Posted by Leon Haller on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 05:02 | #

I cannot find any actual vote percentages, but the NYT is calling it for “No” after a close fight. What did I predict at MR - “no by a squeaker”? [How did I call the Obama reelection, please recall? Mr. Haller is almost always right (sorry, arrogant, not good for making friends, but all too true)].

I really wanted to be wrong on this, however. EVERY time there is some little chance at a breakthrough somewhere over something - anything that would, however indirectly, challenge the corrupt Establishment that has fastened its claws across the whole white world (in a curious and wholly negative sense, we may say that the West has never been so united, at least at the elite level, and on the proposition of white suicide) - WP forces often come close, but we never win. Why is that?

I condemn the individualist ethical meta-narrative (although that explanation, by itself, is almost certainly inadequate). Also psychological inadequacy. Whites just cannot bring themselves to challenge the PTB, not on anything really significant. Most whites seem to be “inertial conservatives”, but exist on a racial scale of individualist >>> self-hating race traitor. This intersecting combination of “don’t rock the boat” cowardice (along with continued trust in authoritative institutions)  among the Right-leaning, and extreme racial self-abnegation if not hatred on the Left, is literally killing off the greatest civilization the world has yet seen.

We live in the most amazing and bizarre historical period yet.

Posted by Leon Haller on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 05:11 | #

Sorry, I had wanted to add that, as usual, the biggest victim in all this will be the English common man. There will be more sops for the Scots - autonomy, wealth transfers - and more tyranny and continued loss of self-rule for the English.

Perhaps the place to begin a serious WN movement among the English would be to start agitating for English secession and sovereignty. Is that possible? Yes, still vote for UKIP while internally pushing it to the Racial Right on immigration termination, but also, as part of the broadest possible anti-Establishment campaign, start working towards a referendum for English sovereignty. I know there were historical particulars behind this Scottish referendum which aren’t likely to get repeated, esp for the English. But why not start agitating for English independence? It’s another route to awakening the masses being herded to self-destruction.

And what better place to start this campaign than at MR? “Majority Rights” - indeed!

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 06:09 | #

What better place for the paid troll, Leon Haller, to promote a campaign to co-opt European-nativist interests and direct them back into the powers-that-be (e.g., through the UKIP)?

and “just how independent is UKIP itself?

http://www.identitariancongress.org/blog/2013/4/24/were-only-making-plans-for-nigel

The man wearing the pink shirt is billionaire James Beeland Rogers Jr., a business partner of George Soros, while the man with his arm around Farage is investment broker Peter Schiff. Also in the frame is Ron Paul. All in all, a very nice and cozy group shot that serves to remind us that independence from Europe may not necessarily mean independence for the UK.”....or for England.

When are you going to make the last post that you were offered here Leon?

Majority Rights already is, and has been, promoting independence for the native English (a fact that Leon has tried to sweep aside, bury, and now to co-opt). MR may step-up this campaign, but it will be WITHOUT Leon Haller.

Leon will be starting his own site promoting “White Zion”, Austrian School economics, Catholicism, warm-friendly relations with Jewish American professionals and mulatto women as a consolation to disenfranchised Whites who manage to hang-on.

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 08:20 | #

Martin Kettle puts the No victory down to the risk-averse, security-seeking female mind:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/19/scottish-independence-union-survived-put-away-flags

The win ... was decisive. It looks like a 54%-46% or thereabouts. That’s not as good as it looked like being a couple of months ago. But it’s a lot more decisive than the recent polls had hinted. Second, it was women who saved the union. In the polls, men were decisively in favour of yes. The yes campaign was in some sense a guy thing. Men wanted to make a break with the Scotland they inhabit. Women didn’t. Third, this was to a significant degree a class vote too. Richer Scotland stuck with the union — so no did very well in a lot of traditonal SNP areas. Poorer Scotland, Labour Scotland, slipped towards yes, handing Glasgow, Dundee and North Lanarkshire to the independence camp.

There will now be a hiatus for a few weeks while the Scottish Labour Establishment works out with the coalition government how to give the Scots the parliamentary powers and cash it promised during the late, desperate phase of its campaign.  Always lurking in the background is English discontent.  If they try a second time to dismember England into regions, or even to hive off English cities, they will be defeated.

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 08:47 | #

“Martin Kettle puts the No victory down to the risk-averse, security-seeking female mind”

That makes sense according to Carol Gilligan’s assessment of differing “moralities” between males and females in “In a Different Voice.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_a_Different_Voice

Women generally fear people separating, viewing moral order in terms of webs of caring relations.

Men generally fear people being forced together, viewing moral order in terms of rights and justice.

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 09:13 | #

Anthony Wells of YouGov puts the result down to “late swing (which is probably accounted for by Gordon Brown’s intervention, with free jam).  Wells doesn’t say whether women were particularly conspicuous among the change-voters.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9005

As I write there is still one council to declare, but the maths mean that the overall result is going to be Yes 45%, No 55%. So, how did the polls do?

The final pre-election polls had all tightly converged around the same figures – Yes 48%, No 52%, with every company was within one point of this. In fact the level of No support was three points higher than this. For a single poll a three point error would be within the margin of error, but every poll being off in the same direction suggests some systemic error.

A possibility is the shy noes/enthusiastic yesses we discussed before the referendum, but on the face of it a simpler explanation is just late swing. The YouGov recontact survey on the day, going back to the same people they interviewed in their final survey found enough movement between final survey to actually voting to take the figures to YES 46%, NO 54%, one point from the actual result and enough to explain the apparent divergence. From that it looks as though no was going to win anyway, but there was a further movement from yes to no when people actually got to the polling station.

Posted by Leon Haller on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 09:35 | #

What is wrong with Rpn Paul (from your perspective, he ought to be a hero - he was one of the Congressmen MOST antagonistic to the “special relationship” with Israel)? Peter Schiff is excellent when discussing economic fundamentals.

Prove that I am a “paid troll”. Or just keep repeating that crap, in the hopes that it will stick. Actually, I think there is a possibility that DanielS is some kind of troll, though an ineffective one. His mission was to infiltrate MR and so de-intellectualize it that all or almost of all of the best persons associated with it have fled (with a few who wouldn’t leave being driven away).

I think Daniel has such a “hard-on” for me because, at some deep level, he realizes that he is so very badly intellectually and cognitively outclassed. There is no other rational explanation. Anti-Christianity and willful economic ignorance are insufficient.

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 10:22 | #

Posted by Leon Haller on September 19, 2014, 04:35 AM | #

What is wrong with Rpn Paul (from your perspective, he ought to be a hero - he was one of the Congressmen MOST antagonistic to the “special relationship” with Israel)?

He is a libertarian, Austrian school (Jewish Objectivism - even named his son after Ayn Rand), little in the way of cultural accountability, throws one bone (end The Fed) from a platform that is known to fail or play into the hands of Jewish plutocrats and White sell-outs, lets Jewish elites, cultural corruptors off the hook unaccountable etc etc. kisses “anti-racist” ass, does nothing to stop immigration.

“Peter Schiff is excellent when discussing economic fundamentals.”

Is Jewish, a gold promoter. Gold is a Jewish game.

Prove that I am a “paid troll”.

If you are not, may as well be.

Or just keep repeating that crap, in the hopes that it will stick.

You roll in your own crap, no need to make it stick.

Actually, I think there is a possibility that DanielS is some kind of troll, though an ineffective one.

Not paid, not a troll, have not gotten our project off the ground yet, let alone having a track record that you can condemn (one of the key aspects of having the platform off the ground is having your trolling out of here).

“His mission was to infiltrate MR and so de-intellectualize it”

Sure. Anti-intellectual (for onlookers, see my last comment).

“that all or almost of all of the best persons associated with it have fled (with a few who wouldn’t leave being driven away).”

Nobody worthwhile has left on my account.

“I think Daniel has such a “hard-on” for me because, at some deep level, he realizes that he is so very badly intellectually and cognitively outclassed.”

Leon, I do not mind intelligent, educated people..people who know more than me about things…I welcome them IF they are on the same fundamental page and do not undermine our editorial platform.

There is no other rational explanation. Anti-Christianity and willful economic ignorance are insufficient.

You have continuously attempted to assert editorial prerogative here - Catholic, Jewish friendly, Austrian school perspective - a perspective which is far from MR’s. You have been asked (repeatedly) to leave and go to a site amenable to your views. There is no place for you or others to judge until we have taken our direction without your trolling interference. And even then, there is no place for you to judge us by criteria of yours which we are not trying to assimilate. There is every reason for you to start a website elsewhere, to your liking, UNLESS you are a troll who does not want people to hear from our perspective (which is at wide odds to yours).

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 10:38 | #

Nigel Farage’s post-Indyref pro-English line:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11108465/Nigel-Farage-England-ignored-in-Scottish-independence-debate.html

... a constitutional convention.

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 11:01 | #

The next opportunity to challenge the political Establishment will be on 14th October, when two Westminster by-elections will be held.  The important one is Clacton-on-Sea, where the former Conservative eurosceptic Douglas Carswell is defending a large majority and looks set to greatly increase it, becoming UKIP’s first elected MP:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clacton_by-election,_2014

The other one is Heywood & Middleton:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heywood_and_Middleton_by-election,_2014

Yes, that’s this Heywood:

http://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/two_hundred_vigilantes_in_revenge_attack_on_moslem_shops_in_heywood

The seat, which is being contested through the death of the sitting MP, looks safe for Labour.  UKIP only managed an entry-level perfomance in 2010.  The BNP, however, which took 7%, is not standing this time.  Given the collapse of the LibDems and the likely customary hemorrhage of votes from the Tories, the UKIP candidate could, perhaps should take second.  Obviously, a win would send shock waves through the entire system.

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 11:15 | #

Most native nationalists are hopeful that Farage will play at least the provisional role he might of independence from the EU; most have serious reservations about his platform, but despite that skepticism* wish him luck for at least that provisional function of rupture that will allow a means for true nationalism. Having followed Leon for a while, just about anything he endorses raises the antenna of suspicion of a means-in for the corrupt.

* To the extent skepticism of Farage might be exaggerated and he is rather sincerely concerned for English interests, wonderful. Perhaps he is the lesser of the evils, but it is for MR to maintain a vigil on native interests where Farage may be all too liberal and making concessions too large.

Posted by Leon Haller on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 11:40 | #

“Who is DanielS to define what MR is, or what perspectives it allows?” - Haller

I am the one who GW asked to take ownership of the site

- DanielS

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 13:41 | #

Meanwhile, children, the Tory peer and patron Lord Ashcroft, who runs his very own polling agency, has found evidence that neither women nor some late swing explains the No victory but a fear of losing Sterling:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/active/11109126/Fear-of-the-financial-future-turned-Scotland-away-from-independence.html

Losing the pound was the most important factor for Scottish voters as they rejected independence, according to polling carried out by the Conservative peer Lord Ashcroft in the aftermath of the referendum.

The poll suggests that Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond’s failed to convince voters that an independence Scotland would have a successful financial future.

In the hours after the polling stations closed, more than 2,000 people were asked what finally made up their mind after the months of sometimes bitter campaigning.

The polling provides an early snapshot of the decision-making process of the Scottish electorate.

In the end, it seemed the Scots took a prosaic approach to independence, with their decisions being driven by the risks associated with “the currency, EU membership, the economy, jobs and prices”.

For those who believe that it is (usually) the economy, stupid, this has the ring of truth.  A lot of us found it difficult to believe that the Yes Campaign, who have had decades to plan for this, really didn’t understand the macro-economics or have any kind of credible plan in place.

Posted by jamesUK on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 18:31 | #

@DanielS

He is a libertarian, Austrian school (Jewish Objectivism - even named his son after Ayn Rand)

Actually that’s not true that is said by idiots like Don Black whose own son went against him contacting the SPLC and denouncing the so called white nationalist movement. Lol!

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/29/derek-black-the-reluctant-racist-and-his-exit-from-white-nationalism.html

Rand is not named after Ayn Rand but is short for Randal.

Rand or Randal talking about his name. 

http://youtu.be/oD-R_OeP6tU

Posted by jamesUK on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 18:40 | #

What a bunch of cowards most Scots are that I knew they would not say yes as that would take balls and initiative that was not even close with the NO campaign winning by 10%.

At least England will keep George Galloway and the Respect Party.

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 19 Sep 2014 20:50 | #

Maybe not true that Ron named his son (who is worse than Ron) after Ayn Rand - a small point that you apparently wish to make into an important issue - and it may as well be true as the rest of it is true - Austrian school, objectivism, libertarianism, open borders, Martin Luther King Holiday, no account ..etc.

Posted by Radon on Sat, 20 Sep 2014 01:14 | #

The English make up 12% of the Scottish population and 3/4 of those voted ‘no’.

Posted by Guest Blogger on Sat, 20 Sep 2014 17:32 | #

Colin Liddell’s take on the vote

http://www.radixjournal.com/vanguard-radio/2014/9/20/the-wandering-scot

Posted by Leon Haller on Mon, 22 Sep 2014 11:46 | #

It may be useful for Leon to start a Catholic site somewhere else so that he can try to take Catholicism in a new, ethnocentric direction rather than the catastrophic, open borders direction and pro third world direction it has been on.

Leon, start a Catholic site somewhere else, go there and stay there.

MR has the prerogative to serve people who want to pursue moral orders more conducive to European E.G.I.

Posted by Guest Blogger on Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:55 | #

Christopher Pankhurst gives ten reasons to be optimistic about the referendum

http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/09/after-the-scottish-referendum/#more-49698

Posted by Guest Blogger on Tue, 23 Sep 2014 19:03 | #

Adrian Davies joins Richard Spencer to discuss the enduring nature of British political institutions—their ability to assimilate and mask radical change—as well as the potential for European identity in the 21st century

http://www.radixjournal.com/vanguard-radio/2014/9/20/britain-prevails

Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 01 Oct 2014 07:05 | #

I originally came to MR by invitation, and later stayed because I wanted to learn about European (and specifically British) efforts on race. I wish MR kept to a more European focus (I suspect others who have been participants here do as well).

On an apposite note, I was surprised that there has been no comment (that I have seen) mentioning the recent death of Ian Paisley. I liked him, despite his virulent and ignorant anti-Papism. I have always supported an independent Ulster. Where was he on nonwhite immigration? He always seemed like a very solid nationalist, at least from a view Stateside.

Posted by Guest Blogger on Wed, 01 Oct 2014 07:23 | #

“I originally came to MR by invitation,

But subsequently you have been asked to take your commentary elsewhere because your political/cultural views have been shown to be antagonistic and obstructive to MR’s direction. Nobody worth their salt wants to read ongoing comments that request that you take your concerns elsewhere, repetitious comments necessitated because you refuse to stop trolling here. It is hard to believe that you “don’t get it.” The far more plausible scenario is that you are a troll with an agenda to undermine and re-direct (misdirect) MR’s platform.

...“and later stayed because I wanted to learn about European (and specifically British) efforts on race.”

We will be bringing in European and specifically British Editors/Contributors when opportune.

Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 01 Oct 2014 07:38 | #

L.H. will be taking his views elsewhere. For those interested, he may be contacted at:

.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)