McKinstry again, this time on the global elite.

Posted by Guessedworker on Saturday, 23 August 2008 11:15.

Leo McKinstry, whose gutsy, journalistic war on our dissolution we admired last month and whose latest offering at the Irish Independent was linked to by snax yesterday, is back on the attack at the Daily Mail this morning.

Patriotism is back in fashion. With the Union flag flying high over Beijing after the golden success of our Olympic athletes, the British public has been given a rare opportunity to indulge in unbridled expressions of national pride.

Yet, in our ever more globalised world, instinctive patriotism is being diluted. The concept of nationhood has been undermined by mass immigration and the imposition of the dogma of multi-culturalism.

Our economy is increasingly tied up with the global financial system, dominated by multinational giants which see borders as irrelevant. Supra-national bodies, such as the UN and the EU, have a mounting influence over our political governance.

The idea of national interest is sliding towards the dustbin of history.

Only last month, in a rhetorical and extravagant speech to the Israeli parliament, Gordon Brown called on the nations of the world to ensure that our era becomes ‘the century of the global community’.

In one overblown passage, he pledged to ‘make a reality of the vision of a global society in which we create global civic institutions that turn words of friendship into bonds of human solidarity’.

Not to be outdone, David Cameron has joined this enthusiasm for earnest globalism.

During his controversial visit to Rwanda last summer, when there was severe flooding in his own Oxfordshire constituency, he claimed: ‘There is no domestic or foreign any more. In this world today, we are all in it together.’

Of course, this is the mainstream media, and both McKinstry and the headline writer dance tactfully around the true politics of nation here. The headline man gives us Death of patriotism: How national pride is ‘under threat by a global super-elite’. The picture editor provides us with an image of the Nigerian 400m runner Christine Ohurogu wrapped in a Union Jack. And this notwithstanding the fact that the other seventeen of Team GB’s gold medals todate have been won by native Britons (excepting one mixed-race member of a four-man gold-winning cycling team).

So, McKinstrey’s undiluted truth that “The concept of nationhood has been undermined by mass immigration and the imposition of the dogma of multi-culturalism” has to be finessed into an assault on British patriotism rather than the nationhood and very life of the English. A negress and a drug-cheat, who threatened the British Olympic Committee that she would run for Nigeria unless she was admitted to the British squad, has to be pressaged upon us as the source of our “national” pride.

The article has been triggered by a reading of David J. Rothkopf’s book, Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making. Rothkopf appears to be an insider Jew who is happy to spill some of the beans. He has done it before. His motivation, according to CFR member (and co-ethnic?) Anne-Marie Slaughter, writing in the Washington Post, is democratic:-

Superclass is written in part as a consciousness-raising exercise for members of the superclass themselves. Rothkopf worries that “the world they are making” is deeply unequal and ultimately unstable. He hopes that the current global elite will use their power to do more than egg each other on to high-profile philanthropy. Elites in radically unequal countries such as Chile, for instance, might decide to open their cozy circles of power to allow the emergence of a genuine middle class. New York bankers might realize that they can no longer peddle loans to developing countries in good times but then pressure the U.S. Treasury and the International Monetary Fund to bail out those same governments when they suddenly default on their debts (ensuring, of course, that the bankers get paid). The agribusinesses that reap billions from domestic subsidies in developed countries might consider the longer-term value of trade rather than aid for countries at the bottom of the global food chain.

My reading of that is: Rothkopf sees a fateful disconnect opening, not for the first time, between Jews in the power elite and the main body of the diaspore. While elite Jews are philanthropic towards their co-ethnics, their power and wealth are interests held in common with the Gulfstream gentiles. The kosher butcher in NY and the dentist in Desmoines can’t engage. Rothkopf, then, is worrying, worrying, worrying about the tribal caesura and, no doubt, about “consequences” in NY and Desmoines if and when it all goes horribly wrong. He hopes that a moderating middle-class (ie, Jewish non-elite) voice can be heard in the playground metropolis of Davos and among the faggotry of Bohemian Grove.

The consequences of globalism that McKinstrey is worrying about are certainly no less deadly. His predominant focus on mass population transfers into our racial heartland evinces a perfectly sound understanding that this is the weapon of European mass destruction. Still, to say it too plainly is to risk his career on a single word. I would guess that he must be looking over his shoulder, and watching and waiting for others - Peter Hitchins, perhaps, or Peter Oborne, or Philip Johnston at the Telegraph - to chip in with some strategic new frankness before he takes the next ground-breaking, taboo-breaking step.

Here’s the rest of McKinstry’s article in today’s Mail:-

As Brown argued, a central part of this globalist vision is the creation of a new corporate and political network which would operate far beyond the level of individual nations.

Such a structure used to be the goal of Utopians, who believed that harmony on Earth could be achieved only by embracing world government.

H. G. Wells, the science fiction writer and socialist philosopher, was a passionate advocate of a ‘permanent world congress’ and specialised international agencies which would spell the end of the nation state.

Patriotism, he believed, was ‘mere flag-waving with no constructive duties’.

The establishment of the United Nations in the aftermath of World War II was seen by some as a move towards world government, but in the decades that followed, national self-rule remained as powerful as ever, fuelled in no small part by the Cold War, which deepened divisions between East and West.

But in the opening years of the 21st century, we may now actually be heading towards the creation of an informal kind of world government. This development has been accompanied by no fanfare or official edict.

Yet, hidden from the cameras and the public, crucial decisions about our lives are being taken by a global elite which has no roots in any single country.

This international group of business leaders, bankers and politicians might not be the official world congress that H. G. Wells envisaged, but it is perhaps all the more influential precisely because it operates behind the scenes at remote conferences and clandestine meetings.

The nature of this global elite is revealed in a new book by the American writer and political analyst David Rothkopf.

In Superclass, which has attracted wide interest in the United States, he argues that there are 6,000 people in this unique set who wield growing influence over the six billion people on our planet.

Apart from the fact that this elite is mainly white and male, what really distinguishes its members are the twin characteristics of enormous power and unprecedented wealth.

Though many political leaders are included in Rothkopf’s 6,000-strong superclass, as well as the heads of the world’s two biggest religions, Islam and Christianity, the real power in the elite is derived not from formal office but from private enterprise.

Around two-thirds of its members are from commerce, such as the Mexican telecoms tycoon Carlos Slim Helu, one of the richest men in the world with a fortune worth more than £30billion.

Through his acumen, Helu now controls 94per cent of all Mexico’s landlines and 70per cent of his country’s internet market, a near monopoly that he has used to crush his competitors and boost his wealth to such an extent that his earnings last year were the equivalent of 8per cent of Mexico’s GDP.

The statistics concerning the riches of the global elite are staggering.

According to Rothkopf, the top 1 per cent of the world’s most prosperous people own 40per cent of the planet’s global wealth. Furthermore, the combined net worth of the 1,000 richest people in the world is twice that of the poorest 2.5 billion.

The massive influence of the bosses of the global multinationals is also reflected in the fact that at least a third of the world’s entire wealth — estimated to be worth £25trillion — is produced by just 250 companies.

As the process of globalisation accelerates, so the resources of the richest are becoming ever larger.

In Britain alone during the past 17 years, the super-rich have seen their income go up by an astonishing 600 per cent, at a time when retail prices increase by only 60 per cent.

The rise of the global elite has been made possible, in part, by the revolutionary changes in transport, communications and information technology over recent years.

Not only have these developments helped the rich and powerful transcend national boundaries, they have also reinforced the elite’s ability to distance itself from the public.

Equipped with their mobiles, bullet-proof limousines, luxury hotel suites and apartments, attendants, laptops and private jets, the superclass can move in a realm far beyond the gaze of ordinary citizens.

As Rothkopf points out, the Gulfstream private jet, costing around £28 million and customised to the user’s wishes, is the ultimate symbol of membership of the elite, treated by many executives ‘like very large BlackBerries’.

Whereas half the people of the world will never venture outside their own village during their lifetimes, the elite are continually whisked in luxury from one exclusive meeting to another.

The growth in private air travel has spurred the eagerness of the elite for their own conferences to discuss global affairs, such as the World Economic Forum at the snow-capped Swiss resort of Davos.

Like the elite itself, the annual Davos gathering is dominated by the major corporations, who each pay £150,000 in fees to support the forum — though politicians and celebrities are also keen attenders.

Typical of the latter group is the singer Bono, a veteran campaigner for Africa, who, like so many pop icons, manages to combine adolescent rebelliousness with insider status at the heart of the global Establishment, thanks to his wealth and fame.

Bono’s description of Davos as ‘fat cats in the snow’ might be more cutting if he were not one of the fattest cats on the celebrity circuit.

There have, of course, always been elites in every advanced society since the dawn of civilisation. The glories of ancient Rome and Athens were built on the achievements of a narrow patrician class, as was the Victorian British Empire.

But the crucial difference is that today’s global elite is not dedicated towards furthering any national interest, but the opposite.

Suspicious of nationalism, borders and sovereignty, it is driven by the desire to shape global economic forces for the furtherance of wealth creation, not least for themselves and their companies.

Sheltered from their own societies, they have more in common with each other than with people from their countries of origin.

Klaus Schwab, the founder of the Davos forum, argues that revolution in technology and markets means, ‘we are moving from a national dimension to a global dimension’, so new structures of international governance are inevitable.

The shift towards greater influence for the global elite can be seen all around us. In the world’s ten biggest companies, 60per cent of their revenues came from outside their countries of origin, and 59per cent of their workforces were employed overseas.

The same picture can be seen just by taking a stroll down one of the most exclusive streets in London, Kensington Palace Gardens, ‘one of the showcase addresses of the superclass’, to use Rothkopf’s words.

ONE of the homeowners there is the steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal, who is said to have paid £30million for his house in 2004. Also living in the street are the British property mogul Jonathan Hunt and the Russian Len Blavatnik, who made his billions in oil and aluminium.

The idea of a sinister global elite, controlling world events, has long been the stuff of conspiracy theories. Extreme anti-Semites, including Nazis and Islamic hardliners, have clung to the belief that behind Western capitalism is a worldwide Jewish conspiracy.

Others have warned of malign global plots by the Catholic Church, the Freemasons or the CIA.

David Icke, the former BBC presenter turned eccentric campaigner, has even claimed that the world is governed by a secretive grouping called the Illuminati or Babylonian Brotherhood, a cadre of alien reptilians who can take human form.

In contrast to this outlandish nonsense, Rothkopf does not see anything especially sinister or conspiratorial in the emergence of the new global superclass.

He points out that their membership changes regularly, partly due to varying performances by businesses, partly because of loss of political office.

There is no sense of this new group being a closed shop, unlike plutocracies of the past whose membership depended on birth.

None of the new elite is a tyrant or a dictator bent on upholding totalitarianism. In fact, many — such as Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft — are philanthropists.

Neverrtheless, it would be wrong to be too sanguine about the influence of the superclass.

No matter how allegedly benign it is, the new elite is utterly unaccountable.

The point of democracy is that leaders should be accountable for their decisions, giving the public the ultimate say over the government.

That process is bypassed by the new elitists as they huddle together at Davos or the World Bank or UN.

The former U.S. Secretary of the Navy John Lehman once joked, misquoting the historian Edward Gibbon: ‘Power corrupts. Absolute power… is kind of neat.’

This might have been said in jest, but the march of globalisation is destroying political representation.

We have seen within the EU how the unelected institutions of Brussels have made a mockery of this in their determination to create a federal superstate run by an unaccountable elite.

The recent Lisbon Treaty will only hasten the decline of the national freedoms by strengthening the centralist powers of the EU Commission.

Nor can it be said that the new elite has been a great success in running the global economy.

For all its supposed expertise, this new breed has dragged the developed world to the precipice of recession through its irresponsible decisions and failure to oversee global markets effectively.

Meanwhile, the vast disparities in wealth across the world continue to worsen, making the ostentatious wealth of the elitists appear all the more obscene.

Above all, the new elite runs counter to human nature in its indifference to nationhood.

The super-rich might not care about national loyalties, but most ordinary citizens do, as the joy over the Olympics proves.

Contrary to what globalist sophisticates might think, there is nothing unedifying or crude about patriotism. The need for a sense of belonging is one of the most natural of all human impulses. And it is a noble sentiment, signifying a concern for one’s fellow countrymen and women.

Vague talk about global citizenship can never be a substitute for genuine patriotism. In the end, the triumph of the superclass will only destroy our freedom, our democracy and our very identity.

Tags: Journalism

Comments:

Posted by Revolution Harry on Sat, 23 Aug 2008 15:43 | #

‘In contrast to this outlandish nonsense, Rothkopf does not see anything especially sinister or conspiratorial in the emergence of the new global superclass’.

This is pure distraction by Rothkopf. Whatever is going on it is most definitely not new or a loose collection of the global rich and powerful.

Researching what some call the Illuminati is far from easy. There are many bear traps (it’s quite possible David Icke’s fallen into one of these with his ‘reptilian’ theories, however I do reserve judgement) and smokescreens and it’s a challenge to come to any sort of firm conclusions. The membership of the ‘6000’ may change (when their usefulness is over) but that at the top of the pyramid (council of 300 and council of 13) is far more stable.

I’ve often wondered why the idea of a ‘New World Order’ hasn’t been investigated more on Majority Rights. It seems to me to be the very source of the mass immigration and national and cultural destruction we are witnessing. Nothing is happening by chance, it’s all planned. Focussing on the ‘Jews’ also seems more than a little short sighted to me. A number of those involved in the ‘Great Work’ or the conspiratorial plans for a ‘One World Government’ may well appear to be Jewish but I’m far from convinced they are practicing. The theory, of course, is that the elites of the ‘Illuminati’ are actually worshippers of Lucifer. A look at their record of war, starvation, suppression, lies, greed, materialism etc tends to bear this out. If the theories are correct then Israel (or at least Jerusalem; the rest of the country may not be so lucky in the World War 3 that’s planned) is being protected not as a Jewish homeland but as the centre of either the World Government or World Religion or both. The point I’m trying to make is that the vast majority of Jews are every bit as much victims as we are in this evil and Satanic plot. They are manipulated and conditioned just as we are, though in some different ways.

So much of the manipulation is designed to divide and rule (diversity, multiculturism). I fully expect at some point in the future the flimsy sticking plaster holding ‘us’ together will be removed. David Icke has come up with a very good phrase, always worth remembering, which is ‘problem, reaction, solution’. It’s a classic ploy constantly used by the elites. Manipulate a problem into existence (being careful to make sure someone else is blamed for it), wait for the reaction (by the public), then have a solution ready and waiting. My guess is that the Muslims are being built up to play a future role in something along these lines. One thing’s for sure, the ‘solution’ will be less freedom and more power to the State, if possible on a global (EU, UN, NATO etc) level.

If David Icke’s is not to your taste can I recommend a Scottish ex-pat, now living in Canada, called Alan Watt. He’s done some incredibly good research on all aspects of the elite agenda. Sad to say it isn’t pretty. If they prevail the future isn’t looking good for those of us at the bottom of the pyramid. Here, it seems to me, is an opportunity. Can we resist (if possible; Islam, for example, is the deadliest of all the mind control programmes/religions ever devised) the temptations of the ‘divide and rule’ tactics. If we can expose the New World Order agenda for what it is we can show those of other ethnic groups that we have a common enemy. Explain also how they are being used to destroy us as a race and a culture and the very same force would do the same to them if necessary. If those who have looked closely at ‘Agenda 21’ are to be believed then the aim is to reduce the population from around 6 billion to 500 million. One of the methods for doing this is ‘codex alimentarius’ which will see our food messed with even more as well as nutrients being classified as toxins. The main victims will be Africans and Asians. Could our future salvation be in an appeal for them to understand that the reason we are fighting for our homeland is because we value all diversity, including theirs and that national sovereignty is an important bulwark against future attempts to enslave mankind such as the one we are facing? I perhaps haven’t expressed this very well because I have to go out and I’m rushing a little, but I hope you get the general idea.

Two more quick points. There’s a vague idea that this whole agenda is centred on the US. It seems not. If there is a centre then it’s here in the City of London. I read one of David Icke’s books once and in it he tells of something a psychic told him. He explained that the world is very like a human body, crisscrossed with energy grids (ley lines) and that the British Isles were a hub of the energies that surround the world. I’ve no idea if that’s true but nobody needs to tell me how special these islands are. Perhaps if we can find a way to defeat them here then the centre of their web is destroyed and they’ll fall apart everywhere. With the dead hand of the elites removed then all the countries of the world will be free. Encouragement can be given for those immigrants to return to their homes and reduce the overcrowding on this small island of ours. Again there’s a idea of a tactic struggling to get out but I haven’t the time to explain it fully. All I do know is that any attempt at violence is what they are after and is doomed to failure. We need to be far cleverer than that.

The last point is that it’s intelligence that will defeat the ‘Illuminati’ (or whatever you want to call them) and that’s where you on this forum come in. The population has been intentionally dumbed down by TV, food additives, drugs (legal and illegal; they control both) and an appalling education system. They need salvation. However it’s not intelligence alone it’s also wisdom that’s required. A wisdom that identifies the correct enemy and finds inventive and non violent ways to defeat him.

Alan Watt
http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/

Agenda 21
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETz4rMDwD_M

Codex Alimentarius
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5266884912495233634

To see how this conspiracy is financed here’s a simple video explaining the basics of the banking scam.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279

Posted by melba peachtoast on Sat, 23 Aug 2008 20:30 | #

Yes. Yes, that seems likely. The reptile story is just a cover for the far more shocking truth.

(dimensionshifting wallabies)

Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 24 Aug 2008 00:16 | #

“I’ve often wondered why the idea of a ‘New World Order’ hasn’t been investigated more on Majority Rights. It seems to me to be the very source of the mass immigration and national and cultural destruction we are witnessing. Nothing is happening by chance, it’s all planned. Focusing on the ‘Jews’ also seems more than a little short sighted to me.” -Revolution Harry

Harry, Harry, Harry. In Icke’s scenario the reptiles fulfill the same function that ‘the Jews’ do in overly reductionist WN analysis. But, lets assume the reptiles are behind this all. Why do they do what they do? Because they are ‘evil’ and that’s just what ‘evil’ reptiles do? Or is it about resource competition to improve their reproductive fitness and this just happens to be their group evolutionary strategy of getting it done? Well, if someone has to fit the bill why not ‘the Jews’? Ever heard of an ‘infinite regress’? The buck has got to stop somewhere? BTW, who is it who is pulling the reptiles strings? AND why don’t the reptiles just stop fucking around and come in with the flying saucers and zap us War of the Worlds style?

Icke is a purveyor of abject, new age, occultist nonsense. I don’t know what his bag is: does he honestly believe his rubbish? Or is he just a scumbag con-man who preys upon the weak-minded and the credulous who lack the manly ‘will to power’ to stare into the ‘abyss’ of our coming racial extinction without flinching?

Posted by Al Ross on Sun, 24 Aug 2008 02:15 | #

Note the way in which McKinstry equates belief in the reality of Jewish wealth and power’s malignity, (e.g. the Jew Neo-Con/Wall Street/Clinton State Dept axis mobilized to rob Russia and enrich the all-Jewish oligarchy - http://www.russians.org/williamson_testimony.htm) with nonsense like David Icke’s deranged vapourings.

On a pedantic note, I think McKinstry’s mention of Edward Gibbon’s being the originator of the “power corrupts” quote may be mistaken. I believe it was Lord Acton who coined this blinding flash of the obvious.

Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 24 Aug 2008 03:44 | #

McKinstry is no better than the faileo-‘tards over at Takislag; fence-sitting fags all. They need to be mercilessly kicked in the ass until they fall onto our side of the divide. Sheppard and Whittle risked it all for our people. How about you McKinstry? Have your balls been cut off? Be a man.

Posted by Diamed on Sun, 24 Aug 2008 07:14 | #

This is a great article. I too am concerned about the concentration of wealth and power into the hands of a few men who have been trained to have no loyalty to anyone or anything above themselves. Touting capitalism, individualism, and freedom, these few thousand completely control the lives of billions of people who are too poor to do anything but accept employment/trade/charity on their terms. The hypocrisy never occurs to them that they are the most powerful strongmen to have ever existed on earth, and this time there are no opposing columns which might constrain them, all the columns are in the same bag together. Either we gain control back over them and actually rule the policies and choices that matter to the world most, or they will rule over us in the same genocidal totalitarian fashion they have for the last 50 years.

“According to Rothkopf, the top 1 per cent of the world’s most prosperous people own 40per cent of the planet’s global wealth. Furthermore, the combined net worth of the 1,000 richest people in the world is twice that of the poorest 2.5 billion.”

This is the clincher. No one should ever be that rich. Period.

Posted by Bill on Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:58 | #

I didn’t watch any of the Olympics, I refuse to take part in their bread and circus distractions, I did find it kinda odd though, to see the BCC and the Daily Mail cheering to the rafters the very thing they abhor and spend most of their time planning for destruction, namely the British nation and its people.

Which is all very interesting really. Before the games, did the MSM all sit round a table and discuss how they were going to play (handle) the Olympic Games, after all it must have presented something of a dilemma, how could they approve, let alone cheer to the rafters something they all hate - the nation state and its peoples?

The dogma of multiculturalism (as McKinstry puts it) is the choice weapon of the multi-cults to deliver the final blow to Western civilisation, so it will be interesting to see how the MSM will play (handle) many more future competitions that are based on nothing less than international competition, such as the World cup, cricket, golf, sailing athletics and all the rest. How can they, (MSM) continue to promote, as bread and circus to the masses, inter nation state competition, whilst all the time railing and destroying the very notion - that the nation state itself is evil?

It’s the same with Brown, I’m hearing that he is spending his vacation dreaming up what it is to British, at the same time going round telling us, soon we will all be citizens of the world. Duh!

More unintended consequences or what? How is it possible to get into the minds of such people? Maybe its as Harry says, they’re a bunch of shape shifting lizards.

McKinstry’s take on the NWO seems to be distilled through the lens in purely economic terms, with which he seems pretty cool, (well, not too fussed) he conveniently omits to tell us that globalisation is a two headed hydra and the opposite side to the economic is Postmodern Libralism in the form of Political Correctness and Cultural Marxism. Why didn’t he mention that?

All very Littlejohn.

Ps. Maybe Harry’s right, perhaps MR should discuss NWO related issues more, (tone down the other a bit,) then maybe MR might attract more interest from those visitors seeking help – just a thought.

Posted by onetwothree on Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:26 | #

OFFTOPIC:

Just got done watching the disgusting spectacle of an America audience chanting “USA” to an all-black team as they barely beat Spain. I would have been chanting “ESP”, but…oh, well. Lost cause, I guess.

Posted by Bill on Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:50 | #

Acres of column inches this morning.

Roll on 2012 - Where will we be by then?

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:13 | #

cc,

By their “courage”, Shepherd and Whittle removed themselves from the equation. That was not intelligent or helpful.

McKinstry is not alone among MSM journalists in trying to push the envelope. But he is the most advanced of them (their number does not include Littlejohn, of course). Whether any of them understands the Issue in much depth is debatable, but not really the point. They can’t publish the harder end of it anyway.

There is progress here. Views are being aired, subjects broached, that would have been rigorously excluded from public discourse even two or three years ago. This has to be welcomed.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:05 | #

The subject I want broached in the MSM is this: 1) there is a race (forget the “race does not exist” smokescreen intended by the Jews to cover their national race-change operation, that canard’s not flying any more; it never flew; so drop it and do not ever again insult our intelligence with it); 2) there is a race, and that race is being forcibly changed by the government which, under the control of élites either uncaring or outright hostile to the people, refuses to honor the people’s clear and obvious wish not to have their race changed; 3) we the people don’t like that; 4) we want it stopped; 5) if it’s not stopped things are going to go from bad to worse (use your imagination; in fact, let it run wild); 6) we demand that PC end so all this can be brought out in the open, discussed freely (including by people like Sheppard and Whittle), and the people’s wishes taken into account.

That’s what I want broached in the MSM.

It’s not rocket science:

<u>HANDS!!! OFF!!! THE!!! RACE!!!</u>

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 26 Aug 2008 12:27 | #

Pearls of wisdom:

”To call free-market neoconservatives ‘rightists’ is to miss the point that they are merely racial/cultural Marxists who figured out that economic Marxism doesn’t work, and that they need a semi-robust economy to shower the masses with trinkets in order to have them accept their own race-replacement.”

File that under “Bullseye.”

Posted by Bill on Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:24 | #

Fred above.

PC cultural Marxism (control) in tandem with Capitalist Corporate Right (profits) .

IOW, a sedated, controlled, compliant, consumer base - supplying profits to the big boyz. - very neat

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 26 Aug 2008 17:03 | #

An Irish Catholic immigrant from the Republic who, as an American citizen, conducted himself with intergrity:

( http://www.vdare.com/letters/tl_082508.htm )

My father was born in Ireland in 1901, served in the Irish Republican Army, fought in the Irish Civil War to overthrow the English-puppet Quisling Collins, worked laying railroad tracks in this country [the U.S.], and respected and would have been glad to vote for Senator Robert A. Taft if he had been nominated for the presidency of this country. [Scroob note: Taft was what today would be closest to, probably, a Pat Buchanan Republican.]

Needless to say a man with that amount of integrity never would have and never did vote for any Kennedy. Nor did my father vote for any other liberal, especially those in the guise of Republicans.

I hold my father up as a role model for all Americans who want to rise above narrow parochial, racial, and religious self-interests.

(Emphasis added)

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 26 Aug 2008 20:47 | #

Excellent shot across the E.U.’s bow by an Irish cardinal,

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/0825/1219616651409.html ,

but not a word about the current largely E.U.-imposed genocide of the Irish. Maybe in future salvos the subject of this unprecedented genocide will be broached? We can always hope.

(Hat tip: http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3474 )

Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:44 | #

No wonder he would vote for Taft. He was an anti-nativist, pro-Zionist, immigrant loving bastard.

Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 26 Aug 2008 22:06 | #

The race replacers that shall not be named. After all it’s not race-replacement, just white nationalism.

Unions had strong reasons for wanting a foothold within the shops. While safety was not a high priority for any industry in the early 20th century, railroading was particularly dangerous and working conditions were sometimes deplorable. Men working in the foundries complained of their green urine and sweat, and many died from copper poisoning. The air in the erecting shops always had the appearance of being smoky because asbestos floated through the air workers breathed. Before 1900 six out of ten men working as brakemen were killed or injured each year. Furloughs also put railroaders out of work. Tom Lynch, a shop worker, told of how each man had several skills to fall back on when out of work. While some complained about having to use these skills to eke out a living when laid off, Tom did not, declaring, “Hell, I felt safer working in the coal mines than I did on the shop floors!”

Conditions were even worse for the new immigrant workers who began to enter Altoona’s labor force in the early decades of the 20th century. Throughout the 19th century the PRR kept the city white, Protestant, and ethnically centered on the “traditional” Pennsylvania family of English, Scottish, and German descent. The PRR sought to keep Altoona homogeneous by preventing immigrant trains traveling from eastern ports inland to the nation’s major industrial cities from debarking passengers in Altoona.

By the early 20th century, though, the need for labor outweighed any desire for homogeneity. The PRR began to accept and even recruit workers from eastern and southern Europe and African Americans from eastern cities and the South. These new workers often had to accept the least desirable or most dangerous jobs.

According to one popular expression, “You could tell the destiny of a man by the ring on his finger.” If the worker had a Knights of Columbus ring he was destined to be a laborer all his life. However, if the ring was a Mason’s, his future would be in management. Promotions often were based on connections, ethnicity, and race, not on experience and skill. With dangerous working conditions and poor advancement opportunities, immigrant and migrant railroad workers joined the fight against the company-controlled unions and worked to replace them with more effective unions. Company unions continued, though, until 1934, when the Railway Act of 1926 was amended and company unions outlawed. Altoona workers’ sense of independence, however, led many railroaders to choose independent unions even in the early years of the labor movement.

Tensions existed among laborers as well as between labor and management. Xenophobia and racism were pervasive, as it was throughout the nation. The Ku Klux Klan marched through the city in protest over the perceived threat presented by the newly arrived Catholic “Papists.” Each neighborhood had its street gangs, and violence was common. When the PRR furloughed 2,100 workers in 1909, ethnic and economic tensions culminated in a riot. The Altoona Mirror headlines were big and bold. The Mirror reported that a large group of Italian workers converged on a city street-paving company looking for jobs. On the following day the headlines reported a riot that ensued when several hundred furloughed PRR workers who had been long-time residents of the city clashed with the Italians, believing they were more entitled to the available jobs.

While working and living conditions were often difficult, as was the case in many cities, successive groups of immigrants found refuge among others of their own ethnic, religious, and racial origin. The influx of new immigrant and migrant workers began to change the landscape of Altoona. New ethnic neighborhoods formed: Little Italy, Jew Hill, Boogie Bend, Bloody Eighth, and Dutch Hill. Each ethnic group established churches of its own, conducted in its own tongue: Gaelic, Italian, Hungarian, and so forth. By 1936 there were 80 different churches in the city of 80,000. The church was the single most important organization, outside of the PRR, in the lives of most laborers. That same year there were 136 taverns and pubs within the city limits, which provided meeting places for friends, family, and organizations for the discussion of labor and management issues, social causes, neighborhood disputes, and politics.

The cultural practices of Altoona’s residents also began to change. “Hopin’ John” (African American rice and black-eyed peas) found its way onto the dinner table, as did gnocchi (Italian pasta) and haluski (Polish cabbage and noodles). Within a generation “healers” began working across cultural lines and storytellers found favor no matter what their ethnic/racial background. Various cultural practices gradually became a part of the larger culture, in some instances changing altogether and in others maintaining their distinctive character.

Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 26 Aug 2008 22:16 | #

84 years later, town’s stand against KKK recalled

Let’s celebrate the extinction/replacement of the founding “American”. Europeans are homogeneous. Altoona’s a prime example. Nothing much changed after the arrival of mass eastern and southern European immigration, did it?

Plans are in the works by local historians to dedicate a memorial later this month to the mostly Catholic residents who stood up to turn fire hoses on the 400 armed Klansmen who marched through their town.

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 27 Aug 2008 02:08 | #

Thank you, Fred, for the interesting ‘Irish Times’ link. I would question, however, whether the cardinal is entirely correct in severely discounting the activist Christians’ influence, especially in the area of race replacement. An illustration of this must surely be the appearance of a Nigger salvation expert called Dr Derrick Campbell (with a PhD in that most non-empirical of subjects Christian Theology) whose dissembling and snivelling pronouncements about ‘injustice’ can be mocked and jeered at what was once a fine Conservative newspaper (London’s Daily Telegraph). http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2008/08/government_is_l.php

Campbells’ sentiments are but a natural expression of his professed Christian, underdog-supporting faith (his personal hero is the Jewish King David who was so merciless towards the Chosenites’ Gentile foes that even Yahweh considered him unworthy to build the first Jerusalem temple, preferring to allot the task to David’s son Solomon) as advertised at
http://blackbirminghamhistory.com/heroes/dr-derrick-campbell.html

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 27 Aug 2008 02:17 | #

Erratum. http://birminghamblackhistory.com/heroes/dr-derrick-campbell.html

This influential Christian gentleman is an official adviser to the UK government, dont forget.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 27 Aug 2008 23:45 | #

The Realist:

The state of the white race in the West confronts us with a horror unprecedented in the annals of human history. Demographers predict whites will be a minority in the United States in 40 years and in Western Europe shortly after. Since the West condones interracial breeding, there is a serious prospect that the white race as we know it will disappear in the next two or three centuries.

An even more urgent threat is that whites will lose political control over their ancestral homelands and be put at the mercy of alien races who are unfriendly to our people.

Because culture is rooted in biology, the subjugation or extinction of the white race may well mean the death of Western culture and its fundamental ideals of individualism, pluralism, tolerance, and the rule of law. If the white West is not preserved, it is quite possible that what we today call the Third World will become the whole world, and the light of humanity and progress will be extinguished.

This prospect, while fearsome enough, does not express the full horror of our plight. What gives the situation of whites its uniquely dreadful and grotesque cast is that it is taboo for us to voice any desire for our continued existence. Our current cultural establishment labels “racism” and “hatred” any word of complaint that whites may breathe about their impending subjugation and obliteration. These labels are a slander wicked almost beyond imagining. Indeed, the hatred is on the side of the people who express indifference towards or even eagerness for the destruction of a people.

[Read more]

I didn’t read the whole thing, I dunno why — too much of it is too tame or something; too oblique. The parts I did read are a mixture of “quite good” and “his intentions are good but he’s not quite on the right track.”

A couple of thoughts:

“As commentator Ilana Mercer put it, ‘Greater diversity equals more misery.’ “ (—from the log entry)

Not for Jews. For Jews in Euro societies, greater diversity means the pinnacle of delight, maximum satisfaction, greatest opportunity for Jewish happiness. For Jews, ethnically homogeneous Euro societies equal misery. Ask either of the Jews who post at Inverted World: “White, Jewish, and Proud,” or “Jewish Racial Realist.” (Only two??? Right, once the Jews find out The Realist isn’t mad at them, doesn’t blame them for anything, they’ll come flocking to his site ... any day now ............)

That’s why Jews and Euros should live apart: what makes one happy makes the other miserable and vice-versa. Why force miseries on each other then, each finding happiness only when the other feels miserable? That’s insane. Just separate. There’s plenty of good land for Jews to be given for their very own to settle on, where they won’t be perpetually plunging the knife in the Euro back and Euros won’t be perpetually resenting getting knifed in the back by the Jews.

“the distrust and misery bred by racial diversity,” (—idem)

The Jews in Euro societies feel distrust and misery when surrounded by Euro ethnoracial homogeneity and blessed relief and deep happiness when surrounded by the complete demographic substitution of Third World Mystery Meat for Euros.

“the subjugation or extinction of the white race may well mean the death of Western culture and its fundamental ideals of individualism, pluralism, tolerance, and the rule of law.”

“Pluralism”??? One of Western culture’s “fundamental ideals”??? Isn’t thinking like this what got us into this mess in the first place, Realist? Gee, ... uhhhh .... do you think this could use a little editing? ......

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 28 Aug 2008 01:12 | #

Spot on, Fred.

Ilana Mercer is the Jewish lady who had a spot of bother with a negro on the Metro a couple of years back. I think he got a bit fresh with her. Anyhow, she was very aggressive towards the WNs who visited her website to point out that, as a sort-of right-winger-cum-libertarian, she approved of the diversity from which she was now suffering, and would she care to change her mind.

Jobling is running a Jewish website, so I guess Ilana has changed her mind, but not her religion.

Posted by Matra on Thu, 28 Aug 2008 01:54 | #

Ilana Mercer is the Jewish lady who had a spot of bother with a negro on the Metro a couple of years back.

I think you’re mixing her up with some other female libertarian. Mercer is the South African Jew who lives in either the US or Canada and opposes (I think) immigration.

Is this the incident you’re thinking of?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:29 | #

Ilana Mercer is indeed an ally: she opposes excessive incompatible immigration into the Eurosphere.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:45 | #

Ilana in that quote I posted was expressing her own view, to the effect that “greater diversity equaled more misery.” That of course is our view here, too. She’s an ally in that sense (certainly not in others). In my comment I was only saying that view of hers, which holds for all normal Euros, doesn’t hold for Jews (yes she’s Jewish but on that subject she’s an ultra-miniscule exception among her tribe, 99.99997% of whom badly want race-replacement of Euros all over the Eurosphere).

Posted by Bill on Thu, 28 Aug 2008 09:54 | #

The Realist

“Since the West condones interracial breeding, there is a serious prospect that the white race as we know it will disappear in the next two or three centuries.”.......

“If the white West is not preserved, it is quite possible that what we today call the Third World will become the whole world, and the light of humanity and progress will be extinguished.”.......

Posted by Fred Scrooby Wedenesday, August 27, 2008 at 10:45 PM.

Tolerance is suicide! What do you do when the tolerable becomes (in your face) intolerable?

Taken at face value Liberalism is a suicide cult, white’s suicide that is. Of course, they don’t believe in any of this rubbish as it is nothing but a psychological straight-jacket with which to psyche whites into paralysis - and ultimate suicide.

I’ve just skimmed through a review of Camp of the Saints…” If we let them in we die, if we keep them out, they die.”

For some time now I have concluded, that by extension, liberalism will lead to a world without humans.

Intentional or unintended consequences?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 28 Aug 2008 12:44 | #

Bonzo was showing us some Jewish beauties the other day ... Look at that photo of Ilana, Bonzo ... (link in my comment three above). (Another is Nigella Lawson, by the way.)

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 28 Aug 2008 12:54 | #

Of course the only reason Melba doesn’t head that particular list of beauties is she’s not Jewish, otherwise she’d be right at the top (some of her wallabies are Jewish, though ... and one or two of her wombats have been seen in the long black frock-coats, black wide-brimmed hats, and wearing their hair in side-curls, I believe ...). Where beauty is concerned, Melba heads her own list; is in a class entirely of her own creation, the WWGMWTP (“Women Who Grace MR.com With Their Presence”), the world’s most beautiful females by far.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 31 Aug 2008 04:23 | #

”Come you English, stop your sobbing, stop your mourning, stop your grieving, learn the lesson well, defend yourselves or lose all that you have, and all that you love, forevermore.”

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 31 Aug 2008 04:47 | #

JWH summarizes a big part of what’s going on:

It is reasonable to assert that in a so-called “free democracy,” “the people” need to make informed decisions on a wide variety of important issues. It also stands to reason that in order to make such decisions, they need to discuss, hear, read, and understand a diverse set of opinions and analyses on these issues - opinions and analyses covering the full spectrum of thought. Some of these ideas will be considered “mainstream” and others “extremist,” but they all need their fair time in the sociopolitical marketplace, to be considered, debated, discussed, challenged, and evaluated. Furthermore, for all the citizens of the nation to accept the outcome of this process and to believe in its legitimacy, they need to have the ability to freely express their opinions - no matter how “controversial” or “extremist” - as part of this process. After all, you cannot expect people to truly accept the outcome of a debate in which only the opposition was allowed to express and promote their viewpoints. Such a skewed system would fairly be considered non-democratic and unfree. In addition, one can note that if the consensus ends up being wrong, the only way it can be corrected in the future is if the topic is open to free critique and debate.

What may well be the most important issue facing any nation is what that nation will be in the present and, most importantly, in the future. Here, issues of race, demographics, immigration, and culture are paramount. Will the nation consist of population mix “A” with culture “X,” or will it consist of population mix “B” with culture “Y?” Is there anything truly more important than that? What? Tax rates? Abortion? Foreign policy? No - all those issues are secondary, and are in fact themselves influenced by the primary issue of national composition, for different peoples and different cultures will exhibit different preferences for all these secondary issues that “the people” are usually so concerned about.

Now, demographic issues of race, immigration, culture are likely to be controversial. There really isn’t any way of expressing preferences along these lines that will not “offend” and “outrage” the over-sensitive. However, that’s a small price to pay for having these crucial decisions made in an atmosphere of free inquiry and open debate.

Unfortunately, there are vested interests who do not wish to allow Western populations to have the right to openly and freely discuss and debate these topics, for fear that the Westerners will reasonably opt to support their own survival and reject policies that would lead to their diminishment, displacement, and demise.

These vested interests include Third World peoples who wish unlimited access to Western nations and who wish to displace the Westerners and take Western lands and Western wealth for themselves. Then there are Western businessmen, selfishly interested in low-wage labor, and Western leftists equally selfishly interested in Third World voters. There are also many masochistic guilt-ridden Westerners who have a twisted conviction that all will be all right with the world if the West ceases to be. And there are others, including globalists and their desire to erase ethnic, racial, national, and cultural particularisms in favor of world government. Finally, there are some motivated simply by a hatred towards Western peoples and a strong desire to see such peoples destroyed.

This coalition of anti-Western forces do not want to allow Westerners the right to decide their own destiny in a free, open, and democratic manner. They want to outlaw, to criminalize, all expressions of Western self-interest and the desire of Western peoples to survive, prosper, and enjoy demographic and cultural continuity in their own homelands. Thus, to achieve this censorship, certain pro-Western positions are labelled with the emotion-laden pejorative terms of “hate,” “racism,” and “xenophobia” - “horrors” that must be suppressed with the force of law. The healthy and normal desire of Western peoples to survive is transformed into a morally reprehensible crime against humanity, and the overly altruistic and naive Western peoples allow themselves to be fooled by such mendacious rhetoric. Therefore, Westerners allow self-interested parties to establish totalitarian systems of censorship and repression, in which the mere dissemination of legitimate sociopolitical ideas is considered a “crime” on the level of “child pornography” and is talked about as if it were a prelude to genocide.

Of course, preventing Westerners from defending their interests will lead to genocide - that of the Westerners. But that’s the whole point of the process from the standpoint of the censors.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:37 | #

The way 16-year-old Ben Kinsella’s murder (see my comment two above) should be viewed is the government deliberately brought in Negroes for the express purpose of killing this boy.

That view is based on the statistical inevitability of precisely this happening to a certain number of British people at the hands of Negroes and no, I don’t need to say “white British people”: white’s the only kind, so that’s redundant to say.

The government murdered this boy. Deliberately. End of story. There are individuals in government who’ll be called to account before legally-constituted tribunals one day, to explain why they did it. Let’s hope they’ll fare better than those who signed Charles I’s death warrant. Or, wait ... no ... Let’s hope they won’t.

Posted by snax on Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:47 | #

Fred, our posturing “tough on crime, tough on the causes of the crime” government would no doubt applaud this Judge’s comments:

“As a result of your action someone lost their life… You should know that when you call the emergency services and they are responding to that call lives may be put at risk. The consquences of what happened on the night of June 29 could have been foreseen by you… You deserve to lose your liberty for a significant period of time”.

But it seems to me that your comments on their own actions, the inevitable consequences thereof, and so their culpability are just as straighforward.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 31 Aug 2008 21:08 | #

Good point by Snax: a certain number of British people are going to be killed each year by the Negroes the government brings in against what it knows perfectly well are the people’s wishes not to have them brought in. The government knows these killings will occur and knows it will be unable to prevent them, as their statisticians tell this to them, yet it brings them in anyway. For what reason, exactly, must they be brought in (and must this known number of Brits die as mathematically-certain result)? The government never says. It only says if the people don’t want them they’re racist, therefore all the more in need of them to be forced on them, to either 1) cure their racism, or, if incurable, 2) punish them for incurable racism, with punishments like ... well, like getting killed.

Every word of the judge’s comment posted by Snax applies to the governmental criminals in charge of bringing certain races into Britain that don’t belong there and that the people, if one gains their trust and promises not to punish them for saying so, will express a preference not to live near, and a fear of living near.

One day, legally-constituted tribunals will be seeking to learn why this was done — tribunals with their own power to punish.

Let today’s culprits, and they know who they are, reflect on that.

Posted by snax on Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:32 | #

GW:

Of course, this is the mainstream media, and both McKinstry and the headline writer dance tactfully around the true politics of nation here. The headline man gives us Death of patriotism: How national pride is ‘under threat by a global super-elite’. The picture editor provides us with an image of the Nigerian 400m runner Christine Ohurogu wrapped in a Union Jack. And this notwithstanding the fact that the other seventeen of Team GB’s gold medals todate have been won by native Britons (excepting one mixed-race member of a four-man gold-winning cycling team).

It was noted. The White athletics boss has today been sacked for failing to produce enuf Black medal winners in the only sport “our” negroes can compete in.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/feedarticle/7766356

Comments:

Post a comment:

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Categories

Contributors

Links

MR Central & News

Comments