Sutherland continues a long tradition of expropriation of the people from the land.

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Thursday, 08 October 2015 17:36.

The Highland Emigrants Monument
Gaels were expropriated from the land between 1800 and 1830.

What is going on?

Much has been said in recent weeks about a man named Peter Sutherland. Sutherland is the United Nations Special Representative on migration, and he is an international businessman and former Attorney General of Ireland who has served in a variety of business and political roles. He was appointed to the European Commission in 1985 and had responsibility for competition policy. He was the Chairman of AIB (Allied Irish Banks) from 1989 until 1993. He was non-executive Chairman of Goldman Sachs International until June 2015. In 2010, he was appointed co-chair of an Experts Group, to report on the priority actions to be taken to stave off protectionism and to boost global trade.

Sutherland is also keenly pro-European, which doesn’t sound like a bad thing until you realise what he means by that. A person would think that it’s pretty simple, after all, when talking about the ‘European Union’, the word ‘European’ is literally in the name. But no, Sutherland is pro-European, or ‘a Europhile’, in the sense that he supports the institutions of the European Union, but he does not support the ethnic genetic interests of those who live under those institutions.

Sutherland is a person who believes that the Arab Spring should have been considered as a chance to begin ‘weaving together’ Europe with North Africa and the Middle East, population-wise. What he of course means in practice is not—not ever—a colonisation of North Africa and the Middle East by Europeans, but rather, an invitation for literally unlimited migration from North Africa and the Middle East into the European Union to displace Europeans.

Objectively speaking, that is the expropriation of European peoples from their own lands, it is a displacement. Sutherland however entreats Europeans to think of it from a humanitarian and empathetic point of view. For example, it was Peter Sutherland who described the makeshift refugee camps in Calais, as ‘an indictment on society’, and asked the British and French governments to do more to assist the Middle Eastern and North African migrants.

Previously, profiteering

For the Sutherland family name, there is a long history of humanitarian and empathetic points of view being expressed by its members, when behind the hand-wringing and the appeals to a universal morality, behind the cloak of respectability and quasi-aristocratic pretensions, lurks the dagger of the most vicious blood-treason and abject profiteering which can only be expected from business-people of their calibre—a tendency which is by no means diminished but rather is reinforced by their Christian identity.

It was in January 1853, that the Stafford House Assembly of Ladies issued its call to their counterparts in North America, to ask them to consider the plight of black people in the Southern states of the United States, who had been enslaved for so long and were, in their view, in need of sympathy. They were consciousness-raising, making a call to action, and so on. That was a declaration that took place when Stafford House was under the presidency of the Duchess of Sutherland, who—much as it was in fashion then as it is in fashion now—was giving an object lesson on how easy it always is for liberals to show concern for people thousands of miles away, while ignoring the suffering of their own people close by—particularly when that suffering is caused by their own ‘humanitarian’ hand.

The whole history of the primitive accumulation that has led to the appearance of the wealth and prestige of the name Sutherland, and of other names of that type from Scotland and Ireland, is really in fact a history of the expropriation of the Gael people from their own lands, and their destruction at the hands of blood-traitors.

A quick sketch of history will be needed in order for things to become clear. In the 1100s, when the Danelaw was encroaching onto Scotland, the resistance came from the ‘Great Man of Sutherland’, a progenitor whose clan had defended him from all enemies, foreign and domestic, Scottish or Danish. After the Glorious Revolution of 1688 which installed the Dutch stadtholder William III of Orange-Nassau as King, due to the economic changes and the shift in political attitudes at the time, the internecine fighting among Gaels become less frequent, and at the same time, the propensity for Anglo-Dutch wars to erupt was reduced to zero. These things may not be the only factors, but they may comprise part of the reasons for why London was able to take the time to better integrate the Gael clans into the British military establishment, to incentivise stability by inducing these ostensibly different forms of social organisation to mutually support each other in Scotland.

The clan system of the Gaels was an array of social relations based around a progenitor and his or her progeny, which is to say, it is a relationship delimited by ties of blood and proximity. The district in which a clan operated was the land from which it gained its livelihood, much like how it was in what Marxists call ‘the Asiatic mode of production’, because it existed in a similar form in China, Japan, Korea, and various parts of South East Asia, in the pre-feudal era. It’s also comparable to the systems in some parts of the Americas before the appearance of Columbus.

It was basically a pre-feudal system of relations.

At the head of the clan was the progenitor’s family, which had a leader. The whole of the clan was like a system of blood-related family circles under them, the system could not be said to be a system of private property, because all the land was held as common land, under the military command of the progenitor. The progenitor could increase or decrease the allotment of land to subordinates as necessary, perhaps on a whim, or perhaps to fit a particular need. Under the family of the progenitor, were soldiers that administered regions, and under them were subalterns who managed towns and hamlets, and under all of them were the peasants who co-operated with the system in exchange for the benefits of a common defence perimeter and which was cemented by ties of blood.

Without an explicit legal system that could describe or allocate private property, it would be impossible to arbitrate land ownership in any way at that time. However, tradition and rank would mean that someone would have the largest influence, and the family of the progenitor, the leader in particular, would be the person who would ultimately have the final say on what would or would not be happening. This may seem benign at first, but when brought into interaction with a system that does have a concept of private property and the concept of a salary or a wage, it can potentially produce a deadly transformation which can lead to the clan’s destruction.

The destruction

As all services were gradually transformed into contract-based exchanges, the leader of the family of the progenitor began to increasingly take on the role of a landlord toward the soldiers, the soldiers in turn acting like farmers toward the peasants, and the peasants themselves becoming transformed into something like sharecroppers on the land that they used to call their own.

It would be in the early 1800s that the stab in the back was to come, and it came from one of the families of the progenitors in the form of the arbitrary and violent transformation of the clan’s common property into the private property of the leader, who could then dispose of it and its contents in any way that he or she desired, backed by government-sponsored force, which then resulted in armed conflict almost like a civil war.

Karl Marx—yes, seriously—explains with great accuracy what happened after that:

Karl Marx, Das Kapital Volume One, ‘Chapter Twenty-Seven: Expropriation of the Agricultural Population from the Land’, 1867:

[...]

The advance made by the 18th century shows itself in this, that the law itself becomes now the instrument of the theft of the people’s land, although the large farmers make use of their little independent methods as well. [15] The parliamentary form of the robbery is that of Acts for enclosures of Commons, in other words, decrees by which the landlords grant themselves the people’s land as private property, decrees of expropriation of the people. Sir F. M. Eden refutes his own crafty special pleading, in which he tries to represent communal property as the private property of the great landlords who have taken the place of the feudal lords, when he, himself, demands a “general Act of Parliament for the enclosure of Commons” (admitting thereby that a parliamentary coup d’état is necessary for its transformation into private property), and moreover calls on the legislature for the indemnification for the expropriated poor. [16]

[...]

The stoical peace of mind with which the political economist regards the most shameless violation of the “sacred rights of property” and the grossest acts of violence to persons, as soon as they are necessary to lay the foundations of the capitalistic mode of production, is shown by Sir F. M. Eden, philanthropist and Tory to boot. The whole series of thefts, outrages, and popular misery, that accompanied the forcible expropriation of the people, from the last third of the 15th to the end of the 18th century, lead him merely to the comfortable conclusion: “The due proportion between arable land and pasture had to be established. During the whole of the 14th and the greater part of the 15th century, there was one acre of pasture to 2, 3, and even 4 of arable land. About the middle of the 16th century the proportion was changed of 2 acres of pasture to 2, later on, of 2 acres of pasture to one of arable, until at last the just proportion of 3 acres of pasture to one of arable land was attained.”

In the 19th century, the very memory of the connexion between the agricultural labourer and the communal property had, of course, vanished. To say nothing of more recent times, have the agricultural population received a farthing of compensation for the 3,511,770 acres of common land which between 1801 and 1831 were stolen from them and by parliamentary devices presented to the landlords by the landlords?

[...]

The last process of wholesale expropriation of the agricultural population from the soil is, finally, the so-called clearing of estates, i.e., the sweeping men off them. All the English methods hitherto considered culminated in “clearing.” As we saw in the picture of modern conditions given in a former chapter, where there are no more independent peasants to get rid of, the “clearing” of cottages begins; so that the agricultural labourers do not find on the soil cultivated by them even the spot necessary for their own housing. But what “clearing of estates” really and properly signifies, we learn only in the promised land of modern romance, the Highlands of Scotland. There the process is distinguished by its systematic character, by the magnitude of the scale on which it is carried out at one blow (in Ireland landlords have gone to the length of sweeping away several villages at once; in Scotland areas as large as German principalities are dealt with), finally by the peculiar form of property, under which the embezzled lands were held.

The Highland Celts were organised in clans, each of which was the owner of the land on which it was settled. The representative of the clan, its chief or “great man,” was only the titular owner of this property, just as the Queen of England is the titular owner of all the national soil. When the English government succeeded in suppressing the internecine wars of these “great men,” and their constant incursions into the Lowland plains, the chiefs of the clans by no means gave up their time-honored trade as robbers; they only changed its form. On their own authority they transformed their nominal right into a right of private property, and as this brought them into collision with their clansmen, resolved to drive them out by open force. “A king of England might as well claim to drive his subjects into the sea,” says Professor Newman. [25] This revolution, which began in Scotland after the last rising of the followers of the Pretender, can be followed through its first phases in the writings of Sir James Steuart [26] and James Anderson. [27] In the 18th century the hunted-out Gaels were forbidden to emigrate from the country, with a view to driving them by force to Glasgow and other manufacturing towns. [28]

As an example of the method [29] obtaining in the 19th century, the “clearing” made by the Duchess of Sutherland will suffice here. This person, well instructed in economy, resolved, on entering upon her government, to effect a radical cure, and to turn the whole country, whose population had already been, by earlier processes of the like kind, reduced to 15,000, into a sheep-walk. From 1814 to 1820 these 15,000 inhabitants, about 3,000 families, were systematically hunted and rooted out. All their villages were destroyed and burnt, all their fields turned into pasturage. British soldiers enforced this eviction, and came to blows with the inhabitants. One old woman was burnt to death in the flames of the hut, which she refused to leave. Thus this fine lady appropriated 794,000 acres of land that had from time immemorial belonged to the clan. She assigned to the expelled inhabitants about 6,000 acres on the sea-shore — 2 acres per family. The 6,000 acres had until this time lain waste, and brought in no income to their owners. The Duchess, in the nobility of her heart, actually went so far as to let these at an average rent of 2s. 6d. per acre to the clansmen, who for centuries had shed their blood for her family.

The whole of the stolen clanland she divided into 29 great sheep farms, each inhabited by a single family, for the most part imported English farm-servants. In the year 1835 the 15,000 Gaels were already replaced by 131,000 sheep. The remnant of the aborigines flung on the sea-shore tried to live by catching fish. They became amphibious and lived, as an English author says, half on land and half on water, and withal only half on both. [30]

But the brave Gaels must expiate yet more bitterly their idolatry, romantic and of the mountains, for the “great men” of the clan. The smell of their fish rose to the noses of the great men. They scented some profit in it, and let the sea-shore to the great fishmongers of London. For the second time the Gaels were hunted out. [31]

There is nothing that I can add to that.

Nothing is new about what is happening now, compared to what was happening back then. Not only is the same kind of economic structure being used to carry out the destruction as was being used in the 1800s, but furthermore the very name of Sutherland has reappeared, it has reappeared as though to flaunt itself in the face of the people of the British Isles.

A new decision

Last time the great blood-traitors were able to take you down the path that they wanted—a whole ethnic group was effectively destroyed and scattered across the earth.

Now they come again, under the same names to re-invite you down the same path.

My question to all European peoples is this: Will you let them take you again?

Kumiko Oumae works in the defence and security sector in the UK. Her opinions here are entirely her own.


Comments:


1

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 18:10 | #

I hope Graham Lister finds some time to read this very informative and thought-provoking piece, for which I thank you, Kumiko.  It would be interesting to hear his thoughts.

Indeed, there is a correlation between the Highland Clearances, as a precondition for modernity - for urbanisation and industrialisation - and the dispossession and dissolution of European Man as a precondition for The Globality.  Part of that is the development from an elite class of the people, predicated on the virtues of kinship and mutuality, to a class whose elite status is predicted on some grand futuristic project offering hitherto unheard of wealth and position, new intellectual horizons, a new economic and social order,  - from which, of course, the family, however wealthy and respected it is today, must not be excluded simply because of a stubborn loyalty to the past.

So it is that circumstance licences the detachment from the old ways and a relationship to the people which is antipathetic and exploitative.

The very heart of that, when one strips away te seduction of power and the tawdry ambitions of morally feeble men (and women), is the conflict between genetic interests and ethnic genetic interests in an age of a religion and a philosophy of, basically, the individual will.  In a sense, the elites, though traitorous to their people, are true to themselves; since, in times of peace, genetic interests cannot easily be shown to be secondary to ethnic genetic interests.


2

Posted by Al Ross on Sat, 10 Oct 2015 00:05 | #

Peter Sutherland is of Jewish extraction and his multiculturalism is the racism of anti - racists.

http://jewishmuseum.ie/patrons/


3

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 10 Oct 2015 03:23 | #

Al,

I know that is often said of Sutherland, and maybe there is some Jewish ancestry tucked away somewhere; but I am not at all convinced of that he can be called a Jew in any generally recognised sense.  For one thing, his wiki page states:

On 5 December 2006, he was appointed as Consultor of the Extraordinary Section of the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See (a financial adviser to the Vatican).

... as well as:

He served on the steering committee of the Bilderberg Group,[14] until May 2014 and is an Honorary Chairman of the Trilateral Commission (2010 -), he was Chairman of the Trilateral Commission (Europe) (2001–2010)[15] and was vice chairman of the European Round Table of Industrialists (2006–2009).[16]

He was Chairman of the Board of Governors of the European Institute of Public Administration (Maastricht) from 1991 to 1996.[17] He is Honorary President of the European Movement Ireland.[18]

He was appointed as a member of the Hong Kong Chief Executive’s Council of International Advisers in the years of 1998–2005.[19]

He produced the Sutherland Report for the Portuguese Government on the handover of Macao to China in January 2000.[20]

He is President of the Federal Trust for Education and Research, a British think tank. He was Chairman of The Ireland Fund of Great Britain from 2001 to 2009, part of The Ireland Funds.[21] He is a member of the advisory council of Business for New Europe, a British pro-European think-tank.[22]

He was a member of the Commission on Human Security set up by the Japanese Government that reported to the United Nations in 2003.[23]

In 2005, he was appointed as Goodwill Ambassador for the United Nations Industrial Development Organization.[24] In Spring 2006 he was appointed Chair of London School of Economics Council commencing in 2008.,[25] a position he held until February 2015.[26]

Sutherland also served on the International Advisory Board of IESE,[27] the graduate business school of Spain’s University of Navarra.

In January 2006, he was appointed by United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan as his Special Representative for Migration. In this position, he was responsible for promoting the establishment of a Global Forum on Migration and Development, a state-led effort open to all UN members that is meant to help governments better understand how migration can benefit their development goals. The Global Forum was acclaimed by UN Member States at the UN High-Level Dialogue on International Migration and Development, in September 2006, and will be launched in Brussels in July 2007.

Looking at that list of museum patrons,:

Rabbi Zalman Lent – Rabbi of the Irish Jewish Community.
Ben Briscoe – Former Lord Mayor of Dublin and the Irish parliament.
Meryvn Taylor – Former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform – Irish Government.
Issac Herzog – Member of the Israeli parliament, former Minister of the Israeli Government.
Dermot Keogh – Professor of History & European Integration Studies at University College – Cork.
Sean Aylward – Former Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality – Irish Government.
Peter Sutherland – Chairman of Goldman Sachs International, former Attorney General of Ireland.
Rabbi Neuberger – Member of UK House of Lords, Senior Rabbi to the West London Synagogue.
Max Abrahamson – Irish lawyer and international businessman.
Michael Enoch – Irish international businessman.

... Prof Keogh does not look or sound Jewish.  His body of work includes one study of Jewry in Ireland:

Church and Politics in Latin America ISBN 0-312-02815-6
Ireland and Europe, 1919 - 1948 ISBN 0-389-20803-5
Ireland and the Vatican:The Politics and Diplomacy of Church-State Relations 1922-1960 ISBN 0-902561-96-0
Jews In Twentieth Century Ireland:Refugees, Anti-Semitism and the Holocaust ISBN 1-85918-150-3 (Awarded the 1999 James S. Donnelly Sr Prize by the American Conference for Irish Studies in the history/social science category)
The Rise of the Irish Working Class:The Dublin Trade Union Movement and Labour Leadership 1890-1914 ISBN 0-904651-75-4
Twentieth Century Ireland:Nation and State ISBN 0-7171-1624-7
The Vatican, the Bishops and Irish Politics 1919-1939 ISBN 0-521-30129-7

Sean Aylward also seems to be an uncertain candidate for Chosen-ness:

https://ie.linkedin.com/pub/sean-aylward/71/203/346

Overall, I would say that the evidence is for Kumiko, and Sutherland’s aristocratic route into the global elites.


4

Posted by Al Ross on Sat, 10 Oct 2015 19:19 | #

Thank you for the reply, GW. You may be correct. My inferential approach should have led me to observe the time - honoured maxim, viz., “suspect, only suspect.”

Peter Sutherland’s family connection to the 1st Duke of Sutherland remains unclear. That Duke’s family surname was not, of course, Sutherland. It was Leveson - Gower (later changed to Egerton) and he was unlikely to have been Scottish, which is the nationality claimed for Peter Sutherland’s paternal forebears.

Perhaps the Leveson part was a corruption of “Son of Levi” but it may have simply represented a place name in England.


5

Posted by DanielS on Sun, 11 Oct 2015 01:17 | #

It is meaningful if the Sutherlands are Jewish or partially Jewish and hiding behind Christian identity, but it is, if anything, more valuable to pay attention to this kind of expropriation as a structural crime against (our) native people.

It is more helpful to begin inquiry as such because it is a crime that may well be committed by our own elitists - undoubtedly has, in other cases, if not this. It is a crime whether committed by our own traitors or by Jews. The Right will try to distract from their complicity in structural manipulation and with Jews, while being satisfied to lay all blame on Jews should any attention threaten to come their way.

Thus, it is more valuable to examine the crime as a structural problem, a weakness of our own system to be resolved, and quickly turn attention, as has happened on this thread, to check for the fact and where Jewish power and influence may or may not come into play and take advantage of that structural vulnerability.

With that, our platform and comment section do not only keep an eye on our elite traitors, but detect where they are not merely paid off and taking advantage of structural manipulation, but in fact acting on the foreign genetic interests - markedly of the YKW.

Of an ongoing basis, we have our firm vigil on the fact that a Jewish component can and does add virulent antagonism and an exponential function to that structural process of aggrandizement, amassing and consolidation of wealth.

But the very fact of these people having Christian identity displays Jewish motivation from the start and the perfect Jewish cover.

Unlike the right, we keep an eye on our elite traitors, we are not their defenders, nor defenders of the nefarious structures which facilitate their treachery. After that, we can take for granted that our platform and commentators will maintain a vigil on our own EGI and also the activity of theirs (won’t you Al ; ):

                                                 

LOL. Kidding, Al.. vigilance appreciated, a vigilance that also recognizes Christianity as Judaism for gentiles.. and means for Marrano cover


6

Posted by Al Ross on Sun, 11 Oct 2015 03:52 | #

Yes to all that , DanielS.


7

Posted by Jack Arcalon on Tue, 20 Oct 2015 03:48 | #

Unfortunately, it seems that defiance, courage, and hate have been bred out of the European populations by the methods described in this post, while the gene for diabolical Machiavellian manipulation has only been strengthened.


8

Posted by Sutherland: EU should undermine homogeneity on Wed, 18 Nov 2015 02:24 | #

Peter Sutherland, Board Member of the Irish-Jewish museum, former non-executive chairman of Goldman Sachs International…shows his allegiance:

BBC News, ‘EU should ‘undermine national homogeneity’ says UN migration chief’ 21 June 2012:  

                             
Peter Sutherland’s global migration forum brings together 160 nations to discuss policy

The EU should “do its best to undermine” the “homogeneity” of its member states, the UN’s special representative for migration has said.

Peter Sutherland told peers the future prosperity of many EU states depended on them becoming multicultural.

He also suggested the UK government’s immigration policy had no basis in international law.

He was being quizzed by the Lords EU home affairs sub-committee which is investigating global migration.

Mr Sutherland, who is non-executive chairman of Goldman Sachs International and a former chairman of oil giant BP, heads the Global Forum on Migration and Development, which brings together representatives of 160 nations to share policy ideas.

He told the House of Lords committee migration was a “crucial dynamic for economic growth” in some EU nations “however difficult it may be to explain this to the citizens of those states”.

‘More open’

An ageing or declining native population in countries like Germany or southern EU states was the “key argument and, I hesitate to the use word because people have attacked it, for the development of multicultural states”, he added.

“It’s impossible to consider that the degree of homogeneity which is implied by the other argument can survive because states have to become more open states, in terms of the people who inhabit them. Just as the United Kingdom has demonstrated.”

At the most basic level individuals should have a freedom of choice - Peter Sutherland, UN special representative for migration

The UN special representative on migration was also quizzed about what the EU should do about evidence from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) that employment rates among migrants were higher in the US and Australia than EU countries.

He told the committee: “The United States, or Australia and New Zealand, are migrant societies and therefore they accommodate more readily those from other backgrounds than we do ourselves, who still nurse a sense of our homogeneity and difference from others.

“And that’s precisely what the European Union, in my view, should be doing its best to undermine.”

Mr Sutherland recently argued, in a lecture to the London School of Economics, of which he is chairman, that there was a “shift from states selecting migrants to migrants selecting states” and the EU’s ability to compete at a “global level” was at risk.

‘No justification’

In evidence to the Lords committee, he urged EU member states to work together more closely on migration policy and advocated a global approach to the issue - criticising the UK government’s attempt to cut net migration from its current level to “tens of thousands” a year through visa restrictions.

British higher education chiefs want non-EU overseas students to be exempted from migration statistics and say visa restrictions brought in to help the government meet its target will damage Britain’s economic competitiveness.

But immigration minister Damian Green has said exempting foreign students would amount to “fiddling” the figures and the current method of counting was approved by the UN.

Committee chairman Lord Hannay, a crossbench peer and a former British ambassador to the UN, said Mr Green’s claim of UN backing for including students in migration figures “frankly doesn’t hold water - this is not a piece of international law”.

Mr Sutherland, a former Attorney General of Ireland, agreed, saying: “Absolutely not. it provides absolutely no justification at all for the position they are talking about.”

‘UK support’

He said the policy risked Britain’s traditional status as “tolerant, open society” and would be “massively damaging” to its higher education sector both financially and intellectually.

“It’s very important that we should not send a signal from this country, either to potential students of the highest quality, or to academic staff, that this is in some way an unsympathetic environment in which to seek visas or whatever other permissions are required… and I would be fearful that that could be a signal.”

Mr Sutherland, who has attended meetings of The Bilderberg Group , a top level international networking organisation often criticised for its alleged secrecy, called on EU states to stop targeting “highly skilled” migrants, arguing that “at the most basic level individuals should have a freedom of choice” about whether to come and study or work in another country.

Mr Sutherland also briefed the peers on plans for the Global Migration and Development Forum’s next annual conference in Mauritius in November, adding: “The UK has been very constructively engaged in this whole process from the beginning and very supportive of me personally.”

Asked afterwards how much the UK had contributed to the forum’s running costs in the six years it had been in existence, he said it was a relatively small sum in the region of “tens of thousands”.


9

Posted by The Death of Peter Sutherland on Mon, 08 Jan 2018 22:39 | #

       

        The Death of Peter Sutherland

       

       

“It’s not very often when you get someone that you can just pin down and say, ‘here’s the enemy.’

With a lot of people it’s a bit vague, it’s like what are we fighting against? It’s like mist.

But n Suntherland’s case, he ticks all of the boxes.” - Morgoth



Post a comment:


Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me


Next entry: What happens when WNs accept Russian news reports uncritically?
Previous entry: Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Long Game: Today is a Good Day.

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Establishment Problem

Categories

Links

Endorsement 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

Comments

15 and Pregnant commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Sat, 20 Jan 2018 02:17. (View)

Mixed signal for Whitey, not for bloods commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Sat, 20 Jan 2018 01:53. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A crisis in the custody suite – seventh (and final) part' on Sat, 20 Jan 2018 00:58. (View)

Another question from Chris L. commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Fri, 19 Jan 2018 23:47. (View)

Ahed Tamimi interviewed commented in entry '“Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom”: Norman Finkelstein on the Many Lies Perpetuated About Gaza' on Fri, 19 Jan 2018 11:12. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Fri, 19 Jan 2018 10:11. (View)

Putinism commented in entry 'Putin's Revenge' on Fri, 19 Jan 2018 08:12. (View)

Jewish occupy, demonstrate for open borders USA commented in entry 'Africans Deported from Israel “Appear” in Rome' on Fri, 19 Jan 2018 02:08. (View)

question commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 23:15. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 17:43. (View)

Crazy Over You commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:22. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 13:24. (View)

I'm a Man commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:41. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Carolyn Emerick talks pagan folk culture and ethnonationalism with Tara's alt-right panel' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 08:15. (View)

uh commented in entry 'Spencer: My conception of the ethnostate is imperialist - true ethno nationalism is a zero sum game.' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 08:07. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Carolyn Emerick talks pagan folk culture and ethnonationalism with Tara's alt-right panel' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 07:18. (View)

100% European commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 06:39. (View)

The ancient is the modern commented in entry 'Snyder's lessons applied to reality now: universalized liberalism tyrannizing over ethnonationalism' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 02:19. (View)

100% European but you might not guess commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 00:45. (View)

Near 100% European commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 00:18. (View)

95% Native American (Central) commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 11:11. (View)

20% sub-Saharan commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:53. (View)

We knew these things commented in entry 'Hermeneutic construction of Putin and Trump's character, positions and relation:' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 04:13. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:18. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'MR Radio: Greg Johnson talks to GW and Daniel' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:09. (View)

henry m commented in entry 'MR Radio: Greg Johnson talks to GW and Daniel' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 18:29. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 16:51. (View)

This is the Day commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 16:17. (View)

Emerald City commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:46. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'America: Making The World Safe for Hypocrisy' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:41. (View)

Anything, Anything commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:26. (View)

The Allman Brothers commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:04. (View)

Nobody to Depend on commented in entry 'America: Making The World Safe for Hypocrisy' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:56. (View)

Pearl Jam commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:09. (View)

John McLaughlin commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 13:55. (View)

affection-tone