitter and buffoon. In America it passes for philosophy. I really don’t know why Americans seemingly get quite so defensive. It’s a good question, but unanswered, about the jazz music of Dizzy Gillespie et al., – if it is not authentically American then why and how? I can’t think why it is not. Reflecting upon about what I wrote about the psycho-emotional dynamics of political posturing one of the noticeable things is how odd-ball so many self-describing ‘white-nationalists’ are. It seems that having paid the price in reduced status and opprobrium for being openly racist that they enjoy their marginality and antinomianism by embracing as many marginal and wacky causes as possible. Is it any wonder why such discourse repulses the educated middle-class? I strongly suspect that WNs are sociologically a classic sub-culture and actually revel in their ‘outsider’ status. For the record I am not a WN – I’m a moderate centrist, post-liberal, European patriot and ethnocentric communitarian. 9
Posted by danielj on Mon, 19 Dec 2011 21:32 | # Please do you think the ‘anti-ugly’ party will work? http://www.archive.org/details/ontasteonsublim00burkgoog lolzlzlzzz Deeply, deeply unserious. Nick Griffin is a deeply, deeply serious reservoir of seriousnessness!!! lozlzlzz There are of course many unattractive Euros in the USA (have you seen the obesity figures for the USA?). I’ve seen fat people across this entire continent. I’ve observed them in their natural habitat (i.e. Captain Chaos’ Midwest) with great interest. I make occasional forays into their strongholds (i.e. McDonald’s, Wal-Mart, etc.). So I don’t really need to see the “statistics” about fat people. I’ve got better shit to do. A political movement premised on being a supermodel is unlikely to gain much traction under any circumstances. The most attractive candidate always wins an election. I would counsel you to read about the first televised campaign and try and surmise why Kennedy butfuckt Nixon. You mention that pragmatic and practical issues are important, which is true, but you would still have to account for why new Euro neighbours are good and non-Euro ones bad. In the American context that might prove to be tricky. They’re ugly, ugly camel fuckers and towel heads who hate our freedumbs. Can you account for the reason Listerine, O’ Swisher of Men? It’s only tricky if you buy into stupid notions like “human rights” and “freedom” and whatnot… The language of limits and constraints, (environmental, social, cultural etc.,) is not really a familiar one to Americans. It is not completely absent but it is not particularly mainstream. It rather goes against the grain of quite a lot of American cultural history, yes? The ruling elite don’t seem to have any problem replacing an entire population so I’m pretty sure the culture is capable of being changed. After all, you lot were very healthy cousin-fuckerz once and now you’re the center of international finance capital!!! Hip-hip Yankee-Judea! I really don’t know why Americans seemingly get quite so defensive. Says the rapist to this victim… Reflecting upon about what I wrote about the psycho-emotional dynamics of political posturing one of the noticeable things is how odd-ball so many self-describing ‘white-nationalists’ are. It seems that having paid the price in reduced status and opprobrium for being openly racist that they enjoy their marginality and antinomianism by embracing as many marginal and wacky causes as possible. Is it any wonder why such discourse repulses the educated middle-class? I strongly suspect that WNs are sociologically a classic sub-culture and actually revel in their ‘outsider’ status. Blah blah GRAYBEARD! I make tons of monies and get all the bitches and procreate with the white womens. I’m as alpha as the come and certainly no outsider. For the record I am not a WN – I’m a moderate centrist, post-liberal, European patriot and ethnocentric communitarian. You live in England. I would never counsel you to adopt the White Nationalist position. It’s for Coastal Americans. Although I would consider communitarian philosophers to have had an influence on my thinking. 10
Posted by Leon Haller on Mon, 19 Dec 2011 23:39 | # This is upsetting. Anyone notice that AR has now ceased publication with January’s issue? 11
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 05:05 | # Good riddance! Ridiculous graybeard Jared Taylor is a worthless, tea-drinking, jew-fucker prattling on on Oprah and Maury like a good little house-cracker. LOLZZZOOLLLOLZ! No more graybearded wannabe Gandolf half-straight douchebags who are incapable of naming the kike. 12
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 11:27 | # I really wanted to stop commenting, but I must say that I thoroughly agree with this:
It is well said, too. I believe I have offered similar observations, though not as pithily. Of course, at the risk of starting a new thread war that I do not have time for, I cannot help pointing out the overall insularity of Lister’s own position. Dr. Lister has viciously criticized, and often in rather lowbrow terms, Christianity in general, and Catholicism in particular. Are there ideational structures more closely identified with European civilization? Yes, I know Christianity has always had universalist pretensions, and that by sheer weight of numbers, its future is in the global South. But even if the center of the Church gravitates southward, that does not lessen the “mainstreamness” of Christianity in the historical context of Western life. The problem with Lister’s position is the same as that of all secularists (who are usually liberals). They want to live in the kind of civilized society uniquely created by centuries of Christian conditioning - they want the form of morality most highly developed in the Christian tradition - but they cannot or will not accept the truth of the Christian faith. Nietzsche knew better. Not only does Christianity stand or fall with God, but the entirety of Western morality, and ultimately the Christian West itself, do as well. I suggest that what Lister wants to hold onto cannot be so held without widespread acceptance of the faith. For a couple of generations, perhaps, residues of the old belief will persist, but those generations are now past. In this understanding, the WN is not only far more radical than Lister, but far more realistic, too. He is a racial revolutionary, recognizing that traditional, ‘normal’ Eurofolkish cultures cannot be maintained in the absence of the underlying belief system within which over time they were formed, and thus, in discarding that belief system as incompatible with racial will-to-power, is ready to remake the whole of society in accordance with (his understanding of) racial principles. Lister’s project in contrast is hopelessly reactionary; ‘reactionary’ in that it seeks to preserve inherited structures and modes of being from the past, but ‘hopeless’ in that it refuses to embrace the metaphysics supporting that inheritance. I just don’t see how an intellectually sophisticated, scientifically grounded, but rather bloodless ethnocentric communitarianism will be sufficient to rouse men to the barricades and bloody actions necessary to reverse a catastrophe which has already happened, even if its effects linger and are objectionable. Britain desperately needed Lister’s EC around 1950 or 60. Now it needs a harder nationalism (per Ajaxx above).
13
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 11:34 | # danielj, Are you off some kind of psychotropic medication? The level of vitriol in your recent responses is not only uncalled for, it is uncharacteristic, too. To insult Jared Taylor, a fellow Ivy Leaguer of immense talents who could have made a fortune for himself as a Japan analyst on Wall St, but instead chose to devote his life to speaking truth about race and thus bettering the white man’s chances of survival, is really disgraceful as well as counterproductive. I do not think that WNs are necessarily especially ethical or otherwise characterologically solid people, which is why so many normal people won;t listen to them. We desperately need more mainstream persons (in core belief, as well as appearance and demeanor), like Jared (and me, frankly), if our movement is to get anywhere. 14
Posted by CS on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 11:49 | # Leon, About White Zion, I was thinking that we should consider making it a “conservative” state as well. That way we could also attract (white) conservaitve people to it. It will also make us more sympathetic to white conservatives in countries controlled by ZOG. 15
Posted by uh on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:47 | #
That’s what a few days with uh will do to a brotha.
That also.
I nodded off half-way through this phrase.
Fear not: in White Zion you and Jared can conserve, conserve, conserve ‘til the cows come home. ... ever treated a heifer for prolapse? NOT fun. 16
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 16:04 | # Are you off some kind of psychotropic medication? Yes! You got me pegged! LOLLLLOLOZZZZLLOZZZZLOZZZZ The level of vitriol in your recent responses is not only uncalled for, it is uncharacteristic, too. You’re right. At last Taylor is only fucking a waste-of-white-skin Jew while you are busy with a one man eugenics program to create a quarter-slant Yo-Yo Ma! You deserve a much larger heaping of opprobrium. Your “conservative” nonsense is bad enough to turn Ol’ Rich Weaver into Dick Heaver. He would spew ye out of his mouth you silly, lukewarm, graybearded conservatard.
Do you get what Dabney is saying here Haller? This was a man dedicated to the race and not Mammon. The boys over at Butler-Harris dot org are the same kind of men. To insult Jared Taylor, a fellow Ivy Leaguer of immense talents who could have made a fortune for himself as a Japan analyst on Wall St, but instead chose to devote his life to speaking truth about race and thus bettering the white man’s chances of survival, is really disgraceful as well as counterproductive. Ahghghghggghhhhhh!!!! The Posion Ivy League of Shadows! Jared Taylor hasn’t produced one piece of anything with lasting import. Name one fucking thing. Just one fucking thing he has done. All your talk about being “counterproductive” is an attempt at shaming language to keep me in line like a good little house-cracka and to make sure I don’t stray off the plantation. I’m a fucking field-cracka Hallertosis and you can’t stop me from killing your neioconbuttthexxpaymazterz. I do not think that WNs are necessarily especially ethical or otherwise characterologically solid people Says the douchenozzle bagging the half-slant. I’ll give you a hundred dollars and a bottle of Dalwhinnie single malt, sherry-cask finished scotch if you break up with that bitch and act like a White Manz. We desperately need more mainstream persons (in core belief, as well as appearance and demeanor), like Jared (and me, frankly), if our movement is to get anywhere. More whipping boys for radicalism Haller says! More compromise! More jewish genes polluting the gene pool!
JARED TAYLOR IS CHAINED UP TO THE MOTHA-FUUUHKIN ZEIT-G and he that marries the spirit of the age will find himself a widower in the next Haller ol chap. He needs to stop writing that white-boy-Teen-Beat nationalist garbage and get with the field-crackaz GROWNAZZWHITEMAN program.
17
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 16:11 | # About White Zion, I was thinking that we should consider making it a “conservative” state as well. That way we could also attract (white) conservaitve people to it. It will also make us more sympathetic to white conservatives in countries controlled by ZOG. I never understood why we have to call it “White Zion” except of course if we are attempting to express our fundamental ontological unity with the kike. Doesn’t White Nation or White Nationalism do the fucking job? Ya’ll might as well just start practicing all the halakhic handwazhingz and whatnots. Save us the trouble of trying youz by waterz and convert so we don’t have to waste the time post-revolution graybeards. LOLZLOLZLOLLLLZZZZ ZOG will not tolerate GOYISHE KOPF impostors. 18
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 16:19 | # To insult Jared Taylor, a fellow Ivy Leaguer of immense talents who could have made a fortune for himself as a Japan analyst on Wall St, but instead chose to devote his life to speaking truth about race and thus bettering the white man’s chances of survival, is really disgraceful as well as counterproductive. Remember when you come to comment on my blog that there will be no trafficking in counterfactuals. It’s for bitches. Also, I will employ Soren Renner full time to hunt down and assassinate the comma splice, Soren will be ruthless to bitchez! He could have… He didn’t. It would have been better for us if he did and used the fortune for some good because the Jewish American Renaissance is SOFT-SERVE-SQUIRREL-SCAT served up once a month for the graybeardz houze-crackerz. 19
Posted by uh on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 16:25 | # danielj, I really, really wanted to stop commenting, being sorely pressed for time lozzozzlzlz, but eyyo pls could you stop modeling irony-win for the Englishmen here zlzlzlzozozlzlzlzolz. More suits = more shiny polished targets. EYYO LISTERINE, U HEAR DAT?? YO AZZ IS HOPELESSLY REACTIONARY!!! LZLZLZZZ lolz;z;z;lzlzlz lemme give u reatcionareieslssols da history of da next hunnid years in da wess’ where aint no white bish neva been stuck bah no niggro cep she been takin druuuugz:
20
Posted by uh on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 16:34 | # lolzlzlz
http://unamusementpark.com/2011/12/why-a-question-for-the-reader/comment-page-2/#comment-12304 21
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 16:57 | # graybeard: you need to get back on your meds (whipcrack) and put on your Cole Haan’s (fiatfashionmenschen) and speak and act like a respectable house-cracker (whipcrack)! jooz: LOLLIEZZLOLOZLOLZOZ 22
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 17:12 | # grayzbeardz: if we would just don our Cole Haan Oxfords then we snatch victory for White Zionz!!! jooz: LOLLLZZZLOLZZZIE 23
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 17:39 | # Ethnic nationalists, proud or not, appear relatively less happy to begin with and more likely to lead the charge as their nation diversifies around them.” Yes… Civic Nationalism for thee but not for me! Get that graybeardz?! “As your nation diversifies” is a foregone conclusion. You stay put in the swirling vortex of genetico-cultural linearity! 24
Posted by CS on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:08 | # Danielj, I don’t give a shit what the fuck you call it. I use “White Zion” so everybody knows what the fuck I’m talking about. We call it “White Zion” because we are following the strategy the kikes used to take over modern day Israel. It has nothing to do with love for Jews or Israel. We all move to the same small country and eventually take over through sheer numbers. We adopt a pro US, pro Israel, pro Conservative position so when ZOG starts hassling us the freeptards in America might clue in that the problem they have with “White Zion” is that it is full of white Christian conservatives like themselves. 25
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:32 | # I don’t give a shit what the fuck you call it. I use “White Zion” so everybody knows what the fuck I’m talking about. We call it “White Zion” because we are following the strategy the kikes used to take over modern day Israel. It has nothing to do with love for Jews or Israel. We all move to the same small country and eventually take over through sheer numbers. We adopt a pro US, pro Israel, pro Conservative position so when ZOG starts hassling us the freeptards in America might clue in that the problem they have with “White Zion” is that it is full of white Christian conservatives like themselves. Oh feistiez! I think your emotional outburst is indicative of latent homosexuality but graybeardz are a-okz with procreationless sexiez. You needz to rereadz your history of the formation of modern day Eretz Yisraelz. The kikes fought a terrorist guerrilla war. They were heavily armed. The committed ze ethnicz cleanzing yah. The blewz upz the innocent civiliyawns at the King David hotel. Is that what you would like to do? Get over it. We are totally alone. You, me, and about 2,000 of us. The FREEPTARDS will never join us. You have to get past the angry denial stage and realize we are Gideon’s Army. That is a more appropriate Hebraism if you absolutely must utilize one. I’m onz your side. I’m a B.A.M.F and I’m extremely good looking. This is all that counts. Halleroid is a Petit-bourgeois with a devastating fearz of hurting the jooz (read: climax inside of a woman and procreatez). He perfectly resembles that graybeardz species of white filth that is best labelled the existential parasite. The ultimate freeloader who refuses to knock boots because he is scared of where the orgasm leads. He prefers to play cello and spill his race, his tribe, his culture all over his hardwood floors in the ultimate nihilistic negation-of-all-life onanism. I hope his twinkie slips on his seed and splits her head open since that is the only value Haller’s seed seems to have. Unless of course he creates the quarter-slant Yo-Yo-Ma! 26
Posted by Lurker on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:37 | # Dan - I must protest. Whats wrong with tea drinking? 27
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:51 | # Dan - I must protest. Whats wrong with tea drinking? Absolutely nothing! I bow my head and tip my hat to Prime Minister Grey and thank the Almighty Lord of Heaven for bergamot! (See Uh. I draw a line and all of those truly concerned for the race step on the right side of the line. You’re a good man Lurker. You’re also savvy enough to understand such breathtakingly simplistic concepts that I’m sure now you aren’t collaborating with the “credentialed” graybeardz.) 28
Posted by Silver on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:53 | #
He’s attracted the attention (and admiration) of serious men and serious thinkers. Perhaps not many (and not nearly enough, for what he wants), but it’s a lot more than could be said about you. You—who in the world could imagine taking the time to hear you out on anything?
Pretty rich coming from someone with a half-asian child. LOLZZLOZZOLOZLZZLZLZZLZZZOZZZZ
29
Posted by uh on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:54 | # I thought we were agreed that Leon is not a graybeard, but posing as such? There have been stranger feats of deception.
I must use that on a woman. Keeping an Asian is to the white man what pederasty is to the Waziri tribesman.
CS,
Christian conservatives handed this country over to the Jew — and you want to hand them another country? *straps on sparkly [removed] boots, dances off, stage left* 30
Posted by CS on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:58 | # danielj, I am well aware that the kikes did not conquer Israel solely through immigration. I never said anything about violence. It wouldn’t work for us anyway as ZOG would use it as a pretext for invasion. Some of the freeptards will join us. There are a lot of former freeptards on our side now. I used to be one of them. If Obongo wins again there will be even more. We’ll call “White Zion” Honky Land so you won’t get your panties in a knot. 31
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:01 | # Pretty rich coming from someone with a half-asian child. LOLZZLOZZOLOZLZZLZLZZLZZZOZZZZ And half-italo-wog! LOLZLOLZLOLZIE!!!!! I’ve also had sexual stuffz with an Askenazi and a half-Sephardi! There was also some very interesting post-coital intercourse with the former about the Jew-S-A. Anywayz, dust and ashes and sackclothz for mez foreverz. Silver: Defender of the downtrodden WN keyboard warriorzzzz!!! 32
Posted by Silver on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:03 | #
Why should it be upsetting? Most of what could be said (in the form of essays) was already said years ago, and the total subscribers never numbered more than a few thousand, anyway. Concentrating on the website is a far better use of his energies. Swear him off if you like but Amren’s really the only serious sort of ‘race-realist’ (ie realism that thinks realistically about race) site out there, filling the important gap between aracial conservatism and fully blown WN (CC/OO, and, I suppose, MR). 33
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:07 | # I never said anything about violence. It wouldn’t work for us anyway as ZOG would use it as a pretext for invasion. Emperor ZOG will create butththext pretextz for invazions! He is very, very keen on thatz. Emperoro ZOGZ is like the David Copperfieldz of wizardzry pullingz pretextz out of his magic hat for his SHOCKS AND AWEZ and preemptive strikes! SHOCK AND AWE rhymes with: SHEKINAH 34
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:09 | # It seems uh was a very bad influence on daniel. Oh well, and to think many had such high hopes for the youngin. 35
Posted by CS on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:10 | # Uh, Maybe you have a point. We don’t want to attract too many Kosher Conservatives or those idiots will allow the Jews to take over and flood the country with non-whites. I do think it would still be a good idea to adopt a public pro-US and pro-Israel policy. 36
Posted by CS on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:12 | # Silver is correct about the end of publishing Amren magazine. Their efforts would be better spent working on web material. 37
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:12 | # Swear him off if you like but Amren’s really the only serious sort of ‘race-realist’ Nopez. Jared Taylor Thomas is Teen-Beat quality man meatz. He’s like totally easy on the eyez in his slim fit Brookz Brotherz American Trad. Poor wispy WASPZ go bye bye! Seriously… If we all just serious shop till we drop at The Andover Shop we can fomentz weevolutionz! 38
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:15 | # It seems uh was a very bad influence on daniel. Oh well, and to think many had such high hopes for the youngin. Yes. Marshall showed me the light…. But since you have absolutely no fucking idea what transpired, you could always shoot me a line and I promises I won’t be flippant precious and I’ll answer all your questionz. 39
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:19 | # I thought we were agreed that Leon is not a graybeard, but posing as such? In Leon’s case, stuffing the feathers up his ass, does make him a chicken. 40
Posted by danielj on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:30 | # Apparently the MR moderators draw the line at danielj posting as “classic sparkle [removed]” and it is here, and here alone, that we bring out the editorial big gunz and assume with great solemnity our role as guardianz of the netz and enforzerz of standardz. This is truly the subject without confines and it is terrifying indeed. 41
Posted by CS on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:38 | # Silver, Since I respect your opinion, what do you think of the “White Zion” idea? 42
Posted by uh on Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:40 | #
No: it is “the answer to Habermas”.
43
Posted by Silver on Wed, 21 Dec 2011 05:10 | # CS, I think that if it happened, it’d work. Pardon the tautology, what I mean is that if sufficient numbers of sufficiently motivated did flock to a particular locale they, over time, quite likely could effect the desired result. For example, take the 5% or so of white Americans with “strong” racial feelings (not necessarily militantly strong, willing to kill over race, but strong in all other respects), who amount to roughly seven or eight million people (could be much more than this, I’m just guesstimating). If they all flocked to somewhere like the NW they could easily, almost immediately, transform the politics of states like Montana or Idaho. The key is getting people to flock in the first place, and that, I reckon, is almost impossible; at the very least it’d be extremely difficult. The most obvious difficulty that I see is that the most highly motivated racists live in the American south, with all its history and regional identity. They’re not the sort of people who’d even consider relocating. Their hearts are set on resolving their local issues, nothing more. If they seek you out, let them, but I wouldn’t waste my time talking race politics with them. (Don’t read too much into this because I’m only basing it on interactions with them over the net. Still…) Racists outside the south, whose regional identities or ties are not as strong, many of whom are already accustomed to relocation (for work, study or love), are very thinly dispersed across the country, so even if their numbers were to quadruple in the next few years—a welcome development—they’d still remain totally impotent. If there’s an upper limit to the number of people who’ll ever “racialize” to a “strong” degree, and that upper limit rests at say 20%, then forging a political force out of this group really will require getting them to flock, yet how many of them grasp this? And if you do manage to impress the need for relocation on them, the question remains: where? There are no easy and certainly no obvious answers to that question, and there is certainly no way of forcing your preference on anyone. (All of this is complicated by the deplorable tendency of the most highly racially motivated to become kooked out conspiracy whackjobs. It’s just unreal how much utter crap these people are capable of talking.) Then if you’re talking about international relocation, good grief, that’s several orders of magnitude more difficult again. That could only appeal to the thinnest sliver of people (ie a tiny minority of an already tiny minority). Personally, I think your best bet is to work with separatists of other races. Numbers are of the essence and in this way you can maximize the democratic appeal of separatism. There are almost infinite possibilities once one allows one’s mind to venture in this direction. The idea seems deeply unappealing to WNs, though. WNs have spent so long in a state of rage about the harm that other races are doing them that the idea that salvation may lie in cooperating with those other races either only enrages them further or they dismiss out of hand the thought that anyone could possibly ever voluntarily part ways with the Great White Race (neglecting to consider that it’s not necessarily whites they want separation from, but other non-white races). 44
Posted by Dasein on Wed, 21 Dec 2011 07:50 | # I suspect the happiness meant by the founders may have been more classical and Aristotelian than our modern liberal conception. Not surprising that civic nationalists are happier than ethnic nationalists. The former see the damage from mass immigration as reversible using the existing political system. 45
Posted by CS on Wed, 21 Dec 2011 09:26 | # Silver, I like your answer. I think that as things become increasingly shittier it will get easier and easier to motivate white people to move. I mean how hard do you think it would be so convince white South Africans to get the hell out? About 20% have already left since 1994. There is already white flight out of the U.K. Furthermore, when things get moving we’ll try to take over a city in the targeted country first. What we’ll do is work to make the country and city an attractive place for racialists to move to. For example, let’s say you’ve been fired from your profession for un PC thoughts and can’t work in it anymore. What if you could resume your profession in White Zion and be hired immediately because we want you to move there? 46
Posted by danielj on Wed, 21 Dec 2011 17:10 | # @Dasein Which iz, and I knows this is incrediblez too much for us modernmenz, much like the Aristotles definition of friendship, a shared conceptionz of the good rooted in tribal affiliation. Social scientists are a social construct yeah? 47
Posted by Silver on Wed, 21 Dec 2011 18:43 | # CS, One thing is that, hard as it may be to believe, millions upon millions of whites simply don’t regard things as getting shittier. Quite the opposite. For them, life has been growing delightfully more varied, interesting, multifaceted etc and that’s just the “physical” aspect of racial diversity, its outward manifestations. They’re also pleased by the cultural developments: more peace (as they see it), more tolerance, more interdependence, more economic leftism, more sex, etc etc. So while I agree that as time passes more and more will experience things as “getting shittier,” and seek out alternatives, or finally begin to take seriously the racialist alternative they’ve long been aware of (however vaguely), it’s not a process I would bank on to deliver the goods of itself. You mention S. Africa. I think the example of S. Africa makes the opposite point. Only 20% have packed it in? I regard any amount of niggers sharing living space with me as more trouble (even when nothing “happens”) than I’m willing to tolerate, let alone being outnumbered by the fuckers 10:1. But I have to accept not everyone sees it that way. I’m aware of small Greek communities scattered throughout Africa that are not colonial era leftovers but have set up shop in the last thirty years. Wtf, Africa? And yet, sigh, they do it. You talk about what you can do once you’ve got a WZ set up. Having some idea, or a vision, is important. But try not to get too far ahead of yourself. Remember that the hard part will be to get yourself a WZ. Once established, even only incipiently, I’m sure it’ll prove quite the draw. It’s my opinion that many of the specifics you draw attention to could achieve the status of cultural “general knowledge” through simple race-realism “right where you are” (sans WZ). I think a basic degree of “official” race-realism is bound to occur sooner or later, despite the best efforts of goonish WNs, whose inability to communicate with “normal people” is almost total (not uncommonly having the exact opposite of the desired effect), so with that half the job would be done. What may come later is more difficult to predict. 48
Posted by CS on Wed, 21 Dec 2011 20:01 | # Silver, I agree that many whites don’t see things getting shittier. They simply don’t care that whites are being reduced to minority status and probably wouldn’t care if whites went extinct in two hundred years. Therefore White Zion makes even more sense because we’re never going to persuade these people the merits of our ideas even as their countries turn to total shit. The only way we can “win” is doing this “White Zion” thing. Otherwise we just get more of the same. 49
Posted by Jimmy Marr on Wed, 21 Dec 2011 20:32 | # According to David Levy technology may yet be our salvation 50
Posted by uh on Wed, 21 Dec 2011 21:12 | # According to David Levy technology may yet be our salvation
There’s hope for the J Richards bot yet.
A whip cracks in the distance.
Sex is all about filling a void. I administered this oldest existential remedy to a sporting young woman just last night. 51
Posted by Patton on Wed, 21 Dec 2011 21:49 | # Happiness to me would be a state in which I am making a living doing what I love, being meaningful to others and having the support of a loving family and friends. I don’t think any political system can guarantee this because it is driven by a sense of belief and duty to serve others more than yourself. It implies sacrifice and love of others. In a time when everything is reduced to economics, happiness is all too often about material security and libertine self-gratification rather than serving your fellow man. However, life will always have its hardships. Even if the political and economic climate is stable and allows for prosperity. Happiness in itself should not be an end. In fact, I think it is a waste of time and utopian to pursue happiness. Rather, I think one should pursue virtue and seek to be dutiful towards his family, kin, religion. Happiness may then well become a side-effect of that pursuit. I pretty much agree with my mate Benny, who once wrote that he:
Saluto romano. Patton 52
Posted by Leon Haller on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 04:38 | #
I use the concept of “ripening harvest/ encroaching jungle” - basically just Jared Taylor’s “race against time”. Will enough whites first, awaken racially, and second, do so in a sufficiently timely manner actually to be able to realize the 14 words? While history invariably unfolds in a somewhat surprising fashion, I must admit I am sceptical. On the one hand, we have the seemingly snail’s pace growth of racial consciousness (of course, this might be building to a point of “critical mass”, when there will be a huge leap forward in racial awareness occurring in a very short period - but we would be foolish to count on this, plus we may still have many shitty, increasingly multicultural and WN-intolerant, decades until it happens). On the other hand, the longer the white awakening is delayed, the more foreign colonizers will come to occupy our soils; the greater the volume of miscegenation (eg, how many whites are in my position? I have not been able in recent years to find a comparable white replacement for my Eurasian girlfriend; if there weren’t so much white female miscegenation, very much including among the hotties I like, then there might be a correspondingly larger pool of available white females, and I would not be in this situation - and I cannot emphasize enough, LA/CA today, the whole urban Occident next decade); the deeper the economic integration of nonwhites into white national economies (and hence the greater the specific-to-many-whites pain of repatriation, even if the general white populations want it); and the greater likelihood that whites will mostly have grown accustomed to thinking of their homelands as multicultural (this latter concern is already an issue: when I casually broach the idea of America as a “white nation with minorities”, I am often met by other whites with considerable disagreement, even by conservatives - sometimes even by fundamentally racially oriented conservatives; ie, those who fear black savagery, dislike affirmative action, want illegals deported, etc). So I’m just not convinced that any white awakening will be sufficient actually to do something real, something physical, to repel the tide of color, which has been rising and colonizing for a long time by now. I can easily foresee a ‘last stand’ by English patriots simply being physically/militarily overwhelmed by an unholy alliance of nonwhite colonists, mongrel domestics and their white fathers/mothers/siblings/friends, whites with nonwhite lovers, whites with nonwhite employees, treasonous leftist whites, and other brainwashed whites who just can;t bring themselves to be ‘racist’ - even in defense of their own ethnocultural homelands. Honestly, people, am I unreasonable in these fears? Of course, all White Zionites hope we are wrong in these projections. We would rejoice at the appearance of a Barbarossa, or even a Cromwell. But in the meantime, we need contingency plans. And note: this is especially true for those of us New World whites, who are already heading towards ethnocultural, if not personal/physical, extinction. Even if Europe is somehow saved, that doesn’t resolve matters for Americans, Canadians, Aussies, South Africans, etc - for all whites living outside Europe. 53
Posted by danielj on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 04:52 | # Will enough whites first, awaken racially, and second, do so in a sufficiently timely manner actually to be able to realize the 14 words? da. zay will wake ups next to theirs slanties tiny tight you know whats. how many whites are in my position? what positionz wouhld dat beez? the prayers positionz? behind your mongrelz slanty smacking her azz? I have not been able in recent years to find a comparable white replacement for my Eurasian girlfriend; iz shes white or notz leon? if she is not, you areza mis… mis… miswegenator!!! niggers be laughing at yo punk ass. Cromwell jooz: Cromwellz bestest friendz!!!! LOLZZZLOLZOLOZLOLLLZZIEZ!!!!! 54
Posted by Leon Haller on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:04 | # Addendum: I should have added that any eventual white/Euro racial reclamation project may well trigger foreign alien assistance or even military kin-state invasions. Recall the heroic stand of the Serbs against the Bosnian Muslim savages. The “white” Bosnians (clearly “white” has a cultural aspect, in addition to the predominant biological definition) were aided by guerilla co-religionists from throughout the Muslim world. If France sought finally to expel its dark hordes, is it inconceivable to imagine frenzied Maghrebis storming across the Mediterranean to aid their ethnic and religious brethren? And note that by the time repatriation might be demanded, the Gallic French population will have terminally declined (something which is now mathematically certain), while the Islamic Crescent, having continued its explosive growth, will vastly outnumber it (and thus that potential for a Camp of the Saints confrontation will be present anyway, even absent French moves for domestic Arab expulsions). Under these guaranteed demographic realities, with France/Europe already reeling from a long period of domestic socialism/liberalism/Keynesian-induced economic decline (which they have already begun, of course), will even French patriots want to risk further upheaval in order to preserve ‘la vraie france’ - or will they give a Gallic shrug, and just continue to go along/get along (especially when 2/3 of the dwindled Gallic population consists of atheistic nihilists)? The white race faces two challenges, one intellectual, one physical. First, we must give ourselves ethical permission to exist (ie, to implement the hard measures to secure our existence). This requires a substantial revision in modern ethics pertaining to group relations. Second, we must actually figure out the strategy that will enable us to impose those measures. Not even the first task has been accomplished, and that is merely intellectual (or perhaps, intellectual and propagandistic). The second will be very hard indeed. With this in mind, is a WZ ‘end-run’ any more utopian than thinking that millions of Muslims and Africans will one day be removed from French, English, Dutch, soil? The trick was to have never allowed matters to get this out of hand. But we did.
55
Posted by Silver on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 08:49 | #
There was no “heroic stand.” It was pure nationalist greed and fear-mongering: if Yugoslavia’s going down, Serbs figured, we may as well grab as large a chunk for ourselves as we can, and we certainly don’t want to live under the rule of the hated “Turks” (which is how nationalists typically thought of the Muslims). Whatever you think of Muslims they weren’t the aggressors here, and it’s inconceivable that they would have sought to expel Serbs or even so much as disadvantage them. Croats were just as threatened by whatever horror scenarios your mind may conjure so their readiness to side with the Muslims should tell you something. And have you really only recently realized that being members of the same race has never prevented peoples warring on each other? You can’t possibly be so naive, so I’ll attribute your need to even raise the point to your mind having soaked in racialism for so long that such obvious distinctions have faded from general awareness.
Not “inconceivable,” but how about some perspective? The Bosnian conflict was more ethnic than religious in nature, nevertheless because what are today called “Bosniaks” were at the time referred to as “Muslims” the religious character of the conflict was exaggerated, especially so, you’d think, in the eyes of the Islamic world. For all that, however, just how many mujahadeens “stormed” into Bosnia? Far fewer than you’d think based on your logic.
I think the real ‘end around’ will be shunning terminally despairing WNs and realizing that the countries of origin of so many foreigners are confronted with demographic problems of their own (namely, that of SSAs, who are everyone’s problem) and achieving some degree of cooperation in resolving the respective problems. No matter what you think of this, it’s obviously less “utopian” than the idea that millions of Americans are going to up and settle in Tasmania. Why shun WNs? The above mentioned total inability to communicate with anyone, even of their own kind, let alone racial others. WNs inhabit their own little bubble world in which everything, everything, everything completely and utterly sucks so much that it could not possibly suck any more. For many of them, what sucks above all else is the ghastly visage (as they see it) of the non-white. They are living, they say, in “racial hell.” A state of mind results that is not remotely conducive to communication. (Witness GW’s fruitless tortured pleading on Guardian threads, and he’s one of their better ones.) Personally, I’m not concerned with what WNs think or feel. They’re free to think and feel as they like. What upsets me is the WN noise machine comes to characterize “what racialism means.” It becomes so that it’s all but impossible to state a racial preference and express a desire that one’s race kind (however defined) live on without having noise machine views imputed to you, or for others to investigate racialism and be alarmed, annoyed or depressed by what they see and hear. (I’m no angel, of course. I’ve talked about SSAs in ways that would make many people’s hair stand on end. Have to work on that.)
56
Posted by CS on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 08:59 | # Leon, I agree with your last two posts. I think it more likely that whites will continue to go along to get along and they will increasingly become smaller and smaller percentages of the population in their own countries. There are just way too many white people who don’t care about race and will put up with any amount of bullshit that non-whites give them. There are probably tons of white South Africans who are content with the way things are in South Africa. You probably couldn’t get 51% of white South Africans to vote for separation from the blacks in South Africa even if the blacks were fine with it happening. There simply aren’t enough of us in any one country to accomplish anything. We all need to go to one small country and try to eventually become the majority. And if we pick a country like Belize or Uruguay there will be advantages even without being the majority. I doubt there are hate speech laws in those two countries and we can pretty much think and say what we want in public without retaliation. 58
Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 10:34 | # Silver is either an exceptionally verbally gifted wog or a mediocrely verbally talented kike. No matter, either way, his flowing Chatty Kathy writing style screams out metrosexual at best and flaming faggot at worst. LOL
“Niggers”, according to the Silvster, champion of all that is morally upright and in good taste. LOL 60
Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 11:41 | # No. S-S-A is really how stupid wogs like Silver spell “nigger”. 62
Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 12:27 | # Silver has blond hair, blue eyes and a 160 IQ. Those Nobel Prizes keep piling up for the Silvster like so many bowling trophies. Silver is verily the ideal towards which all eugenics should aspire. LOL 63
Posted by CS on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 12:50 | # I don’t have blonde hair or blue eyes. Does that mean I’m not white? 64
Posted by Leon Haller on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:03 | # CS, Were your ancestors European Christians in 1492? Then you are white. This is a strict definition. Somewhat looser ones can be imagined. 65
Posted by uh on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:06 | #
No, no — it just means you’ll never be a real man. ‘Cause only Nordic genes are really masculine. There is really a guy in Michigan who walks around thinking that way. 66
Posted by Mr Voight on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:07 | # Silver, the liberal problem with ethnocentrism comes from the liberal problem with ethnocentrism which comes from the genetic problem of ‘there’s more of them than us’. That’s the ideological be all and end all of it. You can blame ‘WNs’, Neo-Nazis or whatever barely-existent boogie man you like, but you can’t talk your way around it with Joe Public. People are stupid, but they’re not that stupid. Do you really think the whole ‘let’s work together with the ethnic-other’ hasn’t been tried before? Everything has been tried before. Over and over again. There’s not going to be a White Zion, Wog Zion or some interethnic separatist pact. You are not the lone voice of reason. A sophisticated delusion is still a delusion. You’re living completely inside your own head, playing out ridiculously unlikely scenarios, pulling the strings of actors whose lines you wrote yourself. There is no ideological solution to this biological problem. Ideas catch on only because they’re biologically relevant. And an ideology based on separating, argued from a position of weakness, is pathetic(your genes say). Much more biologically correct for a moribund people to accept anti-ethnocentric liberalism. The only two things that matter are fertility and perception of living space. Most people adapt their politics to suit. 67
Posted by CS on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:08 | # As far as I know they were. As far as I know, all eight of my great grandparents were born in Britain. Where is Silver from? How is he not white? 68
Posted by uh on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:11 | # Damned well said, Voight. No national revival without cousin-marriage. Habitat loss in 2011 cannot be reversed.
Just ‘cause I don’t want to read this shit again, I’ll tell you he is Australian, 35, works in women’s retail, and his race is Serbian-Greek. 69
Posted by Mr Voight on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:29 | # Maybe I’m just scared that Silver is going to entice my Germano-Italian children to live in his Wog Zion. 70
Posted by CS on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:58 | # Would you prefer your children to live in “Wog Zion” or Amerikwa? 71
Posted by CS on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:59 | # BTW, once “Wog Zion” is successful, we’ll split it up and create a “Nordic Zion” as well. 72
Posted by Mr Voight on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:33 | # Would you prefer your children to live in “Wog Zion” or Amerikwa? Well I can’t legally enter America at all. And I don’t like my chances of a visa to Wog Zion. Surely there’s a third option where I don’t have to be separated from my kids. 73
Posted by anon on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:44 | # The research is propaganda, designed to fit a purpose. The only interesting aspect is why propaganda was produced that raised a rational argument against ethnic nationalism instead of the standard demonization. I’d suggest the higher population densities in Europe means the social stress from stealth genocide through immigration is higher than it was in the states at the same level of race replacement. 74
Posted by CS on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:08 | # I’ll let you in Wog Zion. When there’s enough Nordics you can split off and create Nordic Zion. Where are your kids now and how old are they? 75
Posted by CS on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 18:35 | # Another idea. We make a deal with other groups like Christians or libertarians. We get them to move to the same country we do and then we have the numbers we split the country up between our groups. 76
Posted by Graham_Lister on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 22:05 | # Today I travelled into a the centre of major English city to finish off my Christmas shopping (yes I’m a shameless and hypocritical consumer lol). Anyway I took public transport to avoid all the hassle of parking/driving etc. Car parking is scarce and hence very expensive in the centre of most British cities and at this time of year the traffic is a nightmare. Well being on public transport was a somewhat distressing experience – something akin to a meeting of the UN with mostly African nations in attendance. Blacks, blacks and even more blacks getting on board. The service should have been renamed the “Gollywog Express”. Moreover many of those present were speaking French and some were talking in various African languages (some even in traditional African grab) so they were not even Blacks from the old Anglophone colonies (Jamaica etc.). So why on Earth are we importing these people? No sane society would. We owe them nothing. Any fair-minded person would surely agree that there is simply no legitimate case to be made as for why those people should be here by ‘right’. Mr. Haller you may just be correct in your assertion that my sensibility might be one or two generations too late. I sincerely hope not. 77
Posted by Silver on Fri, 23 Dec 2011 02:52 | #
I don’t understand what your point is. What exactly is it that can’t be talked around with Joe Public? Do you mean he “gets it” about race but feels powerless and/or afraid given the numbers in play and therefore clams up at any mention of race? If so, then even if neo-nazis or whatever can’t be blamed completely for people’s reticence to openly discuss racial issues, they certainly haven’t made it easier. Frankly, I’m skeptical that there’s any general awareness that race could be discussed honestly in non-neo-nazi terms but people’s fears prevent them doing even that. What’s been “tried”? Do you really mean to say that attempts have been made, over and over again, to cooperatively implement some sort of “separation algorithm”? Why haven’t I ever heard of it before?
Whoah there, pal. I don’t believe any of this is particularly likely. I’m just running through some scenarios of how it could occur if it ever is to do so. As highly unlikely as they are, I still think my scenarios are more likely than most others I’ve read described. (You know, as in more likely than the ludicrous notion that “in two hundred years whites will exist but no one else will,” as you put it. How will that come to pass, Voight?)
I don’t understand this. Does “ideas only catch on” refer to biological fitness? It’d have to, otherwise I don’t see how you could possibly shoehorn all the ideas that have “caught on” throughout history into a biological framework. After all, ideas had to “catch on” first before they proved adaptive.
Yes, most people. That’s been true throughout history. But never all people. Most people do in fact think ah, fuck it, it’s not so bad, and a lot of things are pretty good, so who cares? But not all people think so. History’s rife with examples of those who refused to settle for the way things are and who succeeded, over the course of time, in changing the status quo. There are very few examples in history, I think, of this occurring for explicitly racial reasons, or for racial reasons alone, but the struggle to overthrow ethnic or ethno-religious foreign dominance has been a mainstay, even if “most people” at the time were prepared to settle for the way things were.
Post a comment:
Next entry: Another straw in the wind
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement 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 MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by Graham_Lister on Mon, 19 Dec 2011 04:58 | #
I hope this thread isn’t lost under all that exciting and highly important news about events at a damn/power station somewhere being part of the ‘all-powerful’ Jews machinations.
GW – so many issues are brought up by this interesting item.
Firstly I do think the authors cannot be the most honest/intelligent researchers on the planet. The notion that people will be openly honest in any official or semi-official interaction about issues, however discretely or tangentially linked to race, is very naïve.
Do you recall those videos interviewing people about ‘white privilege’ from a few months ago? One did not have to be Sherlock Holmes to detect the cynical ‘poseurs’ expounding what they thought was the advantageous line on the topic right through to the honest ‘true-believers’ with a spectrum between those two poles. Well there is probably something similar going on in this survey.
Some people will be savvy enough to pick up on the implied distinction between ‘civic’ nationalism (non-racist thus acceptable) and ‘ethnic’ nationalism (racist thus unacceptable) and therefore give the acceptable answer. Many people will be tacit ‘ethno-cultural/linguistic’ nationalists but want to feel good about themselves by not opening admitting that a sharp in-group/out-group boundary defines their world-view – hence placing themselves theoretically in the ‘civic’ group but only for self-serving psycho-emotional reasons. Finally there probably are true-believers in the civic group and/or people that have only given the most superficial thought to such issues.
After all who but a tiny minority would admit in a semi-official interaction with strangers that they were ‘ethnic’ nationalists (which all the implications of racism)? Furthermore how many could understand or articulate that the ethnic/civic divide is not as simple as the survey implies (any people questioning the premise of the survey probably aren’t included). Moreover if the ethnic tag implies ‘racism’ how many understand that a non-racist ethnocentrism is possible? If we mean by racist a framework grounded in perceived inferiority/superiority distinctions between identifiable groups then it is not a necessary component of what might be broadly defined as ethnocentric communitarianism.
Rather ethnocentrism can be grounded in the observable facts about how explosively dangerous sociological/political cleavages, which coalesce around identifiably differentiated in-group/out-groups, can be. Think Indian partition or Northern Ireland – to the socio-cultural ‘outsider’ the differences seem relatively trivial but for those involved their differences became matters of life and death.
There is, additionally, also strong evidence to suggest maximally homogeneous ‘organic’ societies (grounded in a common ethnic background but also encapsulating religious affiliations, language, cultural values etc.) have far less occurrences of a host of social pathologies, greater levels of trust etc., (both wider and deeper ‘social-capital’) and so on [note - no functional society is without socio-economic stratification and cultural differentiation etc., but relatively speaking there can be wide inter-societal variations in the degree of intra-societal homogeneity].
Artificially amplified diversity/heterogeneity has a host of negative societal consequences for the host population with very few benefits (in fact probably none). As I have said before it could be ‘objectively’ superior little green men from Mars with 200 IQs as the ‘out-group’ I would not wish to be part of the majority group that risked becoming a minority in what was its own polis/homeland for the very obvious reason as to the implied loss of collective political power such a development would entail. All of these issues are about the dynamics of in-group/out-group differentiation and the real world socio-political effects of such – not fundamentally about any inferiority/superiority dichotomy.
But all that is a moderately sophisticated position which Mr & Mrs Average could not probably articulate either because they have never seriously thought about it or are uninterested in such topics. For them the term ‘ethnic’ sadly does strike upon connotations of ‘racism’. Hence in this context it is verboten.