Posted by Svigor on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 03:52 | #

I can do the Devil’s Advocate thing, but I find it very tiring.  Instead I’ll just respond to your friend:

Answers:
A,B,C,D,F,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,G,H,I
We’d be better off choosing a different path.  There are a few interesting topics in there but by and large this is the relevant answer.

Comments:
E,H,I
I thought this guy could see reality, but was drawing different conclusions? 

Questions:
Racism has always been a disproportionately atheist belief
Citation?  It’s a fact that people need belief, and that religion is the organic way to get that done.  It’s reasonable to suppose that liberalism is Christianity’s replacement.

Posted by Dharma Chakra on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:02 | #

Let’s do thishttp://www.beyondthesecretdvd.com/.

Since I put these laws into effect in my life I’ve seen a turn around in myself and everyone around me.  It’s amazing.  Can be applied to anything, even to the ideas on majority rights It’s universal.  Try it. 

January 15th 2009.  I’ll be there.  Will you?

Posted by Englander on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:18 | #

I think the words South and Africa are an answer to some of those points, most obviously ‘D’.

Posted by Dharma Chakra on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:39 | #

Japan and China are decent enough countries, their evolution has diverged from ours only 30,000 years ago, and we are so essentially alike, that we could simply hand the world over to them and not worry about ourselves. Perhaps they are superior after all, at least they seem to get the idea of ethnocentrism unlike us. In which case, does it really matter what happens to whites?

China and Japan are very different from one another and enemies from way back.

Awesome

Posted by Diamed on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 05:00 | #

That’s about as relevant an objection as ‘informing’ us that France and Germany are different countries and enemies from way back.  That doesn’t mean France and Germany don’t both have valuable and impressive legacies and could either one be trusted to do great things in the future.

As to Svigor my citation is a poll Amren did to its subscribers.  In a 90% christian country, the poll showed 30% of the subscribers to Amren were atheists, three times the average rate.  It’s published in one of the archived articles I read it long ago and I suppose if I searched long enough I could link to it, or you could just trust me and common sense which says the same.

Posted by Ryder on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 06:13 | #

I’ve run into a few of these types over the years as well. 

They may be “educated” in the formal sense, as well as being aware of some politically incorrect subjects like IQ differential, but at the end of the day they are concrete thinkers.  They are either incapable of or uninterested in abstract, higher level thought.  They simply can’t (or won’t) see anything beyond today, or certainly nothing beyond their planned career path.  As long as they can afford to live in a decent neighborhood, they don’t care about the broader world.  Not really, though they may well have a “Save the Whales” t-shirt stashed away somewhere.  But “Save the Whites”?  Why on earth would that matter?

But, despite their limited intellectual horizons (even those with very good educational pedigrees), there is something else lacking.  They seem to have no tribal attachment at all, no feeling for history, no sense of honor.  I see a statue of a great man in our history, and it gives me inspiration.  They see it, and it’s just a tourist attraction that they can now say they have been to.  There is no “there” there.  They just don’t care.  In the moral sense, the lights are on but nobody’s home.  Oh, sure, they behave well enough in their personal lives.  They aren’t murderers or pickpockets.  But this good behavior seems to be simply a habit, something that is expected of their class.  It does not seemingly stem from any sort of real conscience. 

Tell such a person about Channon and Christopher, or some white girl born on the wrong side of the tracks pimped out and murdered by Rufus the Rasta.  No real reaction.  Just some lame and poorly intellectualized response - no real sense that the horror of what has happened has registered at all.  Nobody’s home, dude. 

I’ll be frank: I don’t consider such people to be fully human.  There is some indefinable essence of humanity that, well, it just ain’t in ‘em. 

As to the various arguments that you list, I’ll say this: sure, SOME whites are likely to survive and do O.K.  For example, I’ve no doubt that there are at least some whites in South Africa that are doing fine under black rule.  This doesn’t erase the countless rapes of whites, murders of whites, dispossession of whites, and so forth.  A whole people, a whole culture, in essence destroyed. 

Meanwhile, back in the Kwa, the horror show continues.  Massive amounts of rape and murder of whites.  Our media and schools transformed into leftist indoctrination outfits.  A beautiful and sublime culture degraded and ruined.  Beautiful Celtic/bluegrass melodies replaced by a Negro banging on a garbage can, shouting about how he is gonna pop a cap in yo azz.  The triumph of the ugly. 

The bottom line reality is that whites are being displaced and replaced all over the world.  I don’t oppose the system merely because of how bad things are going to get, and they are going to get VERY bad.  I oppose it because things are already more than bad enough.  The rapes are already bad enough.  The murders are already bad enough.  The dispossession is already bad enough.  Add hundreds of millions of non-whites on top of what we already have?  Any “informed” white who believes that is just going to result in the Big Rock Candy Mountain is an idiot, regardless of his nominal IQ. 

Basically, these Devil’s Advocate theories advanced by such people are mere covers for the fact that they don’t care about their fellow whites, they aren’t willing to do anything to help them, and they don’t want to be bothered with the subject.  Any arguments that they employ are not offered in the spirit of honest intellectual debate, but rather to provide cover for the sad fact that they lack a conscience.

Posted by Homelander on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 07:40 | #

I could tell my story:

In my twenties, in the mid-70’s, I read Arthur Jensen, William Shockley and H. J Eysenck and was entirely persuaded of it.

Then along came the Reagan Revolution: supply-side (Gilder and Laffer), conservative sociology (Murray and the whole Public Interest crowd) and neo-Conservative foreign policy (remember - the enemy was still the Soviet empire).

It was happening now, it supplied a much more palatable (and saleable) explanation for minority failure (the disincentives of the welfare state, and the absence of an entry-level in compromised capitalism)...and you could privately entertain your doubts about minority performance while still promoting the same policy reforms.

Good reforms…mostly, as far as they went.

But it has run out of steam. No - even the most robust capitalism can’t carry 20 Billion people on this planet…or six billion, if they’re 90% non-white.

Posted by Svigor on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 08:00 | #

Religion is going the way of the dodo as each new generation finds it has less and less to do with their daily lives. With religion’s passing, people will be seeking some new cause to join, something bigger than themselves. Race is one of those things. Racism has always been a disproportionately atheist belief, and as atheism rises so will racism.

Okay, so the arrow of causality points which way?  Are atheists more likely to be racist, or are racists more likely to be atheists?  Would an increase in atheism necessarily mean an increase in racism?  Mightn’t a better question be, “does the death of conventional religion mean ‘yay for us,’ or ‘yay for liberalism and unconventional religion,’ or both?”  It seems intuitive that as conventional religion dies, yes, some will turn to racialism.  It does not seem intuitive that this is a win for us, as liberalism and other competitors would gain far more than we; they’re the ones with the ad space.

Who’s a better potential convert?  A Christian Euro, or a non-Christian Euro?

Posted by Ryder on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 08:07 | #

It was happening now, it supplied a much more palatable (and saleable) explanation for minority failure (the disincentives of the welfare state, and the absence of an entry-level in compromised capitalism)...and you could privately entertain your doubts about minority performance while still promoting the same policy reforms.

Yes, I fell into this trap myself.  In my case, it was drinking the libertarian kool-aid in the late 80’s and into the 90’s.  It was my one and only foray into ideology triumphing over common sense. 

I’m fairly forgiving of college aged people who really believe that non-whites will be wonderful fellow citizens if you just add liberty, or just add some government program, or just sprinkle holy water on them.  Every ideology has its own “just add **** here” routine.  It all seems so ridiculous now, but that’s hindsight for you. 

As I got older, I saw through more and more of it.  And that’s the rub: age should provide at least a certain amount of wisdom.  When it doesn’t, I am less forgiving.  It’s one thing for a college sophomore to be babbling nonsense, but when it comes from an otherwise mature adult, it’s really hard to swallow. 

It took me a long time to realize the systemic nature of the problem that confronts whites.  It’s not just the guvmint, as the libertarians would have us believe.  Instead, it’s all of a piece.  And while I don’t expect every person out there to spend their waking hours analyzing every aspect of our system, by the time someone reaches middle age they should at least have a strong sense that something is seriously wrong with the powers that be and the agenda pushed by the system.  Most of the people I talk to at least have that sense, and even if they haven’t really thought things through, it tells me their instincts are still decent.  They still have a conscience, they still care, at least a little.  But those people who simply don’t care at all, well, that’s a different matter altogether.  For them, the lights may be on, but nobody’s home.

Posted by Svigor on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 08:07 | #

To answer my own question, I’d say Christians are better potential converts.

If I had to be locked in a room with a potential convert until I had him preaching the gospel, I’d take a Christian any day of the week.  I could probably do it with only a Bible as reference.

Christians aren’t allowed to not care; more importantly, their religion is racist to the core.

Posted by Diamed on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 08:33 | #

Ryder’s point that there are already too many victims is hard to argue with.  My reaction to the Knoxville Horror was visceral.  I know exactly what you mean ryder, I keep on my computer a post from SAS that made me cry.  I take what the blacks do down there personally and I hate them for it.  That really is the difference, between people just adding up numbers, and people who actually care about. . .anything.

Anyone who can read this account and then fob it off as ‘all races do bad things’ or ‘what about the holocaust and the crusades’ or ‘this is because of apartheid and slavery’ or ‘in the larger picture it’s an acceptable cost’ or ‘it’s not polite to point stuff like this out, it disturbs our happy dream land where nothing is wrong,’ are not “there.”  The light is on but no one’s home.

Never Forget:
?
On Easter Sunday, a gang of vile black beasts forced their way into an upmarket Faerie Glen home, where they found the 19 year old Esteè van Rensburg. Esteè was alone at her parent’s home when rampaging blacks invaded her house. They slapped the screaming, terrified teenager around, punched and kicked her, ripped off her clothes and proceeded to gang rape her for a few tortuous hours.

When they were done raping and sodomising her, one of the criminals grabbed a pillow with his black paw and pushed it over her face. At this point Estèe’s cries had subsided into pitiful, muffled whimpering for her mommy. In his other paw, the coon held a 9mm pistol, which he shoved into the pillow and calmly pulled the trigger. Estèe died instantly as she was shot in the head execution-style, her hellish excruciation finally -almost mercifully- over.

The blacks then ransacked the house, loading stolen electrical appliances into Estèe’s silver Toyota and made off with their loot. A profitable, fun-filled evening they had themselves in the new South Africa.

But this wasn’t the first violent house invasion: three years earlier, three armed blacks attacked Estèe and her father in the same home, racially abusing them, pointing guns and also making off with a car heavily-laden with looted household goods. Estèe’s parents were away for the Easter weekend when their petite ballerina daughter was brutalised and cold-bloodedly murdered. Another young White life snuffed out - a few hours of sexual torture, and bang - her usefulness expired when the anti-White hatred of the black criminal wielding the gun boiled over.

?Image: Estèe’s body being retrieved by mortuary staff

As is sometimes the outcome of these unconscionable, mindless acts of savagery, her parents may liquidate some assets, start a trust fund for the simian murderers and hold tearful media briefings during which the formerly disadvantaged, Apartheid-oppressed tormentors of their lovely daughter are exonerated and hugged in a show of White Liberal Guilt, all while muttering apologies for black suffering for which Estèe (just like her beloved Jesus) paid the ultimate price.

Or, perish the thought- they might grow some balls, hunt down these fucking animals, torture their stinking carcasses for several days and finally snuff out these worthless subhuman cockroaches.

Know this, White Man: that little baby girl of yours, on whom you spent thousands of rands in pre-natal medical care, bought a cot, stroller, clothing and baby toys for when she was born… spent so much time with during midnight and early morning hours when she was sick or in hospital… had fever while teething…that girl, who you then put through school, spent thousands on piano lessons, sporting activities, clothing and entertainment…

That little girl, with whom you laughed and cried, teaching her right and wrong, on whom you lavished so much love, resources and effort to raise her as an intelligent, educated asset to society…

is in Azanian terms nothing more than a sperm receptacle for rapacious, murderous negroid beasts to violate and enjoy for a few hours. Her virgin womb little more than a glorified condom for the exclusive pleasure of the most execrable, vile filth imaginable, to stick their filthy, unwashed, disease-ridden dicks into, after which she is unceremoniously shot like a dog…her life snuffed out with as little thought and concern as squashing a bug…

Don’t get mad White Man - you have no right to anger, no matter the gravity of injustice against you & yours. The only right and obligation you have is to apologise for the sins of your fathers. Just shut the fuck up and do your duty - to conscientiously raise more disposable sperm receptacles for your black brethren to enjoy as & when they please. And remember to APOLOGISE. - it’s the right thing to do.

Posted by Homelander on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 08:47 | #

One Idea above which may have some merit is the notion of assilimating Jews out of a conscious existence.

Other things haven’t worked. How about an all-White society welcomes anyone of Jewish heritage, but otherwise white (that is, Ashkenazi’s) provided only that they renounce any public expression whatsoever of a Jewish identity - cultural, religious or political? No yiddish, no congregations, no Zionism.

Penalty for non-compliance? Expulsion! Much like the way Elizabeth-I handled Catholic recrusants. It worked.

The Enlightenment wanted to give everyone freedom of religion. I say fine - for any kind of Christian, atheist freethinkers agnostics, civilised Western pagans (Stoics and what-not), tribalised Western pagans (Odin), Buddhists and Hindus (civilised non-Western pagans…even some hippy-dippies into Native-American or Voo-Doo, whatever.

But no Jews. No Moslems. No ur-competitors to Christianity. These are incompatible foes.

What would happen to these (in effect) recanting Jews? Perhaps they would finally disappeat…without wasting all those smart genes.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:29 | #

“I’ve run into a few of these types over the years as well.

“They may be ‘educated’ in the formal sense, as well as being aware of some politically incorrect subjects like IQ differential, but at the end of the day they are concrete thinkers.  They are either incapable of or uninterested in abstract, higher level thought.  They simply can’t (or won’t) see anything beyond today, or certainly nothing beyond their planned career path.  As long as they can afford to live in a decent neighborhood, they don’t care about the broader world.  Not really, though they may well have a ‘Save the Whales’ t-shirt stashed away somewhere.  But ‘Save the Whites’?  Why on earth would that matter?

“But, despite their limited intellectual horizons (even those with very good educational pedigrees), there is something else lacking.  They seem to have no tribal attachment at all, no feeling for history, no sense of honor.  I see a statue of a great man in our history, and it gives me inspiration.  They see it, and it’s just a tourist attraction that they can now say they have been to.  There is no ‘there’ there.  They just don’t care.  In the moral sense, the lights are on but nobody’s home.  Oh, sure, they behave well enough in their personal lives.  They aren’t murderers or pickpockets.  But this good behavior seems to be simply a habit, something that is expected of their class.  It does not seemingly stem from any sort of real conscience.

“Tell such a person about Channon and Christopher, or some white girl born on the wrong side of the tracks pimped out and murdered by Rufus the Rasta.  No real reaction.  Just some lame and poorly intellectualized response - no real sense that the horror of what has happened has registered at all.  Nobody’s home, dude.”

Well put by Ryder there.

“something is seriously wrong with the powers that be and the agenda pushed by the system.”  (—Ryder)

 

What that “something” is is Euro control over themselves has been done away with (this change was finally decisively tipped during the mid-to-late ‘60s) and in its place we now have control over Euros by an alliance consisting of an alien race that wishes Euros destroyed, and a bought or intimidated traitor class of Euros caring nothing whatsoever for Euro survival or well-being, nothing.

Miasma theories?  I’ve left them all, every single one, behind me.  I’m into germ theories now.  Like Louis Pasteur.

Posted by Dave Johns on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:39 | #

Forget about wasting time arguing amongst ourselves over Christian v atheist or ‘liberal’ v ‘conservative’ etc…

People should be viewed as two opposing groups: Those who oppose racial-integration, and those who tacitly support and or actively promote racial-integration. Racial-integrationists of all stripes are our enemies.

On the surface it appears most whites support racial-integration; however, I’m confident most whites are still normal, therefore, they’re against racial integration. They’re just too afraid to say so in public—and even in private! ... and who can blame them given the fascist PC climate we all labor under?

Our job is to mock ridicule and denigrate racial-integrationists and their policies at every opportunity. We can and must adopt and use the tactics of the Left against them, such as, for example: “Critical Theory.”

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:46 | #

What’s going on is not rocket science.  Imagine if Hamas or Hezbollah achieved hegemony over the Jews in Israel.  What would happen to the Jews in Israel and to their country? 

Answer:  same as happened to the Euros in the U.S.( * ) and to their country, after the Jews achieved hegemony in the ‘60s:  namely, the uninterrupted destruction of the Euros began.
______

( *  and to those in the Euro lands the U.S. controls or heavily influences:  we control or heavily influence those lands in much the same way Moscow controlled or heavily influenced its “Soviet Satellites” from 1945 until 1989)

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:54 | #

Jews see Euros and Euro lands the way Hamas and Hezbollah see Israeli Jews and Israel:  they hate them and will weaken and/or harm them if they can. 

The Israeli Jews are smart enough not to let those who hate them achieve hegemony over them.  The 1960s-era U.S. WASP establishment wasn’t.

Posted by Dave Johns on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:11 | #

“The 1960s-era U.S. WASP establishment wasn’t.”

You’re right! They foolishly thought they could ignore and sweep the radical sex, drug, and rock&roll;crowd under the carpet. Well, now those radical leftists of the 1960s era are firmly entrenched in every category of power. What now, Fred?

Posted by J Richards on Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:53 | #

The Devil’s Advocate has his facts wrong!

A. The economy can only support so many unskilled workers. Once business- and economy-fixated people notice their quality of life going down ... they’ll decide that immigration must stop.

Wrong! The implicit assumption is that immigration support is heavily favored by business interests, which isn’t exactly correct.  The wealth of a nation partly lies in what products it can come up with.  Third Worlders are both less capable of producing the totality of goods and services that would sustain a healthy First-World economy and less likely to be able to afford expensive goods.  Importing them for business interests doesn’t make any sense unless one does so because of business structure.  The typical big business is a publicly traded company operating in an environment where nearly all money is generated out of nothing, and as debt, by private bankers.  This system is designed to fail by the private bankers in the long run, but to keep it going for the maximum time and thereby maximally leech the public’s wealth, businesses must increasingly turn in greater profit, and this is why hiring cheaper labor is the way to go.  Long-term interests are not an issue since the system is designed to come down periodically, allowing the bankers to acquire more assets for pennies on the dollar and leech more from the government as bailout.

A little examination reveals that the big bankers are typically Jews and most of the big shareholders in publicly-traded companies are Jews also.  So instead of blaming business interests, the fault ultimately is with malicious Jewish interests.

B. By failing to deliver the very progress it touts, liberalism - the age of pity and excuses and handouts for minorities - is losing sway.

Liberalism is a misnomer.  So-called liberals are not liberal about gun rights, evangelical Christianity, freedom of speech, etc.  Their leaders are a bunch of malicious individuals using a good-sounding name to describe themselves, and the people pulling the strings are mostly Jews.

C. Surely, at some point scientists will concede the fact that racial IQ gaps are genetic.

Far-away possibility.  Much havoc will be wreaked until then.  And, a genetic basis for IQ differences doesn’t rule out social attempts to ameliorate nature’s injustice - more minority handouts akin to helping the handicapped.

D. Soon enough non-whites will outnumber whites at the voting booth, but it won’t matter.

Not worth the risk and losses.  Look at Zimbabwe and South Africa.  One could even say that in a race war whites will emerge with the upper hand because of their higher intelligence and better organization ability, but this victory will come at the cost of a great many whites killed, raped and maimed.

E) Miscegenation can help as well as hurt.

Given the large numbers of blacks in America (tens of millions), eliminating them them via miscegenation is a pipe dream since you couldn’t find large numbers of non-blacks to do so fast enough.  The only thing that’ll happen is that the proportion of more-pure blacks will go down slightly and the part-black people will mostly lean toward blacks in behavior, political identification and anti-white attitudes.

Jews are marrying out at a rate of 50% a generation.

Nonsense.  Jews cannot legally marry non-Jews in Israel, and the American figures are grossly exaggerated by Jews to make themselves appear less ethnocentric.  This has been extensively discussed at MR.

F) With enough economic growth, even a vast influx of non-whites does not directly endanger the white population of the USA.

Another pipe dream.  Economic growth is sufficient and virtually infinite only in the fictitious world of the economist’s.  One shouldn’t forget that the system is designed to periodically come down since most money is generated out of nothing and as debt by private bankers.

We are a gigantic landmass and could easily fit a billion people in our borders, so long as there is productive work for them.

Even if the work is there, the quality of life will go down severely.  With finite resources, more people means less available per capita.

A breakthrough in…

Improved cars and computers cannot prevent the economy from going down periodically or save us from being indebted to the Jewish bankers unless money is generated by the government, not by private bankers, and obviously as a public service for facilitating the exchange of goods and services, not as a commodity or debt.  Some of your breakthroughs are pipe dreams: feeding everyone easily (finite resources), curing virtually all diseases (many diseases are a natural part of life), cheap space travel (the enormous energy requirement), cyborgs (way, way into the future).

Religion is going the way of the dodo as each new generation finds it has less and less to do with their daily lives.

Religion is here to stay for a very long time.

Racism has always been a disproportionately atheist belief

Tell this to the medieval Christian crusaders.  You could use Biblical passages to justify keeping other races out or welcoming them in.  It’s a matter of the passages you emphasize.

and as atheism rises so will racism.

Atheism is a rejection of religious beliefs following their examination, but replacing religious beliefs with substitutes is not a part of atheism.  So the rejection of religious beliefs does not necessarily imply increased racism.

Sweeping away the husk of religion will also allow us to discard flawed beliefs like .... “jews are the chosen people”

This is a racial supremacist attitude of the Jews, not stemming from religion, but their religious beliefs reflect their supremacist attitudes.  The Middle Eastern Jews are descended from the Pharisees mentioned in the Bible, and the Ashkenazi are predominantly descended from the southeastern European khazars.  Some “chosen people”!

Liberals have been studiously lowering the birth rates of overseas non-whites, aborting the babies of non-whites in the USA, allowed non-whites to kill each other over drugs and crime, and have basically been trying their best to keep the non-whites down.

Not really.  Sending monetary aid from the “Live Aid” concert and encouraging abortions don’t fit in with either increasing or diminishing non-white numbers in the aggregate.  People aborting the babies are those that voluntarily seek abortion and the doctors that perform them.  If a liberal makes it possible for a woman to have an abortion, you can’t say that he is aborting babies.  The abortion industry is mostly under Jewish administration, and white numbers are more affected by it in the U.S. than Hispanic numbers.

They ((liberals)) even oppose wars for Israel.

Their leadership is phony (Jews or agents of the Jews).  The phonies’ job is to pin the blame on Bush, Cheney and other bogeymen and destroy any serious attempt at undermining the Israeli war machine.

Historically speaking, whites have never been conquered by non-whites, not for long.

A couple of hundred years in the Balkans (Ottoman Turks) and Spain (Moors) is a long time.  The devastation wreaked by Jewry in the 20th century alone was too heavy a price to pay for having the vilest of the scum hold the power reigns.

When Serbia participated in this kind of activity, other whites bombed them into submission.

The U.S. had no reason to bomb Serbia, and did so in defiance of NATO rules.  Jews, not whites, had the U.S. military and other NATO forces bomb Serbia.

The same for SA, it was sanctioned and threatened with bombs into submission.

The people were, again, overwhelmingly Jews.

Japan and China are decent enough countries, their evolution has diverged from ours only 30,000 years ago, and we are so essentially alike, that we could simply hand the world over to them and not worry about ourselves. Perhaps they are superior after all, at least they seem to get the idea of ethnocentrism unlike us. In which case, does it really matter what happens to whites?

The existence of a superior people doesn’t undermine the case for racial preservation of one’s own inferior race.  The Japanese and the Chinese are still to produce evidence that they have the capability of matching whites with respect to per capita inventions, innovations and philosophical output.

—————————-

Other things haven’t worked. How about an all-White society welcomes anyone of Jewish heritage, but otherwise white (that is, Ashkenazi’s) provided only that they renounce any public expression whatsoever of a Jewish identity - cultural, religious or political? No yiddish, no congregations, no Zionism. - Homelander

Jews renouncing their Jewish identity?  A camel has an easier chance of passing through the eye of the needle.  Jewry’s malevolence primarily stems from their heredity.

Posted by Bill on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:35 | #

The End of White America

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200901/end-of-whiteness

Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:57 | #

Even granted all of the enumerated come to pass, it is still more desirable to forgo our dispossession.  What is described by Diamed are only ways to blunt the impact of our marginalization, to anesthetize the pain of our deracination.  No, we will take back all that has been stolen from us: the Big Idea.  If we don’t have to settle for less, why should we?

Besides, it is too great a risk to trust in the benevolence of alien peoples to grant us our survival.

Posted by Dharma Chakra on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 01:01 | #

Diamed, when refering to a long article, could you do just that - refer to it, via a link, so that we can read it on it’s own web page rather than here?  Thanks.  That’s part of net protocol/etiquette and I am not alone in appreciating it.

In response to the article you copy and pasted here - it’s a shame what is happening to whites in S.Africa but why are they staying on?  Time to repatriate.  They should not have been there to begin with.  Staying on just means facing more of the same.  Get out while you can.

Posted by Diamed on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 01:16 | #

I read that entire article and it makes me boil with anger.  Endless assumptions with no proof, like ‘white’ is a ‘social construct.’  That Irish, Italians, and Jews were exactly like English/Dutch/Germans and thus any opposition to those immigrants proved how ‘crazy’ people were in the 1920’s, that America will remain one nation by 2042, that whites will allow themselves to become a minority without fighting, that people will be viewed as ‘individuals’ not members of their tribe, on and on.  Endless assumptions, all fatuous, all based on brainwashing and bullshit but not on reality, not on nature, not on what science is telling us, not on the facts of white flight and self-segregation we see everywhere around us.  Whites will never accept living in a sea of non-whites, no matter what, they will continue to move until they are part of a majority white area, even if the country is 99% non-white, we will never, ever ‘assimilate.’  Anyone who observes reality around the world sees this pattern everywhere.  No matter how many non-whites you pack into our countries, you will just get ghettoes of all black, all muslim, all hispanic, all asian cities and whites STILL living 100% pure lily white lives in their own countryside retreats.  There is no post-racial age, because in life there is nothing but race, the race is Everything.  For Everyone.  Whether they admit it or not.

Posted by Diamed on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 01:34 | #

Why shouldn’t they have been there to begin with Dharma?  They were there first.  They found a completely uninhabited corner of the world, a few tiny bushmen who have now gone extinct wandered across it hunting and gathering, that’s it, and built it from nothing up to a wonderful first world country through their own blood and sweat.  They didn’t take any slaves, they didn’t steal anyone’s gold, they came to work and they farmed the land.  Boer is simply ‘farmer’ in their language, now that’s an ethnicity to be proud of.  The real people who don’t belong in south africa are the bantus who migrated in much later and stole the land from the whites who built it and made it rich.

The answer is not to leave South Africa.  The answer is for white people of the world to unite, declare war on South Africa, and free our persecuted people from the bondage of black crime, black taxes, black economic empowerment, and black power.  The answer is to take all that land back and drive blacks back into Congo.  Unfortunately, the number of whites who still have any moral sense as Ryder described, any concern for anything, any morality at all when it comes to these issues, is vanishingly low.  And by dismissing the account with ‘that’s a shame but whites deserved it and brought it on themselves by being where they don’t belong’ you have just named yourself a member of that soulless stock.  That is, if you’re even white.

Posted by Dasein on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 09:59 | #

One Idea above which may have some merit is the notion of assilimating Jews out of a conscious existence.

Other things haven’t worked. How about an all-White society welcomes anyone of Jewish heritage, but otherwise white (that is, Ashkenazi’s) provided only that they renounce any public expression whatsoever of a Jewish identity - cultural, religious or political? No yiddish, no congregations, no Zionism.

Penalty for non-compliance? Expulsion! Much like the way Elizabeth-I handled Catholic recrusants. It worked. (Homelander)

A more accurate historical precedent is perhaps Spain’s New Christians.  Assimilation could work, if this time Torquemada is a geneticist.

Posted by Dharma Chakra on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 10:12 | #

Whites are benefactors of the state welfare system in great numbers and incredibly more so in the past year.
Whites need to get themselves off of welfare.  Parents should support their unmarried teen daughters with babies if need be.

Anyway, I’m obviously not as hardcore as y’all are regarding immigration, but one thing that I do think needs to be put in place asap is that every immigrant obtaining citizenship in the USA should be required to pass a cultural course.  This course will outline to them behaviours that are acceptable and not-acceptable in American society.  I think Australia or the Netherlands is implementing this after having had some serious problems with immigrant males and their attitudes towards women.  I remember reading about this some years back. 

Anyway, the following is an example of behaviour that is NOT acceptable in our society.  Any sort of sign in the course or exam or brainwashing session that betrays a belief system like the following should DISQUALIFY an immigrant from becoming citizen in this country.

http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/005582.html

Posted by the Narrator... on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 11:23 | #

The End of White America

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200901/end-of-whiteness

.

.

.

.

I posted the following four months ago, but it seems to address much of the Atlantic article, http://signalsfromthebrink.blogspot.com/2008/09/race-that-wasnt-there.html

.
.
.

And be sure to take special note of the name of the author of the Atlantic article…Hua Hsu.
A non-White celebrating the mass genocide of a race of people.

The Atlantic should be accused of promoting hate speech for that…

.

Posted by Dave Johns on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 11:37 | #

“The End of White America”

Like that’s news? It’s a little late for that to come out now, don’t you think?

+++++++++++++++++++++++

The seminal event that signified the end of white-America marked its date in history when Brown v Board of Education became law in 1954.

Posted by America's Millions of Jews on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 12:20 | #

Many millions of Americans are clearly descended from Eastern European Jews who came to America from about 1880-1925 and they don’t even know it - during that time span millions of Jews from Eastern European/Russian territories immigrated here and actually assimilated to a very large degree because they were very secular (many were enamored with modernistic thought) and didn’t much care for Judaism - if you look at their history many Russian Jews have actually been open to assimilation with groups that didn’t threaten them with harm.

While the official number of Jews in America is about 6-7 million, the real number is obviously MUCH higher when you count people with PARTIAL ethnic Jewish ancestry. These Jews originally settled in the big cities in the American Northeast but as time passed they fanned out all over America and intermarried with other Americans to a very large extent, most of them forgetting all aspects of their Jewish past.  It’s an estimate but I’d say that at least 25-30 million Americans (maybe a bit more) probably have some Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry they are not aware of - a lot of these partial Jewish Americans now live in the suburbs of a bunch of American cities.

The 2-4 million Jews who came yo America between 1880-1925 have since ballooned in to a huge number (who expects 2-4 million to only double in over 100 years? - in reality population growth has occurred at multiples much more than that), and now a large amount of so called ‘White’ Americans now have some Jewish ancestry in their past they aren’t even aware of but which continues to influence their appearance and mindset.  Ever notice how many Americans are actually completely unaware of their ancestry or only have the vaguest idea?  Well, that’s extremely common…and if you go around America you will find people who are quite obviously partially Jewish - they are descended from these Jewish immigrants in their distant past who are long forgotten because of the low value placed upon ancestry and distant family ties in America.

Posted by the Narrator... on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 12:54 | #

Many millions of Americans are clearly descended from Eastern European Jews who came to America from about 1880-1925…..during that time span millions of Jews from Eastern European/Russian territories immigrated here and actually assimilated to a very large degree because they were very secular (many were enamored with modernistic thought)
Posted by America’s Millions of Jews on January 08, 2009, 11:20 AM

I don’t think so.
Your assertion is based on a lack of historical knowledge.

How exactly do secularists enamored of modern thought assimilate into a population which was overwhelmingly and rabidly Christian and considered modern thought (liberalism) to be heretical to all that they held dear?

Jews were recognized immediately as a subversive and harmful element and treated accordingly.
Unfortunately they were not fully encouraged to repatriate themselves back to the middle-eastern deserts from which they sprung up and have continued to act as the enemy within the gates of America up to this very day.
(a role and title that they stubbornly insist on taking for themselves)

.

Besides that, jewish marriage customs and genetic research do not support your slander.

...

Posted by silver on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 13:15 | #

People should be viewed as two opposing groups: Those who oppose racial-integration, and those who tacitly support and or actively promote racial-integration. Racial-integrationists of all stripes are our enemies.

The corollary of that is racial separatists “of all stripes” are your allies—whether they know or think it or not.  For example, Aztlaners obviously don’t deserve anything like the amount of territory they have their eye on (or even any at all), but their separatist ambition is a real boon (so is “black nationalist” posturing, though few take it seriously). 

On the surface it appears most whites support racial-integration; however, I’m confident most whites are still normal, therefore, they’re against racial integration. They’re just too afraid to say so in public—and even in private! ... and who can blame them given the fascist PC climate we all labor under?

It’s not just the PC climate, though.  At least one poster to this thread admitted to having being aware of the facts about race but opting to paper over them with ideology rather than to bravely come to terms with their implications.  It’s doubtful he did so while living anywhere near blacks, so he lived away from them all the while knowing the real reasons why, but he refused to share those reasons with others during an age (the 70s) when many would have been quite receptive to his message.  I imagine such people to be the majority in the white liberal intelligentsia: they know damn well the truth about race, but since they don’t see how anything can be done about it, they prefer to sweep it under the carpet.  (I think quite a few will start talking soon though. Sweeping worked while the demographic balance wasn’t much altered.  But some white “liberals” are going to start noticing the scam jews and commies (among others, though often one and the same) perpetrated: PeeCee liberalism wasn’t just a way to do away with uncomfortable facts; it was a battering ram intended to wreck white countries.)

<blockquote>Our job is to mock ridicule and denigrate racial-integrationists and their policies at every opportunity. We can and must adopt and use the tactics of the Left against them, such as, for example: “Critical Theory.” </blockqoute>

You’d do better to “mock” and also provide a positive alternative.  Vdare’s “Diversity is ‘strength,’ it’s also [whatever]” do a good job of mockery.  What’s really missing (besides ending immigration) is a positive alternative, something to be for, not just against—the way abortionists aren’t “against life,” they’re “pro choice.”  Diversity isn’t (or hasn’t proved itself) a strength, so let’s do this instead—insert here any number of more sensible policies.  Of course, the point isn’t so much to argue for those, most likely ‘half-way,’ alternatives; it’s to make the discussion of racial reality (pro-white racial reality) more palatable, so that those who know find it easier to speak out.  Racial reality, as seen above, can be difficult to discuss, even for those who’ve been made aware (to some extent) of the facts.  With a more benign context for discussing race, however, certain facts are much easier to bring up.  This is essentially what Steve Sailer has been doing (most likely intentionally, but possibly not).  Of course, true WNs would want to ensure that the final outcome is a separate, independent white racial territory, whether that means the entire US, deporting all incompatibles to wherever a home can be found for them (unlikely, imo) or killing them (many times more unlikely still), or within the territory of the present US (the easiest and most likely). 

As for the arguments that support demonstrating no concern, J. Richards dealt with those listed effectively.

Here are two more:

(J) Besides ending immigration (for reasons other than racial), nothing racial should be done because nothing racial can morally be done.  This is today’s de facto position.  An amendment might be stating racial facts in order to terminate the practise of ascribing black and ‘spanic failure to white racism. 

(K) Freedom of association and/or eugenics.  Freedom of association assures that those who wish to live among their own race are free to attempt to structure their communities in ways that allow them to do so.  Eugenics (meaning here any eugenic measure) can be utilised to attempt to mitigate the racial situation.

Posted by Dave Johns on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 13:23 | #

“Unfortunately they were not fully encouraged to repatriate themselves back to the middle-eastern deserts from which they sprung up and have continued to act as the enemy within the gates of America up to this very day.”

Then who exactly were the pagan tribe known as Khazars? Those that converted to Judaism in or around 830; you know, the same descendants of the people that are now commonly known as Ashkenazim? Are they direct descendants of the OT Jews, or something else?

Posted by Svigor on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 13:41 | #

The Khazars were central Asians, Turkic peoples.  Their ruling caste converted, but a general conversion of the masses isn’t supported (last I heard).  They probably went back to business as usual after their empire was destroyed (8th century?).

Posted by Svigor on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 13:50 | #

Which is what usually happens, btw.  The Russians didn’t end up Mongols, the British didn’t end up Romans, the Sicilians didn’t end up Vikings, Americans aren’t Jews, etc.

Posted by the Narrator... on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 14:05 | #

Then who exactly were the pagan tribe known as Khazars? Those that converted to Judaism in or around 830; you know, the same descendants of the people that are now commonly known as Ashkenazim? Are they direct descendants of the OT Jews, or something else?
Posted by Dave Johns on January 08, 2009, 12:23 PM

Last I read genetic testing proved the Khazar origins of Ashkenazis wrong.

The Khazars were most likely a hodgepodge of tribes from central Asia (looking similar to natives of Kazakhstan). When their empire fell the majority of them probably bled back into central Asian and Anatolian populations, genetically and religiously…

Posted by Dave Johns on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 14:14 | #

Here’s what I’ve read on the subject:

There are two distinct groups of Jews in the world and they come from two different areas of the world — the Sephardic Jews from the Middle East and North Africa and the Ashkenazi Jews come from Eastern Europe. The Sephardic is the oldest group and it is they, if any, who are the Jews described in the Bible because they lived in the area described in the Bible. They are blood relatives to the Arabs — the only difference between them is the religion.

The Ashkenazi Jews, who now compromise 90% of the Jews in the world, had a rather strange beginning. According to historians, many of them Jewish, the Ashkenazi Jews came into existence about 1,200 years ago. It happened this way:

At the eastern edge of Europe, there lived a tribe of people know as the Khazars. About the year 740 A.D., the Khazar king and his court decided they should adopt a religion for their people. So, representatives of the three major religions, Christianity, Islam and Judaism, were invited to present their religious doctrines. The Khazars chose Judaism, but it wasn’t for religious reasons. If the Khazars had chosen Islam, they would have angered the strong Christian world. If they had chosen Christianity, they would have angered the strong Islamic world. So, they played it safe — they chose Judaism. It wasn’t for religious reasons the Khazars chose Judaism; it was for political reasons.

Sometime during the 13th century, the Khazars were driven from their land and they migrated westward with most of them settling in Poland and Russia. These Khazars are now known as Ashkenazi Jews. Because these Khazar Ashkenazi Jews merely chose Judaism, they are not really Jews — at least not blood Jews.

Throughout their history, these Polish and Russian Ashkenazi Jews practiced communism/socialism and worked to have their ideas implemented in these countries.

By the late 1800s significant numbers of these communist/socialist Jews were found in Germany, the Balkans and eventually all over Europe. Because of their interference in the social and governmental affairs of Russia, they became the target of persecution by the Czars. Because of this, migration of these communist/socialist oriented Jews began. Some went to Palestine; some to Central and South America; and a large number of them came to the U.S ....

Posted by the Narrator... on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 15:28 | #

Here’s what I’ve read on the subject:
Posted by Dave Johns on January 08, 2009, 01:14 PM

I read that before as well.
But DNA studies seem to say different.

Another finding, paradoxical but unsurprising, is that by the yardstick of the Y chromosome, the world’s Jewish communities closely resemble not only each other but also Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese, suggesting that all are descended from a common ancestral population that inhabited the Middle East some four thousand years ago.

The analysis provides genetic witness that these communities have, to a remarkable extent, retained their biological identity separate from their host populations, evidence of relatively little intermarriage or conversion into Judaism over the centuries.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D02E0D71338F93AA35756C0A9669C8B63

Posted by Dharma Chakra on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:27 | #

What about Jews who have converted out of Judaism to other religions?  That’s quite common in the West.

Posted by Diamed on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:41 | #

Silver made an important point.  Probably a lot of people are perfectly aware of the facts, but figure it won’t be so bad because of J and K.

Like typical buddhists, the J-folk will be telling themselves “it’s better to suffer evil than to cause it.”  They will go through their lives grinning and bearing all the pains of diversity because it’s ‘better than the alternative.’  Considering many of these people will believe in an afterlife and thus not in the least care what happens in this life, figuring it will all work out later, such a soporific could work.

Also with K-folk, people who think that national, legal borders aren’t needed to fight diversity, and along with some combination of J-ness in their hearts and a wish to not harm anyone, they’ll retreat to some sort of cultural barriers and just live like other resented minorities who cleave to each other—jews, armenians, lebanese, etc.  The results are usually grim but, after all, ‘it is better to suffer evil than to cause it.’

It’s obvious knowing the facts, race realism, is not sufficient to make a white nationalist.  I predict race realism will spread throughout this century but racism itself won’t, not naturally.  It’s still possible to draw other conclusions than the correct ones, even with the exact same knowledge base.  Considering bloodthirstiness is inevitably a genetic trait, how many J’s can be convinced it’s better to cause evil than to suffer it?  How many of our conclusions are a result of genetic predilections rather than logic and facts?  In that case, how transferable is our message to the wider public?

Posted by J Richards on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:41 | #

Narrator,

Dave Johns is correct about the non-Middle-Eastern origin of the Ashkenazi.  I have addressed the Y chromosome evidence before.  In short, the Jews are lying.

Zoossmann-Diskin A. Are today’s Jewish priests descended from the old ones? Homo. 2000;51:151-162.

The article on the Y chromosomes of Ashkenazi Levites (Behar et al., 2003. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 73, 768-779) is the fourth in a series on the Y chromosomes of the three Jewish male castes: Cohanim (priests), Levites (priests’ helpers) and Israelites (lay people). It became apparent that there is a problem with omission of samples when the second article “Origins of Old Testament priests” (Thomas et al., 1998. Nature 394, 138-140) was published. In the fourth article a remarkable 55% of the Ashkenazi Levite samples from the earlier 1998 study are not included. This causes the “Levite modal haplotype” to double its frequency from 21% of the Ashkenazi Levite sample in 1998 to 42% of the Ashkenazi Levite sample in 2003. The authors offer three main explanations: The explanations offered to the problem of omitting samples from subsequent studies after their haplotypes or partial haplotypes are known, are not convincing. Consequently their sample sets cannot be considered random and non-biased. At the least, these laboratories have bad practices of sample handling and many typing errors, which are enough to invalidate their studies. Zoossmann-Diskin A. Ashkenazi levites’ “Y modal haplotype” (LMH)—an artificially created phenomenon? Homo. 2006;57(1):87-100.

Genetic evidence places the Ashkenazi in the southeastern European region close to central Asia, which is consistent with their history.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.0030236
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.0040004
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=17436249
Look at the placement of the Ashkenazi compared to the Druze (from Harpending, Cochran, etc.) below.

More (though preliminary): http://www.ashg.org/2008meeting/abstracts/fulltext/f21843.htm

John Baker, in Race, cited evidence from skull shapes that Ashkenazi skulls were usually of the Armenoid (Armenia) type, again placing them in Khazaria.  The Pubmed article places the Ashkenazi genetically closest to the Armenians.  There’s surely a lot more, and I need to post an entry on this topic.  These Ashkenazi creatures have no claim to Palestine.

Posted by Armor on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:11 | #

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. (—Diamed)

What that minor sub-set would need to demonstrate is that the rest of us are happy to be race replaced, which we are not. Until then, their opinion doesn’t matter.

Still, you can try to find out who you are dealing with:

- If they don’t mind race replacement, it may really be because they do not think racially. Maybe they have not been in contact with non-whites. Or maybe they are suicidal and think that nothing matters. Do they care about other things in life? Is it a case of selective relativism?

- If they reject valid arguments against mass immigration, it means they think racially, but in an anti-white way. Maybe they have been unable to resist to the propaganda. Or maybe they are having a game with you. It may be a passive aggressive method they try on any person who seems to hold strong beliefs. Or maybe they resort to rhetorical contradiction in order to hear your arguments in favor of repatriation. Etc.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:32 | #

Notice the opening line of the article abstract at J Richards’ last link in his comment just above:

“Understanding and detecting population substructure [on the genetic level] are critical issues.”

That’s the diametrical opposite of race-denial.

Posted by Armor on Fri, 09 Jan 2009 02:08 | #

Fred,
as you read french, you should have a look here (and here) if you don’t know Anne Kling’s blog. It takes a critical look at the LICRA and the CRIF, two Jewish organizations specialized in silencing french opponents of mass immigration.

According to Le Pen, it seems that the french coverage of the middle East crisis has been less extensive than in other countries. He thinks the media may have received instructions, or maybe there is a consensus among them, that they should keep their coverage low-key in order to avoid trouble from Arabs living in france.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 09 Jan 2009 02:47 | #

Thanks, Armor.  Here is a discussion of Annie Kling’s book about LICRA.  For non-French readers:  LICRA is a Jewish organization which functions as France’s ADL, ACLU, and SPLC rolled into one, forcing race-replacement on the people by savagely attacking, punishing, and trying to ruin anyone who tries to speak out against it or tries to warn the people:

http://www.toutsaufsarkozy.com/cc/article04/EEAyZEylAyBSzrkCVm.shtml

(Hat tip:  http://www.thecivicplatform.com/2007/12/08/opinion-la-france-licratisee-un-livre-a-lire-et-a-faire-lire/ )

Annie Kling is a French heroïne of the stature of Joan of Arc.  She is trying to warn the people of their impending doom and trying singlehandedly to fight against it to save France.  This is a very good and brave woman who deserves the support of every Frenchman.

Posted by the Narrator... on Fri, 09 Jan 2009 11:21 | #

http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.0030236
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.0040004
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=17436249
Posted by J Richards on January 08, 2009, 06:41 PM

Well you know more about this than I do, but since (if I read it right) the links mention an Ashkenazi connection with the area of historic Armenia, have there been studies linking those peoples (modern Armenians)  to central-Asian origins as well?

From what I’ve observed most Turkic peoples have a quasi Oriental look to them. In fact many of them look like Native Americans. Whereas Ashkenazis look more like Arabs, hook nose and all.

...

Posted by The Lost Dress of Elizabeth I on Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:39 | #

The Lost Dress of Elizabeth I