Posted by Silver on Sat, 30 Jun 2012 00:33 | #

To advocate ethnic cleansing is against the law full stop.
So is genocide.

Surely you had some choice retorts to a sitter like this.

How about:

“Yes, and in contravention of a UN convention to boot.  This article could easily have been entitled “Whites: the waning power in the United States (and everywhere else on earth).” So just why are whites being ethnically cleansed and subjected to genocidal conditions no matter where on earth they’re found, be it new world or old?  Simon?  Anyone?”

Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 30 Jun 2012 00:50 | #

If at the end of all this Germans do not secure their own survival then the English should certainly perish along with them.  I’m sure Dare would agree.

Posted by Leon Haller on Sat, 30 Jun 2012 02:40 | #

The only hope is White Zion. No one has ever disproved this.

“When are whites going to wake up from their dispossession and genocide?”

“When it’s too late to stop it.”

I have seen your future people, and it is WZ or bust. In 20 years everything will be the same, only more so.

Posted by Leon Haller on Sat, 30 Jun 2012 05:00 | #

A bit of good news from Serbia:

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/06/29/serbias-nationalists-take-over-and-turn-to-russia/

Posted by Tripp on Sat, 30 Jun 2012 05:38 | #

What is the White Zion idea, Haller?

You’ve never explained it.

Is it any different from the basic idea of Covington’s Northwest thing?

Posted by Lurker on Sat, 30 Jun 2012 06:46 | #

Ive joined in on that DT thread, a bit late late to the part as usual.

Posted by Leon Haller on Sat, 30 Jun 2012 07:28 | #

Tripp,

You must be new. I’ve explained it dozens of times here, just a few threads back, again too.

Basically, I support Covington’s NWF, and all white secessionist movements. But it’s not going to happen, except sub rosa (ie, a NWF happens without secession, but because militant whites ingather to an area, and just make life miserable for nonwhites trying to live there, too). Taxes will still be reaped by the Feds, and real sovereignty will never be allowed, as the alien regime can’t let our people go, because it needs our slavery to finance them.

WZ involves WN ingathering, too, but in a sovereign nation that is small enough that we might be able to ‘conquer’ it demographically + electorally. My reasoning is that race liberalism innately appeals to a lot of whites, and that they, in combo with ever growing legions of nonwhites, will always be in the majority in all white nations (I may be wrong wrt the Slavic world, but I don’t want to live in Russia, nor would most WN Westerners), thus preventing a genuine WN govt from ever attaining power. Sure, WN will continue growing among our peoples, but always reactively, and too little, too late to take real power.

Long term, for our race to survive ever intensifying global miscegenationist pressures, we must have our own sovereign, defensible country dedicated Constitutionally to white perpetuity. I think this will only happen if the patriotic WN minorities from everywhere emigrate to a common homeland, one small enough that we can come to dominate (like, eg, the Cubans in Miami, Mexicans in Brownsville, etc).

Many here scoff at my idea, but no one to my mind has ever convincingly shown how or where a WN govt will be able to come to power - and then actually institute the coercive measures that will be necessary to ensure racial purity and perpetuity. Even if the FN attains power in France (not bloody likely, sadly), does anyone seriously imagine they will be able to repatriate their nonwhites? A FN govt might be able to stop new immigration, and deport non-citizens, but that will be the most - and that’s not nearly enough to save White France over the long haul.

Posted by Beppo on Sat, 30 Jun 2012 15:40 | #

I don’t want to register to post. Otherwise I would. Some of you need to put those demons in their place. They know they are advocating for White genocide, and that makes them happy. They have no souls.

Posted by Wolf on Sat, 30 Jun 2012 17:17 | #

Quite a substantial proportion of South Americans are of unmixed Spanish heritage, that is that they are white and quietly view themselves as superior to the mixed Hispanic population.

It might be a good idea for the Anglo-Americans to seek some allegiance with this group; who themselves are starting to feel politically marginalised.

Posted by Silver on Sat, 30 Jun 2012 21:48 | #

The only hope is White Zion. No one has ever disproved this.

I would say that I have.  And I think the sum of Hunter Wallace’s thoughts have cast grave doubt on it.

Firstly, and very importantly, you’ve never explained just how agreement could be reached on where to relocate to.  It may seem a trifling detail, especially when you’re trying only to gain intellectual commitment to the idea, but ultimately I think it could well prove your undoing.

Secondly, with respect to it being the “only hope,” I think you’re dead wrong.  There is a massive identitarian constituency out there that I believe would be more than happy to simultaneously work with WNs as well as—this is crucial—agree to part ways with you (this ain’t no “hispanic model”).  Two reasons that I suspect you disagree with this: (1) Your belief that whites are perfection personified, so nobody would ever willingly separate from them; (2) your antagonism towards non-whites, ie the goal should properly be “payback” for all the grief they’ve caused you but first things first.

Posted by CFE on Sun, 01 Jul 2012 01:31 | #

Haller:

“When are whites going to wake up from their dispossession…

...when they should be dispossessing themselves.

Posted by Graham_Lister on Sun, 01 Jul 2012 10:58 | #

Part of the falsity of elitist multi-culturalist liberalism resides in the tension between content and form which characterized already one of the first great ideological project of liberal-modernity, namely tolerant universalism, but in the form of freemasonry: the doctrine of freemasonry (the universal brotherhood of all men based on the light of Reason) clearly clashes with its form of expression and organization (a tiny secret society with its rituals of initiation). The very form of expression and articulation of freemasonry belies its ‘positive’ doctrine. In a strictly homologous way, the contemporary ‘politically correct’ liberal attitude which perceives itself as surpassing the limitations of its ethnic identity (‘citizen of the world’ without anchors in any particular ethnic community), functions within its own society, as a narrow elitist upper-middle-class circle clearly opposing itself to the majority of common people, despised for being caught in their ‘narrow’ ethnic or community confines thus being on the ‘wrong’ side of history. So as much as providing the adopter with a feeling of self-righteous moral superiority (always enjoyable), it also ‘proves’ ones elevated status as being ‘progressive’ and on the ‘right’ side of history. All delusions obviously, but with a very powerful set of emotional pay-offs for those in the grip of them.

Posted by Leon Haller on Mon, 02 Jul 2012 08:00 | #

Silver,

Agreement doesn’t have to be comprehensive. One stream can head to Australia (maybe we’ll be neighbors, Silv?! haha), another to Uruguay, another Estonia, and so forth (well, not too many places - but I doubt seriously that more than two WZ/WN migratory streams will ever get underway). Over time, one or another will be more successful, and people will further ‘vote with their feet’ in its favor. What is important is engendering widespread WZ acceptance, and beginning the first ‘pioneer’ communities.

You’re wrong about #2, but dead on wrt me re #1. I don’t care about nonwhites too much, as long as they are all removed from Europe (so that Europe in effect becomes WZ again - the optimal scenario, and the one point on which I’m sure Dr. Lister et al. would agree with me), and stop victimizing me (whether through crime, special privileges, terrorist threats, or socialist voting) here in the USA. My main concern is with the survival of the West, which I interpret to require the survival of Euroman. I would be only too happy to let my European kinsfolk assume that burden; indeed, if they do so, they can be Nazis or communitarians or whatever they wish as far as I care. After all, their children can always reverse their errors of political economy (and even theology). And for me in the US, I can go back to being a pure libertarian, sleeping comfortably in the knowledge that even though my fatherland is doomed to become a mongrel cesspool, at least my people endure elsewhere.

But wrt #1, yeah, I see no evidence whatsoever that other races (and white liberals) will ever leave us white separatists alone. Why should they? We’re just too valuable. A viable WZ carved out of the US would attract so many white migrants over time that the liberal zones remaining would start experiencing even greater budgetary woes than they already are facing (look at past 30 year history of California).

Maybe the Powers will give us some nasty place like Utah, but that’s just not enough or good enough for WZ (Mormon successes notwithstanding).

Lister @12

I think what you describe is accurate, but the really interesting matter is how things came to be this way. What triggered the betrayal of the upper classes, such that they are more likely to embrace liberalism? I see the same phenomenon in the US, even among friends, and it baffles me no end. Jewish influence, perhaps? It certainly wasn’t Christian, at least not directly.

Posted by Bill on Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:32 | #

Telegraph announced yesterday the result of Census 2011:

Population surges by 3.7 million in a decade.

‘Telegraph View’ kicked off with this….

The population of England and Wales has undergone its biggest surge since records began after a decade of mass immigration and a baby boom, according to the 2011 census.

The main article continues….

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/9403344/Immigration-a-mature-debate-must-start-now.html

Immigration: a mature debate must start now
There could hardly be more damning testimony to the malign impact of the last government’s reckless policy of encouraging unfettered immigration than the 2011 Census

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenpolitics/population/9403215/Census-2011-population-surges-by-3.7-million-in-a-decade.html#dsq-comments

Both articles are taking comments.

As I write, the number of comments are registering 600+ on the first and 5000+ on the second.

I cannot recall an article garnering 5000+ comments before, but I could be wrong.

Could this be a defining moment or will the fast approaching Olympics consign all to the memory hole like Breivik?  The difference is, Breivik is not coming back - this debate is.

It is surprising how many well meaning patriots call for the destroying of the village in order to save it.

Who will empty our bedpans when we’re old?

Before commenting further, I will await any reaction from this comment.

PS. I think the Governor’s in there pitching.

Posted by Dan Dare on Thu, 19 Jul 2012 21:28 | #

GW noted:

The Act, by the way, sets a reasonably high bar to prosecution.  The Crown must be able to demonstrate not only the presence of language that might be threatening, abusive or insulting, but that racial hatred has been stirred up by same.  There has to be a linkage.  Further, Section 18 states:

A person who is not shown to have intended to stir up racial hatred is not guilty of an offence under this section if he did not intend his words or behaviour, or the written material, to be, and was not aware that it might be, threatening, abusive or insulting.

It is not easy to manufacture an intention to stir up racial hatred from an articulate presentation of the morality of survival.

Now Dan can come along and tell me that it is!

Still on ‘sabbatical’ at the moment GW, so this will be shorter than perhaps necessary, however the current iteration of the POA reads as follows:

18 Use of words or behaviour or display of written material..

(1)A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if— .

(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or .

(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.

So it is not necessary to show intention to stir up racial hatred, merely that the actions are likely to.

Curiously enough, since its original retooling to cover racial offences, the POA has always required that intention be shown, and it was only during the Thatcher era that the Act was expanded into its current form to include the ‘likely to’ provision.

[Part 3 of the ‘Discrimination’ series refers]

Be back quite soon.