|
|
|
Sarrazin does it again Thilo Sarrazin has spoken out against German race-replacement again, this time in paperback:
In carrying the story the Scotsman has done what none of the mainstream newspapers in England has so far been willing to do. It would be interesting to know how big a deal this is in Germany. The response from the Establishment is predictable. But what do ordinary Germans say about it? Comments:2
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 25 Aug 2010 05:02 | #
American men are shrinking, from an average height previously of around five foot nine to a current four foot eleven, their skin is browner, hair blacker, American men no longer speak English but Mixtec, with a smidgen of broken Spanish, and on the construction sites American men are the hard-workingest little bastards you ever saw, running around, outworking everybody, and in their leisure time American men now convert their cars to low-riders on hydraulics that they can jack up when they see a pretty girl on the sidewalk and actually make the car buck up and down repeatedly to impress the girl while giving loud wolf-whistles combined with marriage proposals shouted out in Mixtec if the girl is fourteen or under down to eight. American females are now very impressed by bucking low riders with the purple neon lights mounted under the chassis that reflect on the pavement at night. American females are now short, thick, squat, with waists no longer going in but either straight down or out, and wear their hair in two thick black braids hanging down the back straight — zero natural blondes any more — and American women love low-necked white peasant blouses with those puffed little shoulder sleeves, brightly multicolored half-long skirts, and castanets, and American women like to cook cornmeal tortillas for their families on flat griddles, garnished with refried bean paste. But no, this all has nothing, absolutely nothing whatsoever, zero, to do with immigration of Hispanics. Got that? Zero, zip, nada. 3
Posted by Wanderer on Wed, 25 Aug 2010 05:14 | #
Everyone knows it. Yet “voelkisch” political parties seemingly remain firmly in the “Zero-Comma-Ghetto” in Germany. Their crowning achievement of the past decade was to win 12 of the 124 seats in the Saxony Landtag in 2004. That regional NPD party-bloc, within a few years, had pathetically lost 4 of those 12 members to internal squabbling (they left and/or were chased out of the party and became independent MPs). In the recent 2009 Landtag election, the NPD-bloc barely stayed above the 5%-Threshold to retain any representation. (It now has 8 of 132 seats). Yes, the Holohoax-Myth exists, and yes the Holohoax-Myth is powerful. Still, a large share of Germans do know (but will never admit) that it is a Lie. So why don’t we see NPD or DVU or REP in the Bundestag by now? I lived for a time in the Federal-Republic, and the easiest explanation is to blame the long shadow of 1945 for the gloomy, defeatist, fatalistic, apathetic, cynical attitude that prevails. That is a valid explanation. Voelkisch-racialist revival coming out of Germany today is almost inconceivable. Beyond that, the BRD state-media apparatus has done an impeccably-efficient job at demonization of “nationalists” as losers, violent skinheads, and the like. People believe it. Many middle-class descendants-of-Arminius are almost as scared of the “skinheads” as of they are the gangs of young Turks. Actually, the racialist-nationalist political-parties are populated by losers, strictly-defined—That is to say: people who accept (and except) losing. The uncharismatic Udo Voigt (leader of the NPD) is one of these, to me. The party apparatuses are manned by “losers”, and the rank-and-file nowadays are mostly super-energetic youth whose enthusiasm peters-out in their mid to late 20s. 4
Posted by Wanderer on Wed, 25 Aug 2010 05:19 | # The long and the short: Most Germans will (publically or privately) concur with the Wandrin wrote about this recently, the need for various levels of racialist groupings for success. A continuum, as in “V-Dare—> American-3rd-Position—> [Some Hardline Racialist Group]”, thereby some viable presence at all levels of racial-consciousness. Germany’s failure is lacking 1s and 2s and 3s (mild Pat-Buchanan racialists) and being top-loaded with hardliners (8s and 9s and 10s). Then again, the Republikaner would claim to be that gateway, but they have never shown they can win. In 2009 there was an attempt to unseat Voigt in the national NPD, led by a fellow named Molau, who wanted to make the party more moderate and less “nazi”. He was basically shouted down by Voigt’s hardliner cronies and in effect chased out of the party. After’s Molau’s quasi-expulsion fro mthe party, IIRC the moderating baton was taken by the charismatic Udo Pastoers out of Mecklenburg, who unfortunately also failed to win Voigt’s position. 5
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 25 Aug 2010 05:21 | # Thanks for raising everyone’s spirits with that upbeat estimation, Wanderer. 6
Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 25 Aug 2010 14:35 | # Wrestling with issues raised at MR often has the dispiriting effect of making me feel unintelligent (and Notus Wind’s brainteaser sure didn’t help in that department!). Increasingly, I find my thinking somewhat stale; I have little or nothing to add to what I have discussed previously. On that note ... I reiterate: Am I not correct in arguing that it is probably the case that every white nation (or at least Western white nation - though Eastern Europe doesn’t seem to be immune, either) is going to experience “The Demographic Transition” (hereafter DT) over the next half-century or so (a sidebar: in one sense, I think that makes even us seeming ‘latecomers’ - Revilo Oliver was opining on these matters in the early 60s; Lothrop Stoddard immediately after WW1, though in the latter’s case, the worry was more about declining white geopolitical strength, as opposed to the horrors of importing our own agents of extinction - nevertheless “racialist pioneers”, for we are The Awakened decades before the bulk of our people get awakened themselves, by which time of course it will be too late for our “Phase 1” concern - ending immigration - to matter much)? That is, that before our people become racially awakened, we shall have been transformed into racial minorities in all historic white homelands (maybe not Iceland, as Dr. Duke likes to say, but with a quarter of a million people, a pint-size Camp of the Saints armada will be sufficient to end that Viking settlement)? Do people disagree with me? As a prediction, we obviously don’t know to any certainty whether I am right. But I am basing my conclusion on the present ratio of racialist activism and electoral success (the latter especially in Europe, as in N. America and AU/?NZ there simply are no nationalist parties, though that fact itself, at least outside of the peculiar American duopolistic party-system, is not encouraging) to the numbers of alien colonists. In the USA, for example, we are absolutely no more than 65% white (and that includes Jews; many Hispanics of decidedly mixed heritage who choose to call themselves ‘white’ on censuses and interviews; possibly all or most Arabs; many self-identified or ‘passing’ whites who have some ‘diversity’ in their genes; and finally, the large number of Old Stock persons, including some in my own family, who really are white, racially, aesthetically and culturally, but who do have some aboriginal genetic material in them from way back: I see it in the slightly Mongoloid eyes of some of my - very blonde! - cousins). In reality, we are no more than 60% white, possibly less, and that does not include the 20-30 million illegal aliens resident here, 99% of whom are clearly non-white. And yet, look really at how little racial/nationalist activism there is. I am the first to argue that there is a healthy racist undercurrent to the present vociferous denunciations of illegal immigration, though some of that positive, ratcheting vituperation is also due to our terrible economy. If unemployment were at 4%, and the Dow at 15,000, does anyone think we would have the same level of outrage about border issues? And even with our economic nightmare, who is talking about ending legal immigration, running at 140,000 per goddam month! This is the best time in my lifetime for otherwise racially timid conservatives to link ending immigration with reserving American jobs for Americans - but who, outside of the Usual Right, is doing so?! So surely everyone agrees that America will become majority non-white, and, per my prediction in 1989 (!), very possibly by 2020 (and by 2030 at the latest). Even if we dramatically reduce immigration (and as Fred Scrooby’s beloved Talmud has it, “if not now, when?”), we will simply succeed in pushing out the DT to maybe 2050 (after all, by how much does anybody really think we will actually be able to reduce immigration? a fantastic breakthrough would be 50%, leaving us still with 800-900k of high-fertility, non-white immigrants annually, not counting illegals). Will the same thing happen to aging White Europe? From everything I hear and read (including here), it seems likely. The ratio of racial agitation (not to mention still more limited political successes) to the present and incoming levels of aliens is just too discrepant to suggest that Europe will be able to save itself. Maybe this or that small country will stop immigration before the DT, but then they will be at the mercy of their bigger, Islamified/Third Worldized neighbors. Even if they are not overrun militarily, with their borders opened compulsorily, they don’t have the size, physically or demographically, really to be independent. They will be racially Finlandized. My interest is in where we go from there. How do we save our race post-DT? I think this is a worthy topic of extended discussion. I also think my suggestion of emigration-conquest is also worthy of examination. That is, in this epoch of global capital flows, easy transportation, and instant communication, we whites, the last ‘subjective whites’ (remember: many of our impious racial kinsmen have no interest in preserving the West or our race, and never will until their last moments before extermination) from amongst all the nations, could theoretically stage a Counter-DT. There are enough of us, I think, or there will be as things darken, scattered across the world to be able to immigrate-conquer a small sovereign territory of our own, which could serve as our own racial state or genetic reservation, our own Israel. Any thoughts? 7
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 25 Aug 2010 15:13 | # Leon,
In my experience the road to radical thinking is travelled facing the way we have come. How we come into possession of new data - that is, to fully incorporate it into our developing Weltanschauung - is a tricky business. We can be told something a dozen times and always interpret it in terms of our existing knowledge, thereby losing its connectivity to other, occluded information. Then one time we hear it again, there is dissonance, and bam! The world looks different, probably troublingly so at first. But the process can’t be held up. If your thoughts seem stale it probably signifies a weakening of the power of existing associations in some respect, and an approaching newness.
This is the limitation of “inevitablism”. It can’t move fast enough even in optimum external conditions, can’t incubate radicalism, can’t do much at all, really.
A good question. But does the answer lie in a deeper revolution, with new interpretations of human experience, interests, rights and freedoms, than you wish to contemplate today? I mean, what existing force is going to move people around so that a white caucus is preserved? What existing force is going to contain the revolutionary energy to sustain a movement all the way through to completion? 8
Posted by Wanderer on Wed, 25 Aug 2010 18:54 | #
Interestingly, in the U.S.-Civil-War, nearly one-third of the white men in the Union Army [1860s] were classified as having “light” or “sandy” [blondish] hair. Just an interesting tidbit. 9
Posted by Wanderer on Wed, 25 Aug 2010 18:59 | #
I assume this is sarcasm as my post was mostly negativistic! Nevertheless, there is reason to be enthusiastic, just not about Germany, IMO. Until its racialists and quasi-racialists and crypto-racialists start more-successfully emulating other European countries’ racialists. (See above). We in the USA can take note of the same lesson, actually. 10
Posted by Wanderer on Wed, 25 Aug 2010 19:03 | #
I do not think France or the UK have troops there anymore. Do they? If so, under what possible pretext? All the same, the spirit of occupation there would persist for a long time, even without the token presence of foreign troops. 11
Posted by Anon on Wed, 25 Aug 2010 21:06 | # “The response from the Establishment is predictable. But what do ordinary Germans say about it?” Polls taken by various MSM show 90% approval. 12
Posted by Lurker on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 01:56 | # There are certainly some British forces left in Germany, not sure about the French. Their numbers have been whittled away pretty continuously since the end of the Cold War. 13
Posted by uh on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 02:13 | # Kemp will be pleased I did not know the British share this ugly vice with the Germans. The Romans must have worn socks to avoid frostbite, but remember these were rugged leather sandals and the socks probably of dark, coarse fiber: not the bright white booties and designer open-toe shoes of modern glob-trekkerz, sic. Check this out: http://www.barefootted.com/index.php?q=/ I make & wear these exclusively (in Florida of course ... ). 14
Posted by Wanderer on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 02:56 | #
Great—they’ll just take a page from good old W.Ulbricht and import higher-IQ Vietnamese peasants instead! Problem solved! ...? 15
Posted by Sam Davidson on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 02:57 | # Leon, The problem is where to go? An ideal choice would be to remain in the West and form exclusively White communities to wait out the slow death of the West. (The most appealing is Covington’s Northwest Migration idea.) This comes with a multitude of problems. First, our governments have shown that Whites are not allowed to maintain their racial integrity within the West. We’ve been undermined since the American Civil War, forced busing, school integration, affirmative action, etc… Religious groups that build their own communities of all-white families are continuously facing harassment from authorities. Covington has rightly predicted in his novels that the Northwest Migration would only succeed by means of guerilla war and terrorism. The next choice would be to colonize South America or some place in the Third World. The benefit is that central governments tend to be weak. Of course, infrastructure would be crumbling remnants of the older colonial days, and the natives would be incredibly hostile. The only way to succeed would be to ethnically cleanse a large area that contained fertile land and mineral resources. Keep the non-whites out. No slaves or servants. The only real benefit is that you don’t have to worry about the S.W.A.T. team shooting your pregnant wife and laying siege to your cabin. Let’s say you manage to take a small country and drive out the natives. How do you think the U.N. will respond? Instant embargo! The international (jewish) press would immediately label you bloodthirsty oppressors and you’d be unable to deny it. The lesson of South Africa and Rhodesia is that Whites are not ‘just another ethnic group.’ We are not entitled to the right to survive. In any conflict we engage we will automatically be wrong. The international community will condemn us. Our enemies will be trained in foreign countries and equipped with foreign arms. Then the terror begins. Oops, I mean, “liberation.” 16
Posted by uh on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 03:47 | # The next choice would be to colonize South America or some place in the Third World. First: Never could one scare up enough people to form a “colony”. So there will be no colonization of anyplace. The benefit is that central governments tend to be weak. Second: This is as much a myth as it is a northerner’s relative view of southern governments, always supposed to be “corrupt”, “weak”, “about to collapse”, or however, compared to orderly northern governments. Is Chavez’ government weak? Uribe’s? Lula’s? Morales’? on what grounds do you blanket South America with this assertion that its governments are weak? Point to one, in your estimation. Don’t bother pointing to the Guyanas: French Guyana is France, Suriname is quite orderly and informally overseen by the Dutch, and even Guyana, with a government almost as removed from reality as Obasanjos’ or al-Bashir’s, can field an internal army of muscly negro commandos to quell unrest in its ghettos. Argentina & Chile are both competent and not near any meltdown or collapse. Paraguay & Uruguay are restful. Ecuador is presently run by a US-educated leftist bureaucrat. Colombia will not go to war with Venezuela despite the endless AK-rattling. In sum: These governments are not “weak”. Even if they were, they would yet be run by the same criollos (or upstart indigenos like Chavez and Morales who can count on both criollo state apparatus and mass appeal) with absolutely no desire to repeat the post-War Nazi pipeline. Of course, infrastructure would be crumbling remnants of the older colonial days, and the natives would be incredibly hostile. Fantasy world. No infrastructure is crumbling. And unless you’re talking the Brazilian badlands or Peruvian mountains, there aren’t really any “natives”, which is pure colonialist imagining, to echo the leftists a bit. They’re all “mestizos”—dark pureblood indigenos, ivory-white criollos in the cities, everything in between. For all that you would find those indigenos a world away from the hostility you imagine. The only way to succeed would be to ethnically cleanse a large area ... Oh Lord. The only real benefit is that you don’t have to worry about the S.W.A.T. team shooting your pregnant wife and laying siege to your cabin. Mm. Because the US has never conducted operations in South America, and guerrillas don’t traverse obscure national boundaries deep in la jungla. <i.Let’s say you manage to take a small country and drive out the natives. </i> No! Let’s say I win a million dollars. BILLIONS will die ..... 17
Posted by Wanderer on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 04:24 | #
P.C. enforcers and anti-racialist cranks always drone-on about how the Stoddards of the past are “discredited” and so on. Implying they were con-men who didn’t know what they were talking about. Yet Stoddard got seemingly dozens of predictions about Earth’s geopolitics over the next 90 years exactly right! Very few people can claim anything approaching that. A few of my major recollections from Stoddard’s paramount work, “The Rising Tide of Color”—Remembering now that the book’s manuscript was apparently submitted in February of 1920 (the date at the bottom of the preface): The single major oversight that he had was that he completely missed the seriousness of the “Migration Scenario” of non-Europeans into Europe and North-America:
Madison Grant wrote the introduction to this incredible work, and he did give the possibility of being swamped by racial-aliens more credence that Stoddard had done:
I suppose the purpose of this post is to provide proof to the reader that racialist scholars and thinkers are not “discredited pseudo-intellectuals”. Quite the opposite: If one studies their past works and has even a casual awareness of the history of this planet since then, then serious racialist intellectuals of the past are shown to have been very keen and prescient thinkers. Far moreso than the thinkers of other ideologies. The communist predictions about the future, by comparison, were pretty much all wrong. Why was Lothrop Stoddard able to get so many things so right? To me, it’s because enlightened racialism is a noble thing (preserving the diversity of Mankind), and therefore allows for the clearest vision. Lesser ideologies—namely those which place economics as the highest aspect of human endeavor—will always get more things wrong than those with nobler intentions will. 18
Posted by uh on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 04:39 | # Thoughtful post by Wanderer. 2.) He predicted a war between the USA and Japan “within 25 years” [i.e., before 1945]. Who on Earth would have predicted that at the time, and with a timeframe so right on the nose?! I believe all these can be seen in Nietzsche in philosophic embryo: the prediction of “world wars”, a contest between Christianity and Islam, loss of will to rule in whites—even that the “lower orders” will swamp the higher with democratism. Anyway, Stoddard had his head on right. The Left gets around this by speaking narrationally, usually in the passive past: “In Stoddard’s work whites were seen as superior to non-whites, conceptualized as .... “, blah blah blah. In this way doublethink dodges recognition of the fulfillment of Stoddard’s predictions, by following it purely as “narrative”. 19
Posted by Grimoire on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 08:53 | # Your thinking about Germany is understandable, but incorrect. The foundation behind the NPD utilizes the NPD as a gambit, and not as a end. At this time further incursions into the comedy of the German Bundestag would be counter productive. The natural course of events, of elections, voters, parliaments, etc. was seen, like armed resistance or revolution to be a road to disaster for Europe. While immediate conflagration is impossible now, It is important to realize that it is inevitable and that you will be called upon. Pay less attention to the circus and think more of training the body and mind. That state which seperates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools” 20
Posted by Leon Haller on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 13:43 | # Wanderer, very useful post. Of course correct, though I disagree with your explanation for the superior prognosticatory powers of past race-patriots: Why was Lothrop Stoddard able to get so many things so right? To me, it’s because enlightened racialism is a noble thing (preserving the diversity of Mankind), and therefore allows for the clearest vision. Lesser ideologies—namely those which place economics as the highest aspect of human endeavor—will always get more things wrong than those with nobler intentions will. (Wanderer) This strikes me as overly-sentimental, whereas I think the reason is the diametric opposite. Enlightened racialism may or may not be a noble thing, but I am almost certain that Stoddard, Grant et al. were not particularly interested in the “diversity of mankind”, except to attend to it in order to ensure that it would never catch the white man unawares, and thus threaten Western power. These men were motivated by geopolitical considerations, and hard-headed calculations about national/racial survival. May our race produce more of them! 21
Posted by Bill on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 13:46 | # Grimoire August 26, 2010, 07:53 AM
Ok, so we all know the political system is bought and payed for by the elites. When I say all, I mean the awakened ones. Once again, America seem to be ahead of Britain with the emergence of the protesting tea partier’s movement having gained sufficient momentum to engage in the coming November elections. I see no sign of such a movement forming here in Britain, even the BNP (British National Party) have lost the plot and are imploding in a downward spiral. All of which leads me into thinking our politics (America and Britain) are soon to enter a stage of turmoil and change we really can believe in. The tea partiers Tea Party it seems is trying to usurp the cosy incumbent republican party which is a clone of Cameron’s conservatives. Which in short, means there is nothing conservative about Cameron’s conservatives just as there is nothing conservative about rino republicans - republicans in name only. I read the tea partiers are making inroads into rino territory, and could do well in November. Which is all very good, but does any of it matter anyway? What difference will it make if both our (American and British) political systems are in the back pocket of the elites, what’s the point of voting at all? Three years ago I fully expected Britain to be in the same political situation as the present USA model, ie. Cameron’s conservatives would be pressured by the BNP. In the event however, such was the power of the media the BNP were reduced to an irrelevance and Cameron steered into a liberal alliance. Will the media do the same to the tea partiers as they did to the BNP? I read* it is suggested that the crowning success of the Obama victory was interpreted by the elites as the green light for a surge of a full out programme of socialism. The thinking now is the Obama administration have overcooked the goose, they went too fast and spooked the herd. All of which indicates the elites have badly miscalculated the mood of the American people. And now to the backlash in November. If the result is not to the elites liking, will they accept the verdict of the people? The EU referendums are ample proof of elite mentality, where election re-runs are required until they get the results they want. All of which augers a further ratcheting of discontent - it could get nasty. We in Britain will be watching closely how events unwind in November, for what happens state-side could well be replicated here in Britain. Will bits come flying off Cameron’s liberal coalition bandwagon eventually with their programme of austerity? Will the austerity measures alert the herd? We can only wait and see. * HT to Daily Bell commenter. 22
Posted by Angry Beard on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 15:51 | # Bill, 23
Posted by Leon Haller on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:05 | # Sam Davidson, Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I think you have somewhat misunderstood my intentions, however, perhaps due to my failure adequately to explain (in this particular thread) what I meant by “conquest”, and that you are overly pessimistic, though your concerns are clearly valid, and need to be kept in mind. First, note what I said: There are enough of us, I think, or there will be as things darken, scattered across the world to be able to immigrate-conquer a small sovereign territory of our own. I never said nor meant to imply that we would militarily conquer and ‘cleanse’ a territory. That may one day be necessary, though not necessarily possible. By “immigrate-conquer” I have always meant do to some sovereign country what, say, Cubans have done to Miamians, what homosexuals have done to straight San Franciscans, what African-Americans have done to the white natives of pre-war Detroit, and what Mexicans are doing to the US as a whole, starting with the southwestern states; that is, take over demographically. We immigrate somewhere quietly, legally, gain citizenship, start bloc voting in favor of ever-more white immigration (which the “natives” won’t necessarily oppose, as they will be white themselves), and then gradually change the character of the country into a WN one. Is this really so hard to do or far-fetched? Lots of WN whites (and our numbers are growing, and will one day grow exponentially, in tandem with our reduction to universal minority status (ie, racial minorities in all traditional polities)) could well be imagined to want to move to a place where they/we can live amongst our own kind, especially if non-white majorities persecute us (which they assuredly will, though the degree of oppression will vary considerably). And, if I am correct about the universality of the non-white DT, then what other realistic options will we have to preserve our race/culture? Second, where to go? The key is that it must be a sovereign nation, assuming we want to accomplish our task without the bloodshed of traditional, physical conquest (and we would, or else uh’s allegedly ‘realistic’ objections become sound; it is likely that even a majority of WNs would rather see our race collectively euthanized through territorial dispossession and genetic amalgamation than actually have to engage in physical warfare, especially of an overseas, guerilla nature). Carving out a new sovereign nation from an old one is a way more bloody affair than merely colonizing a country through immigration. What the hell is happening to us, after all?! No Western nation has been militarily conquered by non-whites. We have been sold out by our own greedy (and in some cases, genuinely self-hating as well as hateful) elites, who have facilitated the immigration conquest of their own lands. Why can’t we do this to some other country? Third, again, where to go? I suggest that we must choose a demographically small, traditionally white nation (or historic or geographically defined and isolated territory which has a degree of autonomy or at least clear boundaries, and thus the makings of an independent nation: I’m thinking of Quebec in the first instance, Alaska in the second, my statements above notwithstanding). It should have as few non-whites as possible starting out. It should have the ability to generate a high-degree of economic self-sufficiency. It should be First World, or very close to it. It would be nice for me, but also maximally efficacious, though not absolutely necessary, if it were already an English-speaking place, given that the largest primary language spoken by whites is English - and English is by light years the most common second language among whites. It is, after all, very important to speak the language of the place you are emigrating to (well, at least for whites, majorities of whom everywhere are not unskilled laborers for whom language is unimportant to their occupations). Latvia may be a still very white and fine place (and may it ever remain so!), but unless I am faced with outright extermination and just want to go anywhere white which will have me, I will not move there, because I could never sufficiently master their language to work as a professional. Mere slow-motion racial extinction in the US is never going to be enough to get me to work as a janitor in a foreign country! So what are our options? Present Day Majority White Territories With Historically Defined Boundaries, Small(ish) Overall Populations and Small Populations of Non-Whites/Muslims Australia I rule out the third category simply for linguistic reasons. Very few WNs will be ‘peaceful pioneers’ to these countries as the language unfamiliarity will lead to too great an economic/professional sacrifice. These European countries are also dangerously situated viz their larger, future-Islamified neighbors; and Europe as a whole is dangerous to any sovereign country because of the EU, which is ever more totalitarian, and centralized (and whose bureaucracy will, it is posited, be under Islamic or Third Worldist/self-hating white control). I put Argentina and Southern Brazil into their own category because they are majority white (albeit of the darker, Southern variety), and mostly Western (but with dangerous levels of Latino influence), but they have sizeable populations, and thus might not be so easy to immigrate-conquer (or immigrate-conquer-secede, though Southern Brazil does have a lot of racially-tinged secessionist sentiment). Our most realistic choices are in the first category. Among them, Australia (or, perhaps only Tasmania!) is clearly the most promising. It is First World. It is New World. It is English-speaking. It has a tradition of white immigration, and thus might be more welcoming of lots of white foreign immigrants than an Old World white nation with a deep national culture and history like Ireland. It is wholly sovereign. It has a developed economy which could accommodate white professionals as well as laborers. It is geographically more defensible than most countries (even in the age of nukes, don’t underestimate the psychological and still military importance of ocean boundaries - especially in the age of ‘migratory/demographic’ warfare), as well as wonderfully physically isolated (and so psychologically more prone to isolationism, and thus comfortable with it). Though it’s carrying capacity is not remotely commensurate with its geographic dimensions, it does have a lot of still unharvested resources, especially minerals. I believe it could be agriculturally self-sufficient (though I am not sure it would need to be; a gradually whitening and racializing Australia would evolve into a very prosperous place, one with which other nations would want to trade (and exchange tourists), not go to war over ultimately unimportant issues of ‘political correctness’!). Australia could support a bigger economy, and thus population. Finally, Australia has a bothersome aboriginal population, but it’s small and fairly politically quiescent (unlike the Maoris of NZ, who are expanding rapidly, and nationalistically). Much worse, it has idiotically allowed a huge amount of non-white immigration over the past three decades, but the absolute numbers are still not that great, and the rate of immigration has been slowed recently. Their disloyal business community pushes for immigration, but ordinary Aussies are mostly against it. My suspicion is that Aussies are not anti-immigration at all - merely, sensibly, anti-colored immigration. I have the distinct impression that Aussies might be very supportive of greater white immigration, especially as the Australian mind is still somewhat taken with the old (perfectly legitimate) worry about being ‘swamped’ by Asians. I must end now. I will pick up this discussion in the evening. I note that my second choice for optimum demographically conquerable area is Alaska, though it presents many difficulties, the biggest one being a colored-dominated US being unwilling to give up its vast natural resources to a bunch of white separatists. 24
Posted by Wexler on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:07 | # Leon Haller, I second your post at 01:35 PM, 25 August 2010. I do not want to come off as gloomy, but, in America, the idea of an ethnostate is a non-starter. Mr Haller’s estimates of the racial demographics seem about right, my guess would be that White Americans are 52 or 55 percent, just over half, say. If that is broken down by age, we know how that slants. How much more time will pass before White American ethnic interests are an explicit organizing principle among, say, 10 percent of competent adults? For the time being, population growth rates for non-whites are still exponential (that can’t last, but for now). Deportation of 200 million people? Good luck selling that. So that leaves succession or partition. Apparently there are very solid legal arguments for succession, but what do they add up to? No one can see the future, but, black swans aside (and they are out there, of course), this infrastructure will work at half-strength or better for quite some time. So ... Strategies for existing as a minority group. I know this is not news to any of you, but I like to put in my two cents. 25
Posted by Leon Haller on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:12 | # If we go down, we might as well take heart from the example of the boys trapped on the rapidly sinking HMS Hood in freezing North Atlantic waters.Remember how those poor chaps vainly and valiantly fired off one last salvo in defiance when only the bow of the ship stayed above surface. (Angry Beard) Yes, but too fatalistic. We are a great race, with immense latent resources. We are not inevitably doomed. The future is indeterminate, and it is darkest before the dawn. 26
Posted by Notus Wind on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:39 | # I have a very difficult time believing that the U.S. (as a political entity) will continue to exist in its present form by the end of the next two decades. The demographic, cultural, and economic catastrophes that are looming over the horizon will be the end of the U.S. I could easily imagine recollecting with family about what it was like to live in the last days of America by mid-century, “Oh, the absurdity of those times!” I will be saying. 27
Posted by Leon Haller on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:55 | # Wexler, I think your population stats are wrong re US. Right now, real whites (including those with a bit of Apache in them from the 19th century or earlier, but who look basically like Europeans) are in fact about 60% of the total population (I am excluding Middle Easterners, including Jews, though some of both groups self-identify as white, and look like it), though that number is falling rapidly, and you are right about the white/non-white age discrepancy. The Census claims whites will transition to minority status by 2042; after the tabulation of the current census (2010), that projected date will drop at least to 2040, though I expect it to go down further, probably to 2037 or even 2035. I believe the real DT will occur between 2020-25. As for a white American ethnostate, we must work ceaselessly for this, though whether it ever will be viable through peaceful means is unclear (but if there should be violent social and civic breakdown, the range of possibilities could expand quickly and dramatically; we must prepare ourselves to take advantage of such civic dislocations). 28
Posted by Leon Haller on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:20 | # Be careful, Notus Wind. Ideologists (of all persuasions) are always predicting the imminent or near-imminent end of the US, but it lumbers on. It won’t forever, of course, but my money is still on a peaceful euthanasia of WA (race-replacement + intermarriage), until extermination at the very, very end (2080-2100) of the last true (unreconstructed or ‘subjective’) whites, with a DT to full-on Third World status (ie, economically, politically, and sociologically, in addition to racially, which will occur first) not before 2050. Someone as bright as you should have a more sophisticated vantage of these matters. By 2030, absent what I have called elsewhere the Omega Option (aka, Camp of the Saints: destruction through immediate, massive importation of aliens), but also absent any immigration reduction, the US will still be at least 45% white (real white; with Jews, etc, it will still be 50%+ white). Whites will be older on average, but they will remain far wealthier and politically dominant. We will be shrinking and declining, but still disproportionately in control throughout most of society. This group will not allow America to disappear as I think you anticipate, and I cannot myself foresee any possibility that a mere 20 years will suffice for it to lose everything. You are being a “terrible simplifier”, disregarding the complexities in a society such as ours, including that people do change their operational thinking in new situations. Already, I have two assinine friends who voted for Obongo, but who are now going to “cross the line” and vote GOP in November. And don’t underestimate the extent to which our economic problems are self-inflicted, and therefore remediable, or mitigable. Contrary to some of the conspiratorial defeatists lurking around here, the Jews do not control the whole economy and all politics and discourse. As times worsen, so spines will stiffen. It is happening already. 29
Posted by Notus Wind on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:53 | # Leon,
To be more specific, what I am unable to imagine is a vision of America somehow lumbering on its present trajectory of degeneration - with the occasional spine stiffening here and there - without any kind of substantive political change. In my estimation we have reached a point in our political evolution where we are no long capable of addressing serious problems under the current political system (in terms of its apparatus and operating assumptions) and that we Americans should expect a political discontinuity in the near future. I admit that I don’t have an explicit argument for any of this, it is just the conclusion that sweeps over my person whenever I try to consider the totality of what’s going on right now and the deeper meaning of its patterns. To the extent that I have any Mentat-like powers this is what they seem to be saying. Also, I think it’s unrealistic to develop a “more sophisticated vantage” than this because there are so many variables to consider. It’s like watching a juggler struggling with his routine, at some point it becomes apparent that he’s going to slip up soon but it’s impossible to predict on which object he will slip up first and what that will look like. The analogy is not perfect but there it is.
I cannot imagine us losing everything either, whatever political discontinuity awaits us I don’t think it will be the end of everything. 30
Posted by Angry Beard on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 19:39 | # Anyone with any idealism left should give their full support to the great Tom Metzger and his ‘lone-wolfism’. 31
Posted by Bill on Fri, 27 Aug 2010 09:26 | # Angry Beard. August 26, 2010, 02:51 PM Thanks for the snapshot of the way you currently see things, I have some sympathy for your views. I think we should always keep an open mind, no matter how dim the spark of hope. I am ever mindful that younger generations have been engineered into what you describe by decades of insidious/overt liberal cultural bombardment, be it print, education, cinema, television, advertising or political correctness. The fact is, in the modern world we now live, there is no escape, there is no hiding place. But I do believe that what has been done can be undone, the brainwashing that is. As regards the reclaiming of our living space - Hmm? If you believe all is lost already, then how do you see Britain in say by 2050? Population forecasts of up to 70 million are being bandied about for 2050, although as I see, if present trends continue, this figure will be far exceeded, just look at the non white birthrate. By the time Britain’s population reaches 70 million it is forecast that whites will be in the minority. My imagination will not stretch beyond these two facts (exp.population growth-white minority) because so much data is missing. What will the housing situation be like? What will the employment situation be like? similar questions could be asked of a myriad of such things the politicians are loath to talk about. Such things as the welfare state, infrastructure, energy, water, health care - to name but a few. The more I try to second guess the future the more I pinch myself to believe what I am thinking, to use a parrot phrase by politicians, none of it adds up, it’s like a bad dream where nobody awakens. I can only conclude the intention is to destroy what is and stand back and see what happens. Ther is no plan B. Like the warning on a firework says, light blue touchpaper and retire immediately. One could go crazy with the nightmare permutations available, which I also suspect is part and parcel of the agenda. Still, it is refreshing to see the subject of sustainability finally being discussed here, whenever I’ve gone down that road it fizzles out like a damp squib. (what is it with me and fireworks today?) Is Peak Oil an elite scam or is it for real? (I think the latter.) 32
Posted by Leon Haller on Fri, 27 Aug 2010 12:04 | # Notus Wind, Thank you for occasionally addressing remarks to me. I have enjoyed ‘dialoguing’ with you. That said, I have now definitely concluded that I am wasting my time on this site. I am amazed at how many lengthy, suggestive comments of mine (see, eg, above) generate absolutely no discussion (let alone understanding of their at least conceivable relevance if not importance to our situation). Regulars here, so assured in their shallow pronouncements, and these despite what is to those of us truly literate and educated, an obvious lack of erudition across a range of non-Darwinian topics, just go on blathering in their merry way, failing to distinguish what might be significant from what is irrelevant, juvenile or ephemeral. I acknowledge and appreciate GW’s hard work in putting together a wonderful site like this. But I cannot say there is very much in the way of new theoretical or even strategic political insights on offer. Moreover, my old work at the Chronicles and takimag sites (before I was banned at both, merely for challenging their lack of racial awareness) was invariably better understood and appreciated by fellow bloggers. Fuck it. My psyche, interests, strategic approaches, educational background and general outlook are incompatible with this site. I really need to discipline myself, and focus on my research for my book-in-development on racial ethics within the Christian natural law tradition. That will obviously do more for the intellectual side of our struggle than my continuing to spill ink here. Haller 33
Posted by Sam Davidson on Fri, 27 Aug 2010 19:31 | #
How about Mexico? Every time I watch the Spanish language news I’m always seeing something like this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6096960.stm And then after watching some attractive mostly-White girls bouncing around they’ll have a news update about a mass grave at a construction site. But I’m sure it was a very orderly grave, right? Alot like those cardboard houses shantytowns I saw back in the late ‘80s, very stable and well-built. But, besides this, I was also describing the rest of the Third World.
http://allafrica.com/stories/201008260827.html
From the perspective of WN ‘colonists’ everyone is a native. If I meant ‘pre-columbian’ natives I would have said so. Leon, I apologize for the delay. Busy couple of days. I’m in agreement with the basic principle that we need to begin organizing racially conscious whites into separate communities. My difference in opinion is that every attempt by Whites to organize their own racially conscious communities has hitherto been denied. Attempts at localized racial segregation in the United States were forcibly abolished by the Federal government. Attempts of sovereign governments like Rhodesia and South Africa to maintain their racial integrity were undermined by international action. The point is that no matter where you go our enemies will not leave us alone. We can’t labor under the delusion that the forces that have been destroying the West are simply going to let us live in peace. Any concrete action we take towards the 14 Words will be met with force - either on part of the government or international forces. What I would like to impress upon other Whites is that we must fight to survive and this is the natural state of things. This is, quite likely, the first time in history that teachers have begun to instruct young males that fighting is bad and violence never solves anything. What crap. (And no, I’m not issuing a general call for violence like some of these knuckleheads. Anybody telling you to start shooting federal judges is obviously a federal informer like Hal Turner.) But I am 100% behind your plan! I’d prefer some place with a better climate than Alaska and more land than Iceland. I don’t know much about Australia, but I’d imagine that the East Asians are beginning their demographic takeover. I’ve been to the Pacific Northwest, and but for an unfortunate circumstance I would have lived in Alaska for a while. The Northwest seems like a good place. Beautiful land, plenty of White people (although brainwashed). What is your opinion of Russia? 34
Posted by uh on Sat, 28 Aug 2010 01:01 | # How about Mexico? When rioting leftist demonstrators take the capital, or African thugs take Paris, and national infrastructure breaks down as a result, it will be fair to say these nations are “crumblings”, and not until then. But I’m sure it was a very orderly grave, right? A mass grave is no argument against stable infrastructure. That’s why Mexico has, as you read, riot police—which succeeded in putting down the demonstration. You can look at it from any angle you like; shantytowns do not disprove dozens of modernized cities with every apparatus of state control and average law-abiding people. It isn’t like the inhabitants of shantytowns are eating their dead; there are just too many people. Anyway, this is how the White Nationalist lies to himself about the world. Every country he does not like is “crumbling”, “collapsing”, etc., and will shortly be ripe for takeover—by his fictive band of revolutionaries. But, besides this, I was also describing the rest of the Third World. No, you made concrete sociopolitical assertions about South America (and here Mexico, bringing us to Central America!), and because you are challenged, you now have to shift your projections to Africa: but I must remind you that the point was to declare an entire continent ready for colonization by White Nationalists. Evidently you evade your own purpose in this bit of obfuscation. And no, I’m not issuing a general call for violence like some of these knuckleheads. “The only way to succeed would be to ethnically cleanse a large area that contained fertile land and mineral resources. ~ Sam “El Supremo” Davidson What is your opinion of Russia? Herr Haller has departed from the ranks. Or hasn’t yet. Or did and is back. 35
Posted by Leon Haller on Sat, 28 Aug 2010 06:53 | # uh, I am shall we say readying to exit. My work here is simply not understood by very many (I don’t mean literally; I don’t write like some of the often unintelligible postmodernists lurking about; I mean its correctness). I stress two issues above all: the need to 1) develop an ethics of white racial preservation philosophically compatible with the Christian tradition; and 2) ‘face the music’ about our impending universal racial territorial minoritization (DT), and develop strategies to preserve our people (and Western civilization!) post-DT, towards which I have then offered as my preferred solution the peaceful, quiet, subterranean WN demographic/immigration conquest of some territory with existing, politically defined boundaries or, better, a sovereign country. My comments on these matters, despite being frequently lengthy and always clearly written, are met with at best dismissal, more usually, stony silence, which suggests either that I am a fool, or others are. However that may be, clearly my mentality is not in sync with more than a few persons in the “MR community”. Ergo, my work is wasted, as is my effort, which could be put to better use (for our cause) in other ways. I will finish discussions on threads in which I have been a participant, and then continue reading the posts as time permits. But my future contributions, as limited time and resources permit, would be better directed towards, on the one hand, my scholarly work (which long-term is most meaningful to me anyway), and on the other, pursuing certain very practical activist avenues. I am very articulate as well as aggressive in debate, and, along with a local politician friend, often funny and outrageous in conversation. My friend and I have been actively pursuing getting our own talk radio show, which I think could happen in the next couple of years (it depends on factors too numerous to discuss here, including raising sponsors, which is tough and time-consuming, unless you are already famous). No, it will not be WN at the outset, but it will be American nationalist, which covers some of the same ground. If we/I could ever make it, that is, develop a real, self-perpetuating audience, we/I would gradually move further along the Racial Right. We also are going to set up a 501(c)3 organization devoted to American nationalism. My goal is to contribute to our cause, and the conservative one more broadly, on a full-time basis someday, when I am fully financially secure. 36
Posted by Leon Haller on Sat, 28 Aug 2010 10:33 | # Any concrete action we take towards the 14 Words will be met with force - either on part of the government or international forces. What I would like to impress upon other Whites is that we must fight to survive and this is the natural state of things. But I am 100% behind your plan! I don’t know much about Australia, but I’d imagine that the East Asians are beginning their demographic takeover. I’ve been to the Pacific Northwest, and but for an unfortunate circumstance I would have lived in Alaska for a while. The Northwest seems like a good place. Beautiful land, plenty of White people (although brainwashed). What is your opinion of Russia? (Sam Davidson) __________________________ Sam, Ultimately, I fear you are right: whites somewhere will inevitably have to fight for their survival, though in most places most whites will be peacefully, voluntarily genetically amalgamated through miscegenation. Their genomic lines will simply disappear from the white gene pool. Out here in CA, it is horrifying to see the number of young white girls walking arm in arm with non-white men. No one forces them to do this. The point I made above, however, emphasized the quiet and clandestine aspect of demographically conquering someplace through concerted white immigration. We don’t have to move in blaring the 14 words! We simply pick the best place, and start moving (which is not an easy process, so this type of plan would take 1-2 generations to be fully realized - but we’re talking about the survival of a 100, 000 or 1,000,000 year old sub-species, so what’s 40-50 years?). As WNs move in, we electorally organize (just as minorities do in the West) in pursuit of our interests, which would initially be for more white (and only white) immigration. As we become more powerful we keep pushing the envelope in moving the society in an ever greater WN direction. I’m talking about (re)building the Racial State. Only, instead of doing it after a violent revolution, which I do not see in the cards any time soon, if ever, we do it gradually, quietly, peacefully, always with an eye to maintaining economic prosperity. As I have argued in other comments on this site, I hold this to be the most realistic chance for ultimate white survival (even though from our present perspective it sounds far-fetched). I explained above my opinion on the suitability of Australia. Scoping out the Pac Northwest is an old racialist idea, but that would involve carving out a new country, as well as building an ethnostate - and that would mean the war you’ve predicted. That will require revolutionaries. I’m trying to do this in a professional, non-dislocative way, so as to attract normal whites, non-revolutionary whites, who will always be the more numerous. As for Russia, I’m not optimistic, either for their own racial national survival, or as a possible WN colony. Although they are declining in population, they are still very large. In the early stages, how many committed WNs do you think there are or will be? We need a place with a small enough absolute population for us to have an impact. Then there are all the other negative factors: language difficulty; a still undeveloped economy that might not have jobs, or suitable ones, for incoming WNs; harsh climate; unfriendly people; lack of amenities; unstable currency; etc. We need a developed country with an advanced economy and a small population, not too many minorities, in which the language preferably is English. (Decent climate there too - nasty in Russia). Unlike the regular writers-dreamers-whiners here, I’m actually trying to think of something realistic and practical to advance our racial survival as things worsen. This discussion seems more useful than ones about Darwin, ontology and atheism. 37
Posted by Sam Davidson on Sat, 28 Aug 2010 18:29 | #
I think there are two differences in our line of thought. First, I see violent repression as inevitable. Secondly, any “implicit” racial approach is going to fall on its face. If we’re just “voting with our feet” then we’re repeating the same losing strategy that Whites have been pulling for the past fifty years. First we lost the big cities, then we lost the good ol’ South, and now we’ve lost the entire country. We have to actually stand for something in whatever place we go. (Taking a stand does not mean a ‘last stand!’) Our territorial ambitions will only allow us to regroup. Holding that ground will require willpower and resistance. The idea of taking over a small sovereign nation is a good start, but ultimately they’ll be destroyed from outside forces unless it develops into an autarky. Which is why I brought up Russia, since I don’t see it as important that we control an entire recognized nation, only part of it. Hmm… have you ever read Foundation, by Isaac Asimov?
Another good plan. If you’re both WN and Christian you should work on converting other Christians. Maybe I’ll start a blog trying to beat some sense into the ultra-liberal atheist community. I had a long discussion with Matt Parrott about Christianity and why I’m against it, but ultimately I’ll support Christians if they support other Whites.
Don’t let anyone’s online activity (or lack thereof) discourage you! You should have my email. (I sent you an email months ago but I think your spamfilter blocked it.) ..........
The riot police moved in after five months of a city being occupied by protesters. I could also bring up the example of the EZLN uprising in 1994, the rising number of deaths on the Mexican/American border due to drug wars, etc.
When did I ever say conditions anywhere were “ripe” for takeover? The topic we’re discussing is a “Plan B” from my original post that I made very clear would likely not succeed. You’re misreading my post then attacking strawmen arguments that you have constructed from the text.
Ahem, “The next choice would be to colonize South America or some place in the Third World.” Again, I never said any country was “ripe” or “ready” for colonization, and I certainly never said we could colonize “an entire continent.” More projections of your own mind, like the spurious claim that my use of the word “native” meant “pre-columbian” natives.
Your psychological projection only proves how smart you are, uh! Tell us more! 38
Posted by Leon Haller on Sun, 29 Aug 2010 15:54 | # First, I see violent repression as inevitable. Secondly, any “implicit” racial approach is going to fall on its face. If we’re just “voting with our feet” then we’re repeating the same losing strategy that Whites have been pulling for the past fifty years. First we lost the big cities, then we lost the good ol’ South, and now we’ve lost the entire country. We have to actually stand for something in whatever place we go. (Taking a stand does not mean a ‘last stand!’) Our territorial ambitions will only allow us to regroup. Holding that ground will require willpower and resistance. (Sam Davidson)
These are very complex issues, which don’t admit of any clear answer favoring one approach over the other. I am only certain of one thing. It is far easier to repress people intranationally than internationally. Obviously, the latter occurs, too (recall the West’s suicidal destruction of South Africa), but the former is more usual. Yes, we are going to have to fight for our collective existence someday. But that will be far easier to do if we effectively control a sovereign nation (such that confronting us means war), even a small one (think Israel, and how it has survived - and even without America’s money and weaponry, it would still survive now). South Africa was morally guilt-tripped, and economically-sanctioned, by the West, but it still ultimately committed suicide. I suppose the real counter to my own position is the geopolitical argument; that is, that a tiny racial state divorced from the superpower of the US, Russia, or potential superpower of the EU, would fall prey to to a non-white great power like China, or maybe some Hispanic confederation. On the other hand, the building of the racial state would be a gradual process, which would occur in tandem with that state’s growing wealth. Our little WN state would not have to oppose trade per se; we could combine racial preservationism with radical laissez faire in the manner of Hong Kong. Business elites in Asia, the Middle East and Latin America might not really care about our nationalism - only the dumb liberal whites would!! But what really would the latter do about it? I should really do up a post on this, think through all my ideas. I continue to believe that the greatest threat (until the very, very last white holdouts are confronted, sometime in the 22nd century) is peaceful absorption, destroying us demographically through both immigration and ever greater miscegenation. We absolutely must have at least one sovereign nation which WE WNs control. Our own Israel. Without racial/political sovereignty, I believe we are doomed. I don’t have any email from you. Did I ever give out my public e-address? I keep this one only for web commentary, so it’s not my truly private one, but I’m curious how you could have sent me any email? 39
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 29 Aug 2010 21:56 | # There’s no let-up with this guy:
We’ll assume that last remark is an example of the famously drole German humour. 40
Posted by Notus Wind on Sun, 29 Aug 2010 22:27 | #
The man knows too much for it to be otherwise. 41
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 29 Aug 2010 22:39 | # He sounds like a good man but notice how scared he is — he still does not dare to come right out and talk about race and race-replacement. 42
Posted by Sam Davidson on Mon, 30 Aug 2010 00:49 | #
Hm… I asked for you to email me in May and I received an email from someone identifying themselves as you. Maybe a trick? It was a Yahoo! email address. But, anyway, I have nothing much to say for right now. 43
Posted by Douglas H. Qaid on Mon, 30 Aug 2010 18:33 | # Oh, it’s all over the international news now. Naturally, if somebody states facts about the missed opportunities and a general deabte about migration they will: a) called racists, nazis, etc. In Britain nobody dares to speak up (OK, the loonies of Nick Griffin etc.) because of the “guilt complex” for being a former colonial power etc. b) to shut up critical Germans is even easier: Remind them of 12 years of their history. Sad but true my friends… Doug 44
Posted by CS on Tue, 31 Aug 2010 07:06 | # Leon’s strategy is definitely one I’ve considered. WN that emmigrate could make it a point to be politically active for the government that let them in which will provide an incentive for them to let more WN in. I think Australia is too big population wise, lately I have considered Croatia, Austria or Hungary as the target country. Eastern Europe is also another possibility. Another idea is for WNs to “buy” land off a Third or Second World country which we may or may not pay rent on with an agreement that we will be left alone to govern ourselves. Perhaps we could “buy” one of the Japanese islands seeing how their population will be decreasing in the future. As our nations darken, it will become easier and easier to motivate other whites to move. Furthermore, we could enlarge the tent by creating a “conservative” country which will attract conservatives who are going to be facing an unbroken string of electoral defeats as the percentage of white voters declines. 45
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 31 Aug 2010 11:06 | # CS, Interesting idea about “buying” an area, but I am sceptical. At some point we need military of our own, which as mere ‘renters’ we won’t be allowed. I’m completely open to new suggestions, but mind my point about language. English is the language spoken by the largest number of whites, both as a primary language and overwhelmingly as a secondary one. We must be practical. Who will move as a ‘pioneer’ in the manner of 19th century America; that is, dealing with endless hardships and economic deprivation when whites, lets face it, are being euthanized, not exterminated? I live in one of the most densely racially diverse areas probably of the world. Virtually everywhere I go, I’m in the racial minority of persons around me. Yet, because there are only a few blacks in my haunts, things proceed in reasonably civilized fashion. Whites are disappearing around me, but my area is not turning into a black ghetto. And thus, though I exist in a constant state of simmering alienation, would I possibly up and move to Croatia, a place where any adult American (or Anglo from elsewhere) would find it incredibly difficult ever to master the language? As I mentioned above, my life would have to be in literal racial danger before I would do that. I think most persons with real world jobs, families and lives would agree with me. Reconsider my arguments re Australia. They need and can handle an increase in population, but already the Aussies are getting angry about Asian immigration. Maybe I should do a whole article on this, either for here or elsewhere? 46
Posted by uh on Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:34 | # a place where any adult American (or Anglo from elsewhere) would find it incredibly difficult ever to master the language? Croatian isn’t that difficult. Work those lips. lately I have considered Croatia, Austria or Hungary as the target country. I have considered bad, worse, and neighbor to worse as the target country. Perhaps we could “buy” one of the Japanese islands seeing how their population will be decreasing in the future. I’m sure those extremely non-ethnocentric Japanese will go for it. it will become easier and easier to motivate other whites to move. And yet whites continue to live in South Africa. 47
Posted by CS on Tue, 31 Aug 2010 18:23 | # A large percent of white South Africans have already moved and another large percent would move if they were able. As South Africa declines further even more will move or want to move. As for Japan or a similar country, we could make a deal where we are allowed to have a military and we have a defense pact with the host country if they are attacked. Seeing as Japan has a big hostile neighbor, they might be willing to lease an island to us to boost their numbers defense wise. If we were to choose a non-English speaking country, we would simply create an English speaking area (ghetto) which is what non-English speaking immigrants do in our countries. Australia is a good pick for an English speaking country. They are much more xenophobic than Canada, Britain and New Zealand. I agree that it is difficult to motivate someone to move to another country but it is happening in South Africa and even to a limited extent in Britain. 48
Posted by BGD on Tue, 31 Aug 2010 20:28 | # The difficulty that I see with migration to a white conscious proto-homeland is that many of us value our ethnic background so much that only when the ship starts to dip beneath the waves will we give up on it and get off and abandon our England (or wherever). In the US there is a wide mix of people from many European backgrounds and most of these see no problem with intermarrying: Irish, Scottish, German, English, Italian, Spanish and so on. I would assume that there is less ‘ethnic’ resistance therefore to the multi-ethnic white state idea. For me as an Englishman as an example French blood is one or two steps away As America is wrenched apart I wonder from my vantage point across the Atlantic why more WNs based there don’t dampen their more explicit race based arguments and throw themselves into the growing secession movements. Especially with the recent uproar over Arizona as a political lightening rod and the repercussions from other states looking at their options in light of the federal government’s use of the law to prevent them managing their populations. Many US regions are still largely white and the landmass this occupies is big enough to swallow other countries whole. 49
Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 01 Sep 2010 09:40 | # If we were to choose a non-English speaking country, we would simply create an English speaking area (ghetto) which is what non-English speaking immigrants do in our countries. (CS) But that defeats the purpose. I want WNs to conquer a place through demography and political involvement. I want WNs to become very integrated in their new country/future WN homeland. If whites just want to be ghettoized we can stay in the US, or our home countries. My original point was that eventually, without WN reactions, every white nation is going to become majority non-white. From that point it is only a matter of time until first our culture, and finally our race, disappear. WN emigration/conquest is to stealthily come to numerically (and then politically) dominate a sovereign territory, to provide a final homeland for our people. 50
Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 01 Sep 2010 09:42 | # Croatian isn’t that difficult. Work those lips. (uh) You are an obvious expert in (Serbo-)Croatian. 51
Posted by Christian Alexander Tietgen on Wed, 01 Sep 2010 21:13 | # Sarrazin makes Germany stupid. Germans are not racist. 52
Posted by CS on Wed, 01 Sep 2010 21:42 | # LH, we initially form a ghetto to make it easier for newcomers to arrive with the full intent of eventually transforming the whole country into a white ethnostate. Are there any white countries now that only accept white immigration? 53
Posted by CS on Wed, 01 Sep 2010 21:48 | # Christian Alexander Tietgen > Sarrazin makes Germany stupid. Germans are not racist. Any person who isn’t racist is either stupid or ignorant. 54
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 13 Sep 2010 14:29 | # From the Fjordman being, well, being Fjordman department: instead of replying to his critics in this AltRight.com comments thread, http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/euro-centric/thilo-sarrazin-vs.-the-multiculti-oligarchs/ he goes into righteous indignation mode:
Fjordman is extremely possessive with his output, you see — nobody can use it unless he’s not a fascist. We got a dose of this when his book came out — he solemnly warned the blogosphere it was free to download except to fascists. Fascists didn’t have his permission to download it. And remember the time he showed up here in MR.com’s threads to order us not to discuss him any more? Don’t worry, we generally don’t need to discuss “thinkers” who are a decade and more behind us in catching on, FJ. Being the over-rated slow-learner he is, it’ll be another fifty years before Fjordman catches on and catches up — or no, by that time we’ll all be fifty years further ahead, so he’ll never catch up — or likely catch on, either, at the rate he’s going ……. FJ you seem like a nice guy but boy are you slow ……… no offense, and have a nice day. 55
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 14 Sep 2010 08:17 | # Paul Gottfried’s pessimistic “realism” applied in critiquing Fjordman:
Although I’m getting so I can’t stand Fjordman and his slow-to-catch-on stupidity, and his idiotic self-rightous moral indignation, I certainly hope he’s right and Gottfried wrong. 56
Posted by John on Tue, 14 Sep 2010 12:42 | # “Yes, I know that Jewish Leftists can create problems and they should not be above debate.” But Jewish rightists (a.k.a, Neocons) are just hunky-dory?! 58
Posted by Ivan on Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:01 | # Disciplined people with strong cohesion 59
Posted by Ivan on Sat, 22 Jan 2011 03:05 | # Herr Thilo Sarrazin is not a follower of Islam 60
Posted by Al Ross on Sat, 22 Jan 2011 03:59 | # Anyone who takes the trouble to trawl through the country membership of the Organization of Islamic Conference then refers to Lynn & Vanhanen’s ‘IQ and the Wealth of Nations’ will spot the low average IQ of these Muslim countries. There are no exceptions. Islam is of no help to WNs. In fact, Islam’s Koranic code of rape and slavery of conquered womenfolk had the effect of almost exterminating the pure Bedouin Arab of Mohamed’s era through miscegenation. The people whom the BBC call “Arabs” in the reports of Mahgreb countries are mixed race Arabic - speakers. Saudi has most of the pure Arabs with some in Jordan, the latter being outnumbered by mixed - race Palestinian ‘refugees’. 61
Posted by Ivan on Sat, 22 Jan 2011 04:00 | # The banker seems fond of the Judaic genome 64
Posted by Al Ross on Sat, 22 Jan 2011 04:10 | # Here in guessedworker’s mansion 65
Posted by Ivan on Sat, 22 Jan 2011 04:51 | # I.Q. of Al Ross reminded me of Carlos de Moss 66
Posted by Jimmy Marr on Sat, 22 Jan 2011 05:25 | # Since of limericks here, I am the stanchion. 67
Posted by Better living through poetry on Sat, 22 Jan 2011 11:49 | # Healing all forms of social perversity, 68
Posted by Chechar on Sat, 30 Apr 2011 20:14 | # @ “And remember the time he [Fjordman] showed up here in MR.com’s threads to order us not to discuss him any more?”—Fred Scrooby Link please? 69
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 30 Apr 2011 22:35 | # Chechar, I doubt if it is possible to locate the Fjordman comment now - we have almost 100,000 comments on the blog. But I do remember the episode, and it is correctly referred to in the Fred Scrooby comment you cite. 70
Posted by Chechar on Sat, 30 Apr 2011 22:46 | # Guessedworker, Thanks for responding. Wandrin, in another recent MR thread:
lol! Post a comment:
Next entry: None dare call it White genocide
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by Tanstaafl on Wed, 25 Aug 2010 03:57 | #
The US media regularly reports that Americans are getting dumber, fatter, and shorter. Not to mention browner and more inclined to driving while intoxicated. It’s “hate” and causes anger to point out that all this is a natural, predictable consequence of a massive influx of amerindians and mestizos.