|
|
|
The cultural becomes the racial Thanks to Morgoth for drawing attention to this very honest and fine speech from Paul Weston who has, as Morgoth says, indeed passed beyond the constraints of culturism into full Nationalism. Morgoth also makes the point (on the Woolwich thread) that much of what Paul says reminds him of the discussions of the DT threads, and the stark facts that are used as battering rams. In a number of guises I have battered Paul for his culturism on those very threads. Perhaps an apology is owed now! Paul must have understood then everything he is saying now, and he is saying it in every important detail. It is, of course, the moral case, the case in Nature, for our survival. Paul himself is clearly a most sincere man. How he will square this with the essential culturism of his party remains another issue. Comments:2
Posted by DanielS on Thu, 30 May 2013 11:50 | # I’m glad to hear what Paul Weston had to say here. That was very good. There isn’t anything that I would criticize in that particular address. Beautifully done. That he carefully kept left-liberal together as a term distinguishes it enough as proper to our enemies.
3
Posted by ukn_leo on Thu, 30 May 2013 12:40 | # @Bill ‘The thing is, what are they, (the elites) going to do about it? What counter measures do they have up their sleeves to sedate the masses?’ ...... Chatham House on the EDL and the rise of ‘extremism’: http://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/papers/view/189767 Dame Stella Rimington ‘spy on your neighbours for Mi5’: ...... Classifying all opposition as ‘extremism’ seems to be step one. Extremist = terrorist = legitimate target for extermination by the state and its drone army. The destruction of European man is not an extremist position. Resistance of any form is. A new front has opened in this war, and the stakes have been raised considerably.
4
Posted by Thorn on Thu, 30 May 2013 13:48 | # From Paul Weston’s blog:
5
Posted by Selous Scout on Thu, 30 May 2013 13:49 | # Civil war on the streets of Britain. This is the end-game. It’s going to happen. As an African immigrant-vigilante in Greece recently told a reporter: “I’m not afraid of this neo-Nazi, stupid, idiotic group [Golden Dawn],” he told me. “In WW2, they were crushed. In WW3, we will exterminate them out of the face of the earth.” It’s not far-fetched to consider the importation of vast numbers of non-white colonists into White countries as a preparation for such an exterminationist war. 6
Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 30 May 2013 15:42 | # Why is Paul Weston significant? Certainly his message has been out there since the Enoch Powell “rivers of blood” speech decades ago and people have been trying to get people to listen ever since—and things have only gotten worse. The problem is that civilization is essentially feminine. Attempts to render it sustainable through institutionalized partriarchy are, themselves, unsustainable as evidenced by recent history. It is hopeless to get the females up in arms. Up until it is raped, the feminine mind works like this: “Foreign males are present. This must mean that my co-national males are unable to challenge the foreign males to natural duel and succeed. Therefore, it is imperative that I obtain the genes that are now not only demonstrating their dominance and permanence, but are likely carrying with them immunity to diseases that are coevolved with these foreign males.” When it is raped, the feminine mind works like this: “None of my co-national males protected me from this. They’re just standing around brooding about it instead of dealing instant death to the rapists. This confirms my belief that the foreign males are dominant and that their genes are essential to the viability of my children.” Since the patriarchal scaffolding holding up civilization has been dismantled, giving way to subsaharan African behavior patterns of serial (if not parallel) polygyny among “independent” females, the only hope for civilization is the introduction of religions like Islam that are not as far along the road to the loss of their patriarchal scaffolding. 7
Posted by DanielS on Thu, 30 May 2013 16:46 | # Jim, I’d say that your assessment of the way the female mind naturally works and why they are acting as they do is accurate enough - quite good. But, this particular address by Weston (the first and only I’ve seen by him) is indeed the closest statement to Enoch Powell’s sort of eloquence and sincerity that I have heard coming from a politician since Powell - and that’s not bad. In order to fight and assert our interests as White males, we need for our position to be articulated and organized; and for the misdeeds of our antagonists to be articulated. Viz. to legitimize the fight as masculine: At present, liberalism and anti-racism are presented as what strong men do (strong men are “above it all, liberal, Nietzschean overmen, who value sheer masculinity and no nonsense” - i.e., they are inarticulate - “strong men do not interfere with female prerogative and are secure enough to allow all men to solicit their kind of females”). Weston’s statement rather looks like we are making some progress toward the end of articulation. It is as if he is hearing us.
I heard an interview of Frazier Glenn Miller over there at the White Network. He was trying to defend White females from criticism at the female host’s behest, and I closely paraphrase him: It’s the fault of White men because women have and always will try to get away with things so long as men let them - it’s up to men to stop them. That is, he contradicted himself. Don’t blame White women at all but be critical enough of them to stop them from doing harmful things to you and your people. ... On the other hand, I believe what you say is true, but we need the language of this fight of foreign invasion to be cast as masculine and not weak, not a mere cowardly seeking to prevent foreign competition for females. It can exist also as parallel to normal politics, and parallel with underground efforts. 8
Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 30 May 2013 17:09 | # The reason the female mind perceives “racism” to be ¨cowardly” is that it appears—in large part because it is portrayed—to be a group of men ganging up on individual men rather than an individual vs individual natural duel. The idea that these invaders are acting as a cohesive group (and are being protected by a gang in the form of an elite-controlled government) is not perceived by the feminine mind. The invaders (with the help of treasonous, or mole elites) declare their “individualism” against the “racist gangs” that shrink from a “fair fight”—where the “fair fight” ends up being nothing but males parading around in front of females and letting “female choice” decide all disputes between genotypes. It is this fundamental mode of dispute resolution in the primary interest of genes that renders civilization essentially feminine. The feminine “word of god” is the choice of sire for her children. The masculine “word of god” is the choice of who to lay down his life against in mortal combat. The former is not sublimated hence she is unable to identify with the sublimation of man’s choice. The latter is sublimated into the authority of the elites and that is civilization’s ultimate weakness: elites are such easy prey for parasites. 9
Posted by DanielS on Thu, 30 May 2013 17:41 | # It makes sense, Jim. That is one of my favorite points of yours: that White females are not recognizing that it is not a fair fight - that is key to the sort of articulation of authentic White masculinity. 10
Posted by Bill on Thu, 30 May 2013 17:41 | # Modernity has been built by the best intelligence nature has to offer, it is this best intelligence that has built the means (modernity) to carry out this racial extinction programme. Isn’t it this superior intelligence that has been victorious in all of this? All else is periphery, enablers, useful idiots, women included. Isn’t it these elites whose genes will inherit the earth. After all, that’s what it’s all about - isn’t it? I rarely venture into this side of things, but on this occasion I thought I’d have my two penno’rth. 11
Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 30 May 2013 18:03 | # Bill, the intelligence of which you speak is a particular kind of mendacious intelligence that is “victorious in all of this”: Reducing other people to semi-cognitive cogs in a mill that grinds their humanity into mush. It could perhaps be a wonder of evolution if it weren’t for the fact that this kind of “intelligence” is basically about turning words into weapons rather than means of communicating thoughts. As a Jewish manager once told me: “Its ok to lie to a customer but we must never lie to ourselves.” This sort of discipline is not evolutionarily stable for reasons pointed out by Trivers. 12
Posted by Bill on Thu, 30 May 2013 18:25 | # James @ 11 Yes. The struggle we are about to be enmeshed will be between good and evil. 14
Posted by Dude on Thu, 30 May 2013 20:49 | #
Then why is this such a rare female response James? 15
Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 30 May 2013 21:09 | # Because the “thought” isn’t so much “thought” as an impulse that serves more to sterilize their relationships with co-national males than to result in concerted action. Obviously, for such a “thought” to become conscious would require a great deal of unlearning of cultural norms regarding the “evil sciences” of sociobiology, evolutionary psychology, etc. so it throws a monkey-wrench into the subconscious works—and rationalization along with disintigration of rationality results. 16
Posted by Bill on Thu, 30 May 2013 21:16 | # At the end of Paul Weston’s speech there was polite applause, I half pictured a batsman making his way back to the pavilion on a fine summer’s evening, replaying his stroke when out for a modest score. Another thing that struck me was this speech wasn’t revealing to MR’ers, in fact we’re so familiar with its content we could have written the speech ourselves And there’s the rub, how many people out there will get to hear what Paul had to say, precious few I would say. Imagine the same script being read out on prime-time Televison to an attentive audience of millions, I wonder what impact it would have, not only the viewers themselves, but the collective mood of the nation. I woke up from my reverie with a sigh, it’s just not going to happen I tell myself. I wonder if Nigel Farage will ever come out with a speech like that? (I wonder if he’s heard Paul Weston’s speech?) I can hardly imagine the BBC affording him the opportunity to do so. 17
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 30 May 2013 21:46 | # Bill: And there’s the rub, how many people out there will get to hear what Paul had to say, precious few I would say. Paul’s speech is definitely worth posting on relevant MSM threads. The current play total is 2670. Let’s see if we can push that up. 18
Posted by GentlemanPugilist on Thu, 30 May 2013 23:40 | # A good speech which certainly does deserve a wider audience. I will post it where I can. I am begin to detect a change in people’s attitudes now. Many are really beginning to question the logic of multiculturalism and diversity, however the problem is that the mainstream media has too much influence. I have been reading newspaper articles this week which still portray those who oppose the demographic changes we’re undergoing as ‘extremists’. It would appear that there still is a cosmopolitan elite who, for whatever reason, simply cannot appreciate our concerns. 19
Posted by wobbly on Fri, 31 May 2013 00:30 | # Dude
It’s not rare where there’s no escape i.e. the girls left behind by white flight because their parents don’t have the ability to move away. However even then it’s proportional to how violent the intruder males are so it’s not just the presence of intruder males it’s how threatening they are although as the more threatening they are the more it highlights the inability of co-national males to protect them it more or less boils down to the same thing. If the plutocrats destroy the middle class economically so they can’t run and then section 8 them it will happen more often - unless they fight back of course. 20
Posted by Austin on Fri, 31 May 2013 00:46 | # James Bowery, Even if you are right about the feminine mind, isn’t it ultimately irrelevant? Isn’t the point of political speech and action not to get the females up in arms, but to get the males up in arms, quite literally, to fight? Isn’t the main problem right now about getting the males up in arms and dealing with the fact that many of them serve as the hired muscle of the enemy? Without all the brainless “patriotards” in the police and military, none of the enemy’s crap would be enforced. 21
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 31 May 2013 00:47 | # wobbly, its also not-so-rare when the middle class cannot economically form families—although in that case the invading sexual beneficiary males are more likely to be Jews than their recently-imported (post 1965 Act) surrogate sociopolitical mercenaries/red-herrings like the Muslims who chopped up that young Brit.
22
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 31 May 2013 01:45 | # Austin, suffering moral condemnation from females is powerfully toxic to male morale—especially when the males have no socially acceptable route with which to defend their honor being besmirched by females (which are incited to do so by the continual broadcast mass media and academia insults to their honor from Jews and the like—insults to which there is no natural response available). In effect, females have been reduced to fangs of a viper that has dehumanized them and through them has dehumanized their co-national males. So you are correct in this sense: There are virtually no women—why give any moral authority to the fangs of a viper that has destroyed that which men value most: women? 23
Posted by Lurker on Fri, 31 May 2013 03:14 | # James -
That deserves constant repetition! Also, somewhere in the background, our women are encouraged to think that this condemnation (by them) will work on men of other races. On the whole it doesn’t and it won’t in the future. 24
Posted by Leon Haller on Fri, 31 May 2013 03:18 | # My God, I and my dad have talked exactly like this since the 80s! How this directly applies to California in my lifetime - and America, of course. Good speech from this man. I like him! None of the improperly scientististic appeals, let alone fascist/neo-Nazi skinhead crap. Just plain conservative sense. I wish he were getting a quarter of the national vote. Some of us anti-immigration activists in the 90s talked about “white genocide”. Recall what I’ve long said here. Whites must make an AFFIRMATIVE decision to survive, or else they won’t. We survived in the past because it simply wasn’t feasible, in terms of transportation, communications, and modal psychology (of nonwhite as well as white), for masses of Third Worlders to pack up and move to Europe (the great exceptions being Jews and Roma/Sinti). That has changed, and yet in the very epoch when whites must be more race-conscious than ever, we have succumbed to the moral idiocy of multiculturalism. This is an ETHICAL struggle. Those WNs who seek to sow discord among white preservationists by trying to link nationalism with atheism, or with critiques of Christianity (or with exaltations of ... faggotry! cf “Counter-currents”), are really immeasurable fools. Christianity must be theologically/ethically recaptured by national patriots, and then re-theorized (correctly) so as to recognize the sanctity of, first, counter-jihad, and then later the rights of white indigenes to live in their traditional communities free of coercive ‘diversity’, whose corollary in Europe is the repatriation of all nonwhites from the continent, and, in the more racially complex New World, a) the deportation of nonwhite illegal aliens; b) the end of nonwhite immigration; c) encouragement of greater white immigration; d) pro-natalist tax incentives targeted towards those social classes in which whites predominate; e) restoration of freedom of association and disassociation rights; f) replacement of antiwhite instructional materials in schools; g) devolution of power from the central governments to states or provinces/territories; h) private pro-white advocacy and assertion of cultural traditionalism; and g) encouragement of white patriot geographical ingathering with a goal of ultimate white secession and new-nation sovereignty. Additionally, we need Nuremberg-style trials for those who allowed (imposed) this invasion on Western nations, with the same punishments meted out. We should state this loudly (let it become an internet meme), and begin compiling lists of race traitors for future arrest and trial. Selous Scout is right: I hope none of you English patriots thinks your people will ever get rid of these aliens without a civil war (perhaps that was Blair’s plan in bringing these millions - 8 MILLION in 15 years!!!!?? to little Britain?? - to render any indigenous reaction impossible). Of course, the worst that could happen would be “conservative” integrationism - a dramatic reduction in immigration, followed by lots of superficial structural assimilation, intermarriage, panmixia, and no final alien removal. One question: why is there no English version of Sinn Fein and the Provisional IRA? What are the differences culturally, psychologically and perhaps institutionally, which account for Irish Republican militancy, and English patriot passivity? 25
Posted by wobbly on Fri, 31 May 2013 04:06 | # Leon
The problem - whatever it is - has to reach into the skilled trades as they’d provide the leadership. The immigration-genocide has been bottom up starting with the unskilled and so far the skilled trades have been able to afford to move away. When they have nowhere left to run some kind of ERA will form. It may be too late by then. The situation in Northern Ireland included the skilled trades from the start. 26
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 31 May 2013 04:25 | # But its got to be that structure not only for England, but for all White Nationlisms: an above ground raising consciousness and establishing rules and an underground detached enough from connection with the public spokesmen. 27
Posted by Selous Scout on Fri, 31 May 2013 04:39 | # “This is an ETHICAL struggle” It is a PHYSICAL struggle, an existential conflict—as I’ve been telling you chaps for several years. And you still don’t get it. Blood and bullets. There will be more stabbings, beheadings, and shootings in the streets, bombings in public spaces, smashed mosques, explosions in pubs, in Parliament. Blood will flow in the streets. I prophesise it. How will the English (and Europeans) respond? This is what I’m interested in. You’ve all made the mistake—for years, I might emphasise—in assuming this is merely a cultural or political conflict, easily won over time by concerted effort by culture warriors and puffed-up egg-heads. Hence, your fucking useless philosophising and common mental wank. Guess what? Events have caught up to you. No, I correct myself: they have passed you up and they keep going into unmapped territory. The situation is clearly moving faster than you anticipated. Now what?
28
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 31 May 2013 04:50 | # Leon, it is not only divisive to try to insist that normal White people believe in Christianity, it is divisive of their personal interests, their very ability to think properly, and of particular relevance, divisive of White interests. You want to take awakened people, who are finding rational answers to their problems, who believe in truth and then tell them they must believe in a bunch of stuff which makes no sense what so ever (except for Jewish interests). Maybe those who practice Christianity and White Nationalism at the same time should not be criticized, but the Judeophilic mind cancer of Christianity is there to render our warriors hapless and our people fair game to invaders. It must not be forced on European peoples; it must be moved away from gradually, tactfully and respectfully in some cases, but it must give way to proper European religion of indigenous European peoples. That is, those Europeans who do not and will not believe in Christianity deserve respect and consideration for the sensibilities of their moral concerns. 29
Posted by Robert Reis on Fri, 31 May 2013 05:35 | # Three Great Women: Hanna Reitsch, Melitta Schenk Grafin von Stauffenberg, Hannah Duston Hanna Reitsch
Hannah Duston On this day she wasn’t in any position to fight off a swarming horde of warriors, and was quickly captured and forced out of her home. Her house was plundered and torched to the ground, and a subsequent raid on the village of Haverhill resulted in forty additional settlers being killed or captured by the Abenaki. Along with the other captives, she was forced at gunpoint to walk north towards Canada. For several days they walked through ankle-deep snow and bitter, freezing cold, traveling nearly fifty miles from Haverhill to present-day Concord, New Hampshire. Anybody who couldn’t keep up was brained in the face with a hatchet, and when Hannah’s child wouldn’t stop crying, her captors gave the kid a post-partum abortion by smacking it against a tree. By the time the party left Concord and started traveling by canoe up the Merrimack River, all that remained of the captives were Hannah, her nursemaid, and some fourteen-year old kid they’d picked up along the way. Hannah Duston was a tough New England broad, and she wasn’t going to let the Indians get away with it. The next night, while all of the warrior braves were sleeping, Hannah sought her vengeance. She somehow broke free from her restraints and slowly tiptoed her way across the campsite. Using extreme caution, she held her breath, quietly reached into the pack of one of the warriors, closed her fingers around the wooden handle of a razor-sharp tomahawk, and silently pulled it out into the night air. Before anybody knew what was going on, Hannah Duston was in the midst of their campfire whirling and slashing at everything she could reach. In the span of just a few seconds, she had killed ten indians with a tomahawk and sent two other warriors sprinting off into the woods screaming their heads off. This angry Puritan mother took out an entire raiding party by herself without even blinking. The two men who ran off were sure to be returning in the relatively near future. It made sense for the Puritans to not be sitting around a giant pile of corpses when they returned. Hannah assembled her friends, grabbed a rifle and some food from the campsite, stole a canoe and headed back towards Haverhill. She also went back and scalped the dead Indians before heading out. In the canoe, the small group of fugitives paddled desperately trying to get down river before they were caught, recaptured, and harshly executed. After a couple days of this nocturnal adventuring, they reached the New Hampshire town of Bradley Cove, where they convinced a local farmer to provide them with food and shelter for the night. From there, they headed out for home, walking the remaining 30+ miles to Haverhill. Hannah Duston really didn’t take kindly to being captured, force-marched, and having her kid brutally murdered right in front of her. To commemorate the adventures of this frontierswoman, in 1879 an appropriately-grim-looking statue of Mrs. Duston was erected in downtown Haverhill. She is believed to be the first American woman to have a public monument built in her honor. http://www.badassoftheweek.com/duston.html Sources: Cook, Bernard. Women and War. ABC-CLIO, 2006. James, Edward T., et al. Notable American Women. Harvard Univ. Press, 1971. The Story of Hannah Dustin
30
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 31 May 2013 06:12 | # RR. you are bringing up the behavior of women within cultures that are not utterly devoid of autonomous moral authority—although one can reasonably argue that National Socialist Germany was only truly nationalistic relative to ultimate debaucheries of humanity such as the Soviet Union. Each of the Reichs were really commonwealths that progressively gave over local autonomy to central authority. I have no doubt that many erstwhile women who, in the present circumstances, are serving as fangs injecting toxic venom straight into the hearts of their men, would, in a counterfactual autonomous culture, be worthy of the treatment as goddesses that their ancestresses enjoyed in their indigenous culture. 31
Posted by Leon Haller on Fri, 31 May 2013 07:17 | # wobbly@25
You know what I think, utterly horrifying as it may be to contemplate? I think whites have been so racially degenerate for so long (really, at least since a few years past the close of WW2 hostilities - and even WW2 itself may have involved an aspect of what I’m about to hypothesize) that, at some terrible subconscious level, they consider it more permissible to be hostile towards other whites than towards other races. Sounds outlandish, doesn’t it? And yet, I believe I have seen this behavior exhibited many times in my life. If I’m right about this (and of course, I’m not at all certain; it’s just a hunch), then there really is some kind of genetic defect involved with large numbers of our co-racials. Obviously, this defect was long latent. But, as a historical fact, once the right mental memes had been sufficiently widely propagated, the collapse of white will took off like a rocket. As I have asked many times, as a purely scientific problem, how else (besides genetics) can we account for the same vitriolic antiracist psychosis erupting across vastly different white ethnocultures? Surely we can agree that Swedes are not Italians, and Dutchmen not Frenchmen. Yet, on the matter of dealing with other races, the outlook of huge portions of these various populations is identically absurd (“absurd” in this case meaning “maladaptive”, in turn meaning “tending towards extinction”). How is that possible, if there is not an underlying, common biological explanation? This is why the only long-term solution is revolutionary violence; that is, internal conquest of genetically defective whites by their genetically healthy brethren, and the forcible imposition/indoctrination of our racial values onto the children of our co-racial (liberal) enemies. For even though the propensity towards race suicide seems to be innate among many whites, clearly this is not only not so for all whites, but a huge propagandistic component seems to be necessary to bring out this latent ‘suicidalism’. I assume that this suicidalist tendency can be kept in check through rigid societal (ie, race elite-enforced) cultural norms supporting the absolute value of white preservation. But neither the liberals nor our alien race-enemies will cede such control to us without brute physical warfare leaving them with no alternative. 32
Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 31 May 2013 07:19 | # In 2010 the the country with the highest number of births to mothers from outside the UK http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_230307.pdf Isn’t this the same shit over and over again. How is it anymore brutal than this? 33
Posted by Leon Haller on Fri, 31 May 2013 07:38 | # Selous Scout @27
I hope you’re not referring to me, esp in light of my comment 31 above. I have ALWAYS stated that the survival of Western Man will require PHYSICAL force. I have been saying so loudly for at least 20 years (though I had still then, in the early 90s, held out some slim hope that there would be a Sam Francis-style Middle American Revolt bringing an end to the immigration invasion; instead we got the second Traitor Bush, and the rest is history ...). I have been stating for years, right here at MR, that the race problem is “rapidly moving from a political to a military one”, to quote myself. By “ethical struggle”, I merely meant that our cause is not only one of raw animal survival, in which group life is seen as its own moral justification, but rather, that true morality (assuming one believes, as I do, in objective moral laws - even if the proper application of those laws in concrete circumstances can be difficult to discern) is on OUR side. WNs don’t need to declare war on traditional Western ethics in order to ensure race survival; we simply need to apply them correctly, for a change. Again, I certainly did not mean to suggest that a bunch of egghead ontologists or theologians or whatnot will be the actual saviors of the West. That will require hard men willing to destroy our enemies; indeed, to feel the purest (arational) and most exuberant joy in utterly crushing them, in battering their skulls, slitting their throats, gouging their eyes, hacking their limbs, gutting their insides, roasting their corpses (or using them for feed for their dobermans and rottweilers). But in seeking to recreate such atavistic warriors, we must also ensure they they remain thoroughly moralized, lest they themselves become an anarchic and merely destructive force. Thus the need to update “Crusader ideology” for our own times. 34
Posted by Leon Haller on Fri, 31 May 2013 08:15 | # DanielS@28
I think you have the matter exactly backwards. I have no desire to force Christianity on anyone. I personally would rather live in a more Christian white state, than in a less Christian one. I admire the Spartans and the Romans, and even the Nazis to some extent, but I myself would not really want to live under those regimes. I like normal, traditional, White Christian America - the Old America 1776-about 1965. It was never perfect, obviously, but what has degraded and is continuing to ruin it is multiracialism. How religion will work in a white Racial State is a bridge we can cross then. There will have to be some basic libertarian compromises, just as, apart from some recrudescent European ethnostate, there will have to be many intrawhite ethnic compromises (possibly beginning with language, though I suspect English will win by default). After all, many elements in white ethnic identities involve past hostilities with other whites, and celebrations of such will have to be muted in the interests of mass-comity and common survival in a vastly white-outnumbered world. Certainly, in a white republic carved out of the carcass of modern America, there will be many Christians and white non-Christians. They will have to be mutually respectful (though I suspect some aspects of the present Culture Wars - abortion, same sex marriage, divorce laws - will inevitably carry over to the WR). My point is merely that WN critiques of Christianity (and even, to some extent, of the JQ) are tremendously yet needlessly divisive. If WNs force a Christian to choose between Christ and race, most are going with Christ (myself included). The obviously more intelligent tack (even for atheist WNs) is to work for the realignment of Christianity with race-preservationism. I don’t mean to imply that to be a Christian one must also be a WN (though I have some leanings that way, albeit not yet fully theorized ... I think supporting white race-replacement is an act of terrible disloyalty, which itself I see as a form of impiety, of disrespecting one’s fathers and even the created order in the deepest sense - again, this is not fully thought out, just an intuition); only that defensively preventing white communities and nations from being demographically overrun and/or genetically annihilated is not impermissible for a Christian. There is nothing in Scripture, or the best theology, that I have found, anyway, suggesting that human groupings cannot maintain their ethnic and territorial cohesion. Just because Christ’s message is available to all doesn’t mean that the temporal world must be abnegated, or in turn, that race, and culture and history must be forgotten or eliminated. Those latter conclusions derive from what I believe is the Christian heresy of liberalism - not from Christianity proper. When WNs attack the historic faith, they are deliberately contracting the appeal of their ideology. Successful movements focus on broadening their appeal - even at the cost of lessening ideological purity. But I think my own form of WP (which is completely in agreement with the entirety of Paul Weston’s speech above) would be vastly more attractive than “CQ” and even JQ WN. 35
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 31 May 2013 09:12 | # Leon, there are plenty of scriptural versus that suggest that one should not bother to fight and that one ought to place faith basically in the hereafter, not in this lived life: a central part of which would mean vital concern for those closely related, interested and cooperative in their survival and well being. I am not forcing people to choose between Christianity and WN, but I will not remain silent while this crazy, anachronistic nonsense is proposed for those who are thinking naturally and logically. You suggest that we should not divide people on the JQ. Jews are not Europeans, they do not care about us - their elites and patterns are antagonistic to Europeans. Of course being the advocate of Jews that you are you are going to try to take this occasion of attention turned toward the Muslim problem to put Jewish alliance across. Even if we were foolish enough to think you were right, its been tried and it never works. Ask Geert Wilders and the BNP The same holds true for Christianity: it is alien to Europeans. It only makes sense for Jewish interests.
36
Posted by Leon Haller on Fri, 31 May 2013 09:41 | # No, I don’t think Jews belong in Europe at all. They have Israel (or anywhere else, including the US). In the USA, the JQ is a total loser. Period. I’m happy to form alliances of mutual cooperation with conservative Jews, in the US. I have no opposition to Europeans who want their countries free of Jews, and all other non-Europeans. But Christianity is the truth. Even if it were not, you have not disproven or even disputed my comment above. And even if you did dispute it, I would stand by it, because I am correct. Meanwhile, let’s look at the wonderful secular Britain: What a success (and note: some of those Christians in the pews aren’t even British (white)). 37
Posted by Trainspotter on Fri, 31 May 2013 10:08 | # Very, very well done Mr. Weston. Hear, hear! 38
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 31 May 2013 10:13 | # No, Leon, Christianity is not the truth. And there is too much evidence to even bother with in disproving your claim. That you would try to proclaim separatism from Jews a losing position in The US, goes to show where your allegiances are: with Jews. To say that Whites in America must ally with Jews in order to win is like saying that they must ally with their cancer, their own death, in order to win. You say Christianity is more important to you than anything, more important than European peoples. I believe you and it’d be better for you and everyone else if you’d go to Christian site instead of trying to confuse matters here. 39
Posted by Bill on Fri, 31 May 2013 10:30 | # Men - who needs them? Modernity has skewed the balance of the natural order of things, women especially. No longer is it Mother Nature’s function to guide the issues of procreation in the affairs of the human species, modern man has supplanted the involvement of nature’s role, particularly in the affairs of whites. Women no longer need men. The procreation of the human species in future will be entrusted to the eugenicist. The groundwork has already been done and when ready to roll, only a small section of the best breeding male stock will be required. Both male and female populations will then be vastly reduced to order in accordance with UN agenda 21. The liberation of the white female in the shape of birth control and abortion, is just another weapon in the war against whites and world over population. (Two birds with one stone.) Gentleman Pugilist @18 The architects have turned our language (and our culture upside down) as in Orwell’s 1984, One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter, tough on crime - tough on the causes of crime. Good is bad, prison is freedom, there’s no such thing as truth, tolerance is intolerance, the new fascist is the anti fascist. concern is extremism, concern is Hitler, concern is racist and so it goes on. This whole strategy has been tried and tested in other spheres. They have a PHD on the subject. Same with laboratory experiments with application to human behavior in mind Our civilisation is one giant laboratory experiment preparing for our demise. The culture war against whites knows no bounds. Sad thing is, only a small number of white people are aware of its dastardly motives, most I would say have no awareness to what’s going on at all. Wobbly @ 25 Why aren’t we like the IRA? I too have often pondered on this enigma with no solution forthcoming. Perhaps being one of history’s oppressed makes a difference. 40
Posted by Bill on Fri, 31 May 2013 11:04 | # Paul Western’s speech. There’s an elephant in this speech that I’m surprised the more volatile element here would not, at other times, have been critical. I don’t want to be a party pooper here but why is everyone avoiding the elephant? I think it should be discussed. This speech is an unapologetic anti-jihad speech with embellishments, which under normal circumstances would have been called out. Is it not Gates of Vienna? or Griffin’s BNP? Why not called out this time? What am I missing here? Isn’t Paul Western cool with immigration as long as it’s not Muslim or have his views evolved into something else? Is this not another case of the enemy of our enemy is .....? 41
Posted by Thorn on Fri, 31 May 2013 12:24 | # DanielS, You’d do yourself a great favor to adopt Kai Murros’ attitude/approach towards Christianity. Listen to Kai starting @ the 20 minute mark. He expresses the proper attitude an atheist —or any other non-Christian White Nationalist—should have towards Christianity: http://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/kai_murros_speaks1 As it stands now, clearly your attitudes towards Christianity, Danny, are more based on irrational emotion impulse rather than rational objective thinking. PS, I’ve been linking Paul Weston’s speech at MSM conservative websites here in the States. I think his message will resonate well simply because he is plain spoken and approaches the race-replacement crisis from an ethical/moral perspective. In short, Paul Weston dosen’t scare or repel people. This is very important because before we can effectively wage war against those responsible for race-replacement policies, we need to win enough hearts and minds in order to reach critical mass—that is the necessary precondition. Obviously we are in a race and time is not on our side. We need to reach critical mass before the demographic tipping point is passed. That said, I look forward to the day we can all celebrate our victory; drink Champagne, and piss on Tim Wise’s grave. 42
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 31 May 2013 13:40 | # ...... Posted by Thorn on May 31, 2013, 07:24 AM | # DanielS, You’d do yourself a great favor to adopt Kai Murros’ attitude/approach towards Christianity. Listen to Kai starting @ the 20 minute mark. He expresses the proper attitude an atheist —or any other non-Christian White Nationalist—should have towards Christianity: http://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/kai_murros_speaks1
I’ve been linking Paul Weston’s speech at MSM conservative websites here in the States. I think his message will resonate well simply because he is plain spoken and approaches the race-replacement crisis from an ethical/moral perspective. In short, Paul Weston dosen’t scare or repel people. This is very important because before we can effectively wage war against those responsible for race-replacement policies, we need to win enough hearts and minds in order to reach critical mass—that is the necessary precondition. Obviously we are in a race and time is not on our side. We need to reach critical mass before the demographic tipping point is passed. That said, I look forward to the day we can all celebrate our victory; drink Champagne, and piss on Tim Wise’s grave. Telling people who are reasonable enough to not believe in Christianity that they must accept Christianity is the turn-off to normal folks. As I have said, I don’t seek Christians out for criticism, but when you and Haller come here and try to impose that suicidal anachronism, that anti-thought, I’m going to be honest and defend the people who care more about European people than Christianity. You have both tried to play the card recently that Whites have flawed, suicidal genetics - trying to blame Whites and with that avoid the much more obvious conclusion that Christianity is a suicidal ideology imposed upon Whites. Haller keeps trying to bring Jews in on the side of Whites, under some sort of big tent populism. That is, both of you are trying to weaken or open the doors, in one way or another, to the enemies of Whites.
Haller shows pictures of empty churches. Get it? Most normal European peoples don’t want it. Nobody is stopping those who do. 43
Posted by Thorn the Beneficent on Fri, 31 May 2013 14:30 | # Danny, Here in the States if you try your approach with conservatives, they’d quickly put a boot up your ass then kindly escort you out of the room. The point is, Danny, you have to work smart. Ask yourself: If most white conservative Americanos identify as Christians, is it a good tactic to attack their religious belief or is it better to appeal to them on their turf in other ways? Fact: the vast majority of Americano conservatives (over the age of 30) identify as Christians. The radical Left is another story. They are the true enemy. They are the purveyors of cultural Marxism. They reject Christianity, nationalism, and are implacably against anything that hints of pro-white interests. Bottom line, The world isn’t going to change for you, Danny. You have to adapt and try your best to affect change in the most effective means possible. And yes, I know you fancy yourself as an non-Cartesian Daseinite leftist hippie (but not a leftist as defined by the jews) and an anti-Semite/anti-Nazi/anti-Christian etc. etc. etc. But I can safely assume your unique philosophy will NOT catch on like wildfire amongst academics or the masses anytime soon ... or if ever. In the mean time, you need to settle for more realistic expectations via taking a more normal pragmatic approach. 44
Posted by wobbly on Fri, 31 May 2013 14:46 | # Leon
I’m not interested in anti-white explanations. Bill
Like i say the problem - from the Irish Republican point of view - included the skilled trades from the start. It’s a question of IQ and leadership. One of the things that proves the immigration-genocide is a planned genocide is the way the engineers made sure only a minority of the indigenous population were targeted at any one time. It was mostly restricted to the poorest areas and only one neighborhood at a time (a few at a time in the biggest cities). Only once the first target neighborhoods were turned into a minority did the engineers pick the next targets etc. Secondly the media’s electronic gulag meant most people weren’t fully aware of what was happening and even those people who were living in the target neighborhoods didn’t know the same thing was happening elsewhere. So at each step only a few of the indigenous population were being targeted at the same time and it was easier for those who could afford to simply move a few miles down the road. This process was/is effectively an IQ filter, attacking and eating away the indigenous population from the bottom up. So the people being targeted were like an infantry regiment with no officers or NCOs. Now some of the more crowded countries in Europe are getting to the point where people from the skilled trades level are running out of places to run there’ll be an English Resistance Army or a Dutch resistance Army or a blah Resistance Army of some kind at some point but we’re not quite there yet. If/when it happens let’s hope they pick sensible targets. Bill
As things get more urgent idealogical hair-splitting will get less. 45
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 31 May 2013 15:35 | # Posted by Thorn the Beneficent on May 31, 2013, 09:30 AM | # Danny, Here in the States if you try your approach with conservatives, they’d quickly put a boot up your ass Let them try. I am not trying to adjust to a failioconservative position, nor am I recommending that anyone else do.
I don’t attack their belief. I see the way Haller tries to sneak this stuff in here, saying that nobody should ever question this nonsense and I respond accordingly.
That’s their ball and chain if they really do believe it. It is for the right thinking people, particularly those under 30, whose rationale and thinking has not been contaminated by your Jewish motives, that I speak. The radical Left is another story. They are the true enemy. No. That is your diversion term. The Marxist Jewish Left, which as applied to Whites is liberalism, is the enemy, along with Jewish and traitorous objectivist, capitalist oligarchs - also prescribed liberalism for Whites. They are the purveyors of cultural Marxism. Jews are.
Bottom line, The world isn’t going to change for you, Danny.
No, Christians have to adapt to the optimal world view for Whites, not one that is convenient for Jewish manipulation.
Yes, that’s right. As defined by Whites - i.e. it is not particularly about economics or economic classes in its structure, it is about the European race and meant to keep treacherous people like you out.
I don’t define myself as anti-semitic, anti Christian, anti Nazi. Those things are not central to my platform. Those things, along with the word “left”, by itself, are just words that you are trying to attach to me in order to evoke an unpopular response: to make me look like one of your Jewish conditioned poison stereotypes. Shame on you.
It already has caught on, it is the view of most Whites, though they are not afforded sufficient opportunity to articulate these views thanks to media control and intimidation from creepy people like you. In the mean time, you need to settle for more realistic expectations via taking a more normal pragmatic approach. Bullshit, there is nothing practical about what you are trying to put across: You are trying to put across Jewish neo-con bullshit. 46
Posted by Morgoth on Fri, 31 May 2013 16:51 | # Bill, It is precisely Weston is associated with the Counter Jihad lot that makes this speech interesting. The counter jihad has highly dubious backers and is intellectually false, an intelligent man such as Weston will soon move on, as have many others. Perhaps soon we will see that old slugger Pat Condell speak up for his own people instead of the Israelis ! with a gazillion hits a vid he would be most welcome. But what this does increase the pressure on the centre of politics, many UKIPers are growing confused on the lack of clear stance on Islam, never mind the race/demographics issue in general. At the same time the parties to the Right of UKIP are racializing. Expect to see a ‘‘controversial’’ comment or speech by Farage or a lower level UKIPer sometime soon, just so the masses can feel relieved. This ‘‘shunt’’ will then have a knock on effect within the LibLabCon and once again they will start feeling the squeeze. The task at hand is to whip and kick the UKIPers into having the most Nationalistic stance possible, and a speech like Westons, or censor stats, or a Anti Hitler vid, a Muslim killing etc etc all help in the task. There is no ‘‘Long March’’ for Nationalists, its a series hard and brutal shunts, and they are starting from the ‘‘Far Right’‘ The Tories are, tactically speaking, pitiful. All it would take to let off some steam would be a stern speech from Cameron but we get nothing at all. Blairs Labour were clever at playing the masses, after 7/7 Blair gave a relatively stern address, Labour were like a rubber ball, in contrast the Tories seem hard but brittle, with enough ‘‘shunts’’ they could simply fall to pieces. 47
Posted by Bill on Fri, 31 May 2013 17:47 | # @ 43 Wobbly. Our political leaders just upped and went walkabout, leaving the teeming millions floundering. It really is an unbelievable story. Just think, we enthusiastically voted for candidates that were planning to cut our throats. We have been decapitated by the political leaders turning their backs on us. How they’ve pulled it off is mind bending. He who dares wins. The idea of ridding whites must have been in preparation for decades, since at least 1965. During this time a whole industry has been built with one purpose in mind. Tens of thousands of native Brits must have been employed in the town halls, civil service, housing associations, police and enablers in general. How did they manage to keep the lid on this plot, why no whistle blowing among the thousands employed. Browns economic miracle must have been built on the back of mass immigration, just think of what an additional 1000 new enrichers per day generates in the expanding money supply. New homes, plasma TV’s, interior furnishings , transport, in fact the whole works that modern life requires. How it has all been conceived, planned and executed is inexplicable. And the people responsible are still wandering about in the corridors of power without a care in the world. As regards Paul Western.
Agreed. We cannot afford such luxuries. 48
Posted by torgrim on Fri, 31 May 2013 18:07 | # Bill said, “the idea of getting rid of whites must have been in preparation for decades, since at least 1965”. My opinion is we have had the Morgenthau Plan, “light”, imposed upon the West since 1965, so yes, preparation was just imposing the “Plan” in stages….since the War. 49
Posted by Frankie on Fri, 31 May 2013 19:37 | # Weston’s speech is significant because he is successfully delivering effective talking points, points that hit home. Had he delivered an intellectuals’ brew of studies, theory and references, he would not have been significant or effective. Did anyone besides me notice that nearly all of his talking points were identical to the talking points used by those deploying Whitaker’s “Mantra”? This speech was basically a translation of the Mantra into the English of the English, even to the point of accusing the perps of Genocide. Bravo! Effective talking points outperform intellectual gibberish every time. 50
Posted by Frankie on Fri, 31 May 2013 19:48 | # @DanielS
NICE! 51
Posted by Thorn on Fri, 31 May 2013 20:27 | # @DanielS
Most of Europe has been dechristianize, and the result? A bunch of secular-liberal race traitors clamoring to prove just how “anti-racist” they are. Hence, Christianity is not the problem. The answer to the problem can be found in large part within the field of Evolutionary psychology. Evolutionary psychology theorizes that whites have evolved genetically based behavioral traits (such as whites’ proclivity towards altruist collectivism on one hand and individualism on the other) that are proving to be maladaptive in a multiracial environment. That’s a good starting point in understanding the dynamics of the why and how we’ve allowed ourselves to get into this race-replacement predicament. 52
Posted by Dude @ Morgoth on Fri, 31 May 2013 20:29 | # Morgoth, good points, but I would be willing to bet that such a speech will never come from Farage. The ‘homophobia’ scandals that recently buffeted UKIP are enough to show me that they mean what they say when they suggest they are an ‘inclusive’ party. The principles that animate the leadership clique are those of right of centre liberals. You will note their immigration policy is currently officially under review. Expect when it is disclosed that it will not include their earlier ‘5 year moratorium’. As I asked in an earlier thread here, the task is for the traditionally minded to form up and use their critical mass inside UKIP to push the party in the desired direction. Or show that critical mass that UKIP are not the final answer, just a midway option. Other parties may then be able to eventually benefit from this, such as even LibertyGB, provided they lose their counter-jihad baloney. For either of them to do this effectively, they (and we) have to be sure of first principles and then they must be intelligently and subtly expressed. 53
Posted by Harry on Fri, 31 May 2013 21:37 | # “... which makes no sense what so ever (except for Jewish interests).” Having recently come back to Christianity and begun reading the Bible for the first time I’ve been struck how completely antithetical to Jewish interests it is. I say that with the caveat that huge swathes of Christianity, particularly in America, have been led astray by the futurist/dispensationalist interpretation of Biblical prophecy that could be argued as being in the interests of the Jews. That this is a false interpretation requires very little study. My point being that just because an erroneous version of ‘Judeo-Christianity’ is widely promoted it doesn’t lead to the idea that Christianity itself is either wrong or at fault for the way it is widely misrepresented. “And there is too much evidence to even bother with in disproving your claim.” Just a little of this ‘evidence’ would be welcome. 54
Posted by ukn_leo on Fri, 31 May 2013 21:40 | # @Thorn and DanS On the rare occasion I can bare to visit my Mam and Stepdad I am oft forced to endure watching some US/British ‘God’ TV channels. Chock full to the brim with pro-Jewish, pro-Israel content/propaganda to a staggering degree, they, like tens of millions of others, have bought into it hook line and sinker (can’t be end times if the Israelites aren’t in control of Jerusalem, see). They would disown me, before they would disown this element of their ‘Christian’ beliefs. 55
Posted by Harry on Fri, 31 May 2013 22:14 | # Absolutely ukn_leo. It’s those who haven’t bought into it that are the most interesting. In fact that most would is itself part of Biblical prophecy. 56
Posted by Jon on Fri, 31 May 2013 22:20 | # “With speeches like this it must now be clear to the world’s elite architects that their intentions and preparation for their new order has been sussed, the nation’s herds are becoming more spooked as each day passes. It is a truly an international convergence. The thing is, what are they, (the elites) going to do about it? What counter measures do they have up their sleeves to sedate the masses?” The people at the top (not the useful idiots) who brought this about have no illusions of “we’re all the same under the skin”. I don’t even think they want multikulti to work, even they thought if it could. The have spent huge amounts of money and political capital on this project. Imo, of the immigrants are their unwitting soldiers in a war against us. I think they might just have an end-game planned. 57
Posted by Jon on Fri, 31 May 2013 22:22 | # I’d trust him more if he named the people responsible for this. 58
Posted by Thorn on Fri, 31 May 2013 22:50 | # ukn_leo, I can’t explain Christian Zionism. I never understood it. It never appealed to me. But then again I was raised Roman Catholic. I was never exposed to CZ until I was an adult, and as such I always wrote it off as something belonging to Protestants. However, in the case of the political arena, I suspect the pols feign CZ in order to suck up and bow down to rich and powerful Jews so as to curry favor with them in the form of campaign contributions; but more importantly, to avoid the jews wrath via the Jew media, a.k.a the MSM.
59
Posted by ukn_leo on Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:37 | # ‘Just curious. What denomination of Christianity are your Mam and Step dad?’ ~ Thorn Christ knows! Evangelical/Fundamentalist/Hard-core Creationist nut jobs. Cannot be debated/argued/reasoned with. Won’t even look at or listen to anything that is outside of their world view. Their response to DanS (whom I am in broad agreement with) would be the same as it is towards me - they would pray for his lost soul, in the hope that he would see sense in time for the imminent rapture (that can also only come about whilst the ‘Israelites’ [lol] control Jerusalem), and thus ascend to heaven with all the folk, and only the folk, that believe exactly the same as they do (everyone else is screwed). Last weekend I got them to watch some clips on you tube of anti-fash street fights and the following clip .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) as ‘the Muslims’ are a fairly big talking point over here at the moment as I’m sure you can imagine. It has taken me years to get them to this stage. They were just interested in learning more about the EDL as they had seen them on the news. To them this is just further confirmation that these are the end times and that Satan rules the world. At this stage I usually have to go outside for a cigarette or three. 61
Posted by Leon Haller on Sat, 01 Jun 2013 01:41 | # What the hell just happened? I just posted a lengthy reply to uknleo, hit “post”, the screen went white, my comment disappeared (I hadn’t thought to copy it). Will my comment appear eventually? If not, that’s it. Goodbye. (now this one looks like it will get posted) 62
Posted by Selous Scout on Sat, 01 Jun 2013 06:06 | # Why aren’t we like the IRA? Wise question, indeed. If we were, Choudary’s head (not to mention those of his family and his LibLabCon handlers) would be on a pike paraded about Trafalgar Square by now. Another pint of bitter, please. 63
Posted by DanielS on Sat, 01 Jun 2013 06:18 | # ukn_leo Charles Carleson provides good orientation as to where Christian Zionism comes from and what might be done to help what he, as a Christian, refers to as its cult members. His site and program can provide tact in dealing with Christian Zionists for which I do not have patience (however, it is important to deal with them properly) - http://reasonradionetwork.com/20120131/the-sunic-journal-interview-with-charles-carlson
From the definitive world-view of Christian Zionists that Israel is as important as anything, as “Jesus” even, many CZ churches have been formed. John Hagee is notorious of late; he and his church are very much in the pocket of Zionist interests; according to Carleson, the Christian Zionists constitute the major popular support for the recent middle-eastern wars (W. Bush was put into the Presidency by pandering to them and winning them over to the goals of operation clean break/project for a new American century - i.e. wars as hatched by Wolfowitz, Perle, Netanyahu, Kristol and Feith - to “secure the realm around Israel” (and explicitly to use the American military to effect regime changes in Muslim states surrounding Israel to install Israel friendly regimes). According to Carleson, there is no true scriptural basis for Christian Zionism. I would imagine that CZ acts into a void of coherence and identity for people (which they lack, absent something like solidarity with their own native group, that being prohibited as “racism”), a hope for justice, victory - a sense to be on the winning side. That brings me to a second point, that CZ is based in a quest for “true interpretation” of the scriptures, a quest that all Christianity will inevitably come to (Protestantism was a logical step - there he stood, he could do no other, indeed), though it cannot be the exact science aspired to, as the texts are symbolic, thus inherently ambiguous and subject to manipulation (scaring people; giving them hope for revenge); with that, even more radically, function to serve a Jewish/Israeli world view as the scriptures were originally written by Jews who were largely concerned to overturn Rome and its rule over Israel.
64
Posted by ukn_leo on Sat, 01 Jun 2013 13:46 | # Leon, I think I know you well enough now to have a rough idea of what you may have said, so no worries there (I imagine your critique of Christian Zionists would be brutally scathing and based on your own knowledge of Christian development, thought and scripture). Thanks Dan. Will follow those links. “I do not have patience” - haha, this does not surprise me in the slightest. And I don’t blame you either! 65
Posted by wobbly on Sat, 01 Jun 2013 14:22 | # Selous
The people engineering the stealth genocide are the ones responsible. The immigrants themselves are just a tool. 67
Posted by Classic Sparkle on Sat, 01 Jun 2013 17:10 | # Paul himself is clearly a most sincere man. How he will square this with the essential culturism of his party remains another issue. Racialized integral calculus! Now that’s new math GW! Of course Aristophanes already knew that what the “circle-squarers” were attempting to do was impossible 2,400 years ago… The new is old and the old is new again… 68
Posted by Thorn on Sat, 01 Jun 2013 18:25 | # Harry @ 55 Thanks for the link. It was well worth the read. 69
Posted by Harry on Sat, 01 Jun 2013 19:40 | # “...the scriptures were originally written by Jews…” DanielS, in my own personal ‘quest for the true interpretation’ of the Bible one of the first things I learned was how wrong the above statement is. The first step is get a correct understanding of the word Jew. 70
Posted by Jon on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 10:25 | # Thorn:
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Or more accurately, concomitant with it, therefore because of it. Conversion to atheism or a racially exclusive religion is a first step toward having a sense of us/other amongst people who formerly looked at all Christians no matter what ethnicity or race as “brothers in Christ”.
It’s not a solution for us now, either. Not by a long chalk. Its acceptance as Christians anyone of any race inherent in its doctrine is not the problem but its a problem. An huge problem. An intractable problem. 71
Posted by Jon on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 10:29 | #
I should add to that, “and the entire rest of humanity as potential “brothers in Christ” in need only of soul-saving”. 72
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 13:36 | # Jon, They way I look at it is the is a large segment of whites that are going to act race neutral no matter what. This is not due to Christianity, it has to do with evolved behavioral genetic traits (which of course are caused more by natural environmental pressures than anything else). Moreover, these evolved behavioral traits (e.g. altruist collectivism) work to our benefit in a homogeneous environment, but work to our detriment in a multiracial environment. We whites invariably play host to the invasive parasites. To be pro-Western Civilisation and at the same time be anti-Christian is just plain ignorant. It’s akin to the ideology of the prison yard “intellectuals”. Leon Haller does an excellent job explaining the Christian POV, and why it is a necessary ingredient for European peoples long term survival. Robert Bork is another expert on the subject. I suggest you read the following before you continue banging-on about subjects you know very little. Slouching Towards Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline http://www.amazon.com/Slouching-Towards-Gomorrah-Liberalism-American/dp/0060573112 74
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 14:01 | # Posted by Thorn on June 03, 2013, 08:36 AM | # Jon, “They way I look it..”
75
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 14:19 | # Hey Danny, shouldn’t you be doing your day job as a full time Prancercise instructor rather than spreading your pseudo-intellectualism on the web? 76
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 14:30 | # Thornblossom, the instructions you and Haller receive, assets that you are, deliberate or defacto, for some pro-Jewish entity, cannot be allowed to prevail. We recognize yours and Haller’s unswerving, undying, unending commitment to Jews and we will not be disinformed by you. We will defeat you and achieve liberation from your corruption because we must. 77
Posted by Bill on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 16:52 | # A lot of head scratching going on in Sweden.
Everybody is blaming everybody else.
http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/13676/
78
Posted by Jon on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 20:52 | #
I never said it was. Only that Christianity, because of its universality, is an impediment to correcting that behaviour.
POV, i.e., opinion, not knowledge. There is one thing i need to know about Christianity: anyone can be a Christian. God looks at all peoples as same. Except for Jews, maybe. Or maybe not, wouldn’t matter. Change that, then we’ll talk. There is much about traditional Christianity morality for liberals to hate. But the good parts of it are mostly inherent in European peoples and imo, we don’t need some Friend in the Sky to tell us what’s right and wrong. And their hatred of it as it is would be infinitesimal compared to their hatred for it if it contained the doctrine that only European peoples can receive God’s grace and the rest are damned. As regards Christianity’s current practices, Leon writes nothing about how to reform them. If church authorities won’t (and they won’t) it’s moribund, insofar as its utility for our struggle. Or please direct me to the wormhole leading to Leon’s alternate universe where the Pope just issued a proclamation that mass immigration in the West and miscegenation are mortal sins and the Southern Baptists at their latest convention reversed their earlier stances and are now against Third World immigration and for re-segregating the churches. Do that I will gladly space-time-travel there, confess that I am a sinner and beg Jesus for forgiveness. Btw, Leon, always copy your posts before you hit send. It’s done the white screen thing to me a couple of times. Looks like a glitch in the software. 79
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 21:13 | # Jon, your points have been excellent. Your efforts are better directed positively for us, rather than getting sucked into dispute with Thorn and Haller’s nonsense. It’s all a ruse. We don’t need to hear their new interpretations of Christianity. That would be an endless waste of time. It’s all garbage. 80
Posted by Harry on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 21:42 | # DanielS, I tried to post this the other day but it doesn’t seem to have made it for some reason. The first thing you need to get a better understanding of is the word ‘Jews’. 81
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 21:54 | # It isn’t true, Harry, my understanding of the word Jews is just fine. 82
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 22:00 | # Jon, you are completely missing the larger point: Being openly hostile towards Euro-Christians is counterproductive to pro-white activism. It only serves to futher harm the already prejudiced reputation pro-white activism has. Can not you see that? That said, personally I really don’t give a flying fig if you ever become a Christian, honestly. You can go worship snail darters and tree frogs for all I care. Go for it! But first do no harm to the cause. The same goes for you too, Danny. 83
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 22:18 | # You are harming the cause Thorn, Haller, Harry et al. That’s the point. You don’t hear well reasoned arguments, so take your Christ-insanity elsewhere.
84
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 22:33 | #
Keep talking, Danny. Your Jew insanity elsewhere is revealing itself quite nicely. 85
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 22:37 | # Let’s try this again, shall we? HEH!
86
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 22:48 | # Is that right, Thornblossom?
87
Posted by Harry on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 22:56 | # DanielS, did you read the link? Or the previous one I gave you? The idea that Talmudic Judaism would wish to promote or support the Bible, Jesus Christ or Christianity in general is laughable. Quite clearly the reverse is and always has been true. So much so that whilst I accept that there are genuine people that are not Christians, those that are vehemently persistent in their denouncement of Christianity I tend to view with deep suspicion. You should read the articles, you might learn something. If you have then please point out what you consider to be the main errors contained within them. 88
Posted by Jon on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 22:58 | #
Christians, other than the nominal ones, tend to place their religion above all else. That would ordinarily be a problem in need of some serious thinking if it were equally as popular as 100 years ago but with the same betrayal of European peoples in favour of the NWO among its leaders. But it’s nowhere near so popular as it was, especially in Europe but even in America and even in the Bible Belt. It is dying. The treason of the church leaders (beginning in 1492 and accelerating in 20th Century) probably hastens its death because there is nothing there for White people as White people to hang on to anymore. I am so sure that there is no need to resuscitate it (in fact, it needs to be euthenised) as I am that people like you will scream to the top of your lungs that we can’t live without it right up until it breathes its last few breaths. 89
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 23:20 | # Posted by Harry on June 03, 2013, 05:56 PM | # DanielS, did you read the link? Or the previous one I gave you? I know Christianity well enough, I don’t need to return to that vomit.
But listen to this, Harry: Who are Jews going to be afraid of, people who are stupid enough to worship a Jew on a stick, to sacrifice their own material lives for a faken hereafter?
Definitely not. The Jews are going to be afraid of people who know what’s going on and fight for their own interests, not idiots like you, Thorn and Haller, who try to promote this universal nonsense mixed with Jewish nationalism. So much so that whilst I accept that there are genuine people that are not Christians, those that are vehemently persistent in their denouncement of Christianity I tend to view with deep suspicion. I view you with deep suspicion.
LOL! Thanks for the laugh - I did laugh out loud.
I don’t want to waste time with that stuff Harry. Refer back to the Humphreys interview.
90
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 03 Jun 2013 23:24 | # Jon, Let’s start our discussion here: How do you explain the beginning of all existence? 91
Posted by Jon on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 05:59 | #
An irrelevant question. Even if it were some sentient being, it doesn’t follow from that that it was the Jewish god. It doesn’t even follow that such sentient being even want praise, has issued commands or even particularly cares about what its creatures do and hasn’t created other higher-priority creatures. But lets say you’re right and it was the Christian god. Imo, He fucked up. He didn’t in His code book specifically, particularly and unambiguously proscribe miscegenation or different peoples living in the same lands. Anything you can cite on the matter is subject to interpretation whilst there are sundry other matters of doctrine followed by every or nearly every Christian sect precisely because they are unambiguously laid out. If He wants my praise (a rather odd thing for a god to want, btw) and obedience, He should have thought about that when He created Negros (another monumental fuck-up). 92
Posted by Jon on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 08:15 | #
I tend to view people who are persistent in their promotion of the Christian mind-virus (and I will answer such people, notwithstanding your “deep suspicion”), absent suspicion of my own of malign encouragement and/or dissent-sowing, similar to how Jesus viewed the lost sheep of the parable in the Book of Luke. But I must admit, I don’t have the infinite understanding attributed to Jesus, as I can’t begin to fathom how such unfortunates could not accept the 200.000.000 Mestizos who have issued forth from Church-sanctioned marriages as sufficient evidence of the perniciousness of Christianity in regard to the subject of this board. 93
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 11:24 | # Jon, you have the patience of a saint. You are building voting points to become a saint of the New White Church of the 14 Words. 94
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 11:29 | # If you were to take over a moribund Christian Church on behalf of Whites instead, I might just attend on Sundays. Maybe that should not be put forth as a joke. 95
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 12:09 | #
Yes, the Church of 14 words attended by a total of less than 14 mental patients. 96
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 12:22 | #
Or I should say: only a handful of mental patients would join your church. All others see you as an emotionally disturbed nutcase. 97
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 12:34 | # 150 People Arrested In NAACP Protest Against NC Republicans I’ll bet the farm everyone of the negro demonstrators is a Christian. It’s funny how Christianity dosen’t stand in the way of negro racial solidarity, isn’t it. 98
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 12:59 | # That’s right, Christianity fits with Negro voodoo and joo joo: they’re the only ones stupid enough for it to be gaining popularity amongst.
But you promote Christianity, viz. Jewish/tribalism for Jews/ universalism for everyone else?
.............................................................................................................
99
Posted by Jon on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 13:14 | #
My detractors are merely SPs, their suppressive behaviour and speech caused by Body Thetans placed there by an ancient galactic dictator named Jigabu. All they need are a few auditing sessions and they’ll become Operating Whitans, verified by one of my W-meters.
Hallucinating pathology where none exists is a symptom having lost an argument. 100
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 13:34 | #
No, dumb ass. I mock YOU. You and your co-mental patients do a great disservice to normal pro-white activists. Meaning those of us (not you) that are are trying to recruit a larger following. All long as extreme oddballs such as yourself are representative of WN, then WN will remain a tiny insignificant political force that only the SPLC and the ADL will take notice of. And I doubt the SPLC or the ADL actually takes the WN “movement” as a serious threat. They need and use WN—the joke that it currently is, (thanks to weirdos like you)—as a fundraising tool. 101
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 14:35 | # Thornblossom, so many useful ideas and discussions have been inhibited and blocked by your stupidity. How many threads have you ruined now? Go to a frigging Jesus site. To anything anybody can say all you do is try to divert to Jesus shit. You are scarcely better than that Joe thing (who you congratulated for doing a good job!). Thonrblossom, Christianity is Jewish history. Intelligent people, intelligent masses do not want it: this is not a site for stupid masses nor stupid people like you!
102
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 14:42 | # Whitans unite! Against Thornblossom, the king of the Jews!
I would suspect they were sent by the ancient dictator.. 103
Posted by Jon on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 14:48 | #
Notwithstanding your continued pathologising of non-believers, 37% in GB, 18 in Sweden, 27 in France, 16 in Czech Republic, 22 in Norway, 44 in Germany, etc. believe in any gods at all. If your recruiting pool consists of Northern European Whites (the ones I’m mainly interested in), then I’d argue you’re the one with your Bible-beating, that only appeals to the minority of Christian theists, who is doing the greater disservice. At difficult as I understand it is for you, because of your higher duty to your religion than your race, please keep Christianity out of it. 104
Posted by Jon on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 14:56 | #
Actually, though its foundational myths and ritual practices rival Christianity’s in terms of inanity and ridiculousness, some Scientology’s strategies for founding a modern religion (if little or nothing else from it) might be borrowed from. 105
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 15:16 | # Apparently scientology borrowed from some legitimate thinking: specifically from Alfred Korzybski’s general semantics. So, you do not have to go off the deep end with that stuff but can, rather, go to its rational premises. 106
Posted by Jon on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 15:31 | # I had an intuitive sense of general semantics, map/territory problem inherent in language, nominalisations, “is” problem, etc., before I ever heard of Korzybski or Wittgenstein. I always try to tell my kids, “look at the stylised drawing of a bear” rather than, “that’s a bear”. 107
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 15:54 | # Good, I look forward to hearing more of your ministry. 108
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 16:25 | # Jon @ 103 Where have I said I want to exclude “non-believers”? And where did I engage in “Bible beating”? Anyway, enough of your childish nonsense and on to something of substance.
109
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 16:42 | # Jon, I am interested and willing to consider along with you the strategies that you’ve gleaned useful for the setting-out of a new religion for Whites. 110
Posted by Jon on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 18:17 | #
Where did I say you said you wanted to? I’m starting to feel that I attributed good faith to you inappropriately.
Fair enough. Christianity-promotion, then (that I’m no longer convinced is not disingenuous).
I am only at the stage of having identified a problem (we haven’t in 1000+ years had something that has served the Jews so well—that in large part they owe their unassimilated survival to—an exclusive religion.) And the obvious solution. But words like “ministry” are inimical to what I have (only ethereally at this point) in mind. Same with “praise” and “worship”. The latter words are for the three religions of the literal or figurative Middle Eastern arse-lifters . I hold them offensive to at least the Nordic religious sensibility, who, understandably, paganised Christianity the most of any who adopted it. 111
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 18:49 | # I was not speaking literally but a bit facetiously in using the term ministry. By ministry, I only meant to hear you speak and relate your religious preferences and convictions. 112
Posted by Jon on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 18:59 | # “The White Religion”: Three commandments (these came to me from god, I swear. Didn’t go to a mountain, in fact, I didn’t even have to leave mum’s basement) 1. Be White (self-explanatory) Any other moral code, you can’t figure out on your own. You’re White, after all. But I don’t want to hear about them. 114
Posted by Jon on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 19:33 | # I have rethought the 2nd Commandment, er, I, mean god has revealed more to me. He revised it to, “hold your duties to this simple religion higher than anything else, including other religions”. There is now nothing that I can see that is incompatible with any other religions (except for such religions that require miscegenation or prohibit being White). 115
Posted by Jon on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 19:47 | # God has been busy with me. This is the final revision. 1. Be White. (self-explanatory) 116
Posted by Morgoth on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 20:47 | # Paul Weston’s speech has 22,000 views so far on this copy, and there are a few copies going around. This may well reach into the hundreds of thousands but apart from that, reading the comments and looking at the recommends on MSM the one thing that seems to be going viral is the JQ. Its everywhere ! and given we have had a recent Muslim outrage this is indeed a turn up. Posting at the Telegraph I often make quite blatant posts in regards to Jewish influence in our woes just to test the water and they are now being recommended by many many members of the public, but how? I doubt the British public are reading Culture Of Critique. I think there is an innate sense that something is very wrong and that somebody or something is drawing up plans for our destruction, and as always in the past, they ‘‘feel’’ who is behind it, or rather the pieces of the jigsaw fit together when the taboo around one group is removed. 117
Posted by Harry on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 21:16 | # “I know Christianity well enough…” No, you think you do but, sadly, are badly misinformed. I gave you the opportunity to truly learn something. Nobody can deny that huge swathes of the Christian church has been deceived but the question is, what do the scriptures really say. “… people who are stupid enough to worship a Jew on a stick…” If you’d bothered to read the article you’d see clear evidence that Jesus wasn’t ‘Jewish’. “… who try to promote this universal nonsense mixed with Jewish nationalism.” I can only speak for myself but I’m very definitely not promoting either universalism or Jewish nationalism. Of course you’d know this if you’d bothered to read the links. “Refer back to the Humphreys interview.” I’ve no idea what the Humphrey’s interview is I’m afraid. 118
Posted by Jon on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 21:47 | #
It really doesn’t matter. If the scriptures were so unambiguous and specific about the sacrament of marriage as they are about baptism, there would not be 200.000.000 Mestizos inhabiting the continent of America today. If the Spainard/Indio marriages were not inconsistent with scripture, the argument is over. If they were inconsistent, but merely de facto Christianity, along with the accelerated traitorous synchopathy with the New World Order, your sole remedy would appear to be “pray about it”. Not good enough for me anyway. For those religiously inclined, we need an exclusive religion that is unambiguous where support for miscegenation and immigration of racial others into our lands is manifestly against doctrine. 119
Posted by Bill on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 22:00 | # Morgoth @ 116 What are the chances of a break out on such as Facebook or Twitter- both? That’s where the really big numbers are. Is it these networks you’re referring to? The MSM loves viral Facebook and Twitter. RIP soldier Rigby. It’s an ill wind….. 120
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 22:07 | #
Jon, What we need is common sence. Something that is conspicuously absent in yours and Danny’s case. Listen, the VAST majority of Christians’ conscious being are not totally consumed with thinking about religion. Their Christian religion functions as ONLY an integral part of the whole. Can you even try to understand that fact? Quit being so stupid, fella. BTW, DanielS’ hatred towards Christianity is deeply rooted in his personal experiences with his family members. He has unresolved psychological issues. He is a wounded man. How do I know this? He told us so right here at MR. Right, Danny?
121
Posted by Harry on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 22:24 | # “If the scriptures were so unambiguous …” The scriptures aren’t that ambiguous, that’s the point. A great deal of deceptive effort has gone into making it seem otherwise. For New World Order read Mystery Babylon. That’s what mass immigration is essentially about, rebuilding the Tower of Babel. This is primarily a spiritual battle whether you realise it or not. As for the rest, it sounds like you should read some Arnold Kennedy. 122
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 22:54 | # No Thorn, its not about my personal psychology and experience. Christianity is not for Europeans, it is not about Europeans, it is not about our biological interests and never has been. 123
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 23:01 | # Harry says “I’ve no idea what the Humphrey’s interview is I’m afraid. Fear not, Harry, we will triumph over your ignorance forever and ever, halleluja halleluja halleluja!
124
Posted by Harry on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 23:22 | # I’m not quite sure what’s worse. The claim that Christianity originated in Ethiopia or confusing Roman Catholicism with Christianity. I stopped right there I’m afraid. You can lead a horse to water… 125
Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 02:18 | #
I don’t pretend to great knowledge about the marriage sacrament, let alone about interracial marriage from a Christian standpoint. It is my understanding that such marriages are allowed doctrinally, but that the regulation of marriage by the State is also allowed (and arguably, in certain aspects, mandated), within theologically circumscribed bounds. There is a right, or even (for the lay community) a duty, to marry, if possible. Similarly, I have read in passing the opinions of theologically respected persons that there is no (Christian doctrinal) right to marry whomsoever one chooses. Isn’t that what the sodomites are in a tizzy over these days? A Christian legislator has a religious obligation to oppose many arrangements that some might want to allow as “marriage”: same-sex, incestual, improperly low age of consent, polygamous. Traditionally in the West (when our civilization was morally, and - surprise? or no surprise? - racially, healthier), interracial marriage was condemned, sometimes formally, as in many parts of the US, but mostly customarily. Was this anti-miscegenationism wrong theologically? I can’t provide an academic response, but I have seen neither Scriptural nor theological reason to suppose so. Christianity is not a theistic version of “you should be allowed to do whatever you want as long as it doesn’t hurt people (except abortion)” social liberalism or radically individualistic libertarianism. Whether Christianity demands a particular set of political institutions and policies is very much an open, debated question. What is undeniable is that the Faith is compatible with commitment to a wide (though not unlimited) array of ideologies and practices. My inexpert but not generally unlearned intuition is that laws protecting the biological integrity of the white race (or any race or combination of races) are perfectly doctrinally acceptable. A Christian cannot support a State disallowing Christian marriage altogether, but there is leeway on many of the matters I mentioned above: the age at which marriage is allowed, the degree of consanguinity, and restrictions on who can marry whom, provided they are not so restrictive that the actual ability to marry is nullified. One could imagine an extreme situation where war has exterminated vast numbers of the white menfolk, such that the remaining single white females cannot participate in the sacrament of marriage without miscegenating. In that case I could foresee a Christian/WN divergence, in which the former would favor legalizing miscegenation, while the latter would privilege polygamy. But in the usual world, I do not believe that, for the Christian, individual choice need override communal concerns, in marriage law and much else, from military service to taxation to jury duty, to name a few collective demands.
126
Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 06:29 | # Lest anyone get the idea that I am not among the hardest edged racialists out there (just because I, in good Crusader fashion, refuse to renounce the truth of the Church), here is yet another comment I quickly have been submitting around the web in reaction to the latest white American girl getting gang-raped by overseas muds:
May I suggest that all racialists spend a little more time out in the mainstream, and not just bickering amongst ourselves? 127
Posted by DanielS on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 06:38 | # It was a question about Ethiopia, and not a serious one that begins the Humphreys interview. The Humphreys interview does not claim that only Catholicism is Christianity.
In trying to main the Christianity you are forced into laborious conjecture about what should be and would be plain in a religion organically related to native European concerns. The natural and normal thing to do, and will be, inevitably, to start a new religion clearly dedicated to the exclusive interests of native European peoples. It will have different branches for those primarily concerned with particular kinds of Europeans and/or ways among particular Europeans, but it will explicitly not admit of persons not of native European extraction. I will start a thread devoted to that. It’s going to begin with a minimum of information and commentators will be free to participate in its construction. I don’t anticipate a great deal of participation, however I know that Jon has been keen to emphasize the importance of its exclusivity and that he, like Jim, could articulate aspects of Nordicist chapters. .................................................................................................................. 128
Posted by DanielS on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 06:42 | # In trying to main the Christianity In trying to maintain Christianity 129
Posted by Jon on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 08:30 | # Harry:
Kindly cite the unambiguous biblical references prohibiting miscegenation and mass immigration. Example of unambiguity: Commandment 8. Let’s see how they stack up against that icon of pointedness. Leon:
Removing the semantic negatives from your question, we are left with, “is miscegenation [consistent with Christian theology]”, rendering your non-answer an obvious weasel move. According to the theology of my nascent religion, the conquistador priests have alot to answer for. If it provided for something corresponding to your Hell, they would most certainly be burning in it.
Though I in virtually every context despise liberalism, I ask in advance, if you have such privileges, that you make liberal use of the trash folder.”? 130
Posted by Bill on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 08:37 | # I’ve had this crazy idea for a long time. I’ve been thinking for some time about the MSM, (in particular the popular press such as the Telegraph,) have learnt far more from the blogger’s comments than the commenting blogger has learned from the professional blogging authors. This has been a gradual process overtime as the pushing of the envelope has worn down the mods and comment evolved more forthright. To put it bluntly I think the MSM have been shocked at the knowledgeable comment passing through their desks, I’m convinced that most professional authors have had the crap scared out them as they didn’t have an ‘effing clue as to what is going on in our country. Morgoth. Yes. The ‘J’ word is almost becoming common currency and that’s after the mods have screened it. I’ve even seen some who name the Jew list. What is going on? Has anyone else thoughts along these lines? Is the MSM suffering from cognitive dissonance due to what is being revealed by an intelligent bloggerati? 131
Posted by Jon on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 08:41 | # Thorn: “...blah blah blah…....” Forgive me for my blabbing. I must have been smoking something to think that mass immigration and miscegenation are topical subjects for this board. 132
Posted by DanielS on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 09:07 | # Though I in virtually every context despise liberalism, I ask in advance, if you have such privileges, that you make liberal use of the trash folder.”? I have no such privileges, let along a liberal one. Unfortunately, the usual suspects will try to ruin the new thread as they have ruined the potential for productive discussion on previous threads*, despite my attempts to prevent it and keep open space for intelligent discussion apart from having to deal with those determined to impose Christianity. But I will persevere with the new thread and make the best of fending off Christard comments, as instructive.
Thus, we may make positive use of the interactive capabilities afforded us by the Internet. 133
Posted by Jon on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 09:18 | #
Here’s another example, not just of public comments but of news content. I was dumbfounded when I watched this youtube clip of a news report on the local Milwaukee TV station: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Cev6VwbhInw The “White Rabbit” people were fliering cars with brochures with “WHITE GENOCIDE” in big letters on the front of them. The news affiliate showed the fliers where during nearly the entire piece you could clearly see the meme words, except for the obligatory interview with the most inane “racism expert” they could find. The editor who ran that story was clearly off his head, I thought, otherwise, he would have shown the fliers and at an angle and not mentioned their specific content but instead called them “white supremacist”, racist, hate-speech, Neo-nazi literature, etc. By showing “White Genocide”, they got the message out to far more people than the handful who would have not have reflexively thrown it in the trash without registering what it said there would have been among the people whose cars the lady who brought the story to their attention picked the fliers off. My first thought was that it was the propaganda blunder of the decade, in terms of stupidity if not scale. How could they really not be aware of how incongruous with “white genocide” “racist” and “white supremacist” are?! Only other explanation that came to mind was that they’re secretly working for us. Then the third alternative hit me. Somewhere in the back of his mind this multiculti stuff just doesn’t sit right with that editor. It’s is animal survival instinct coming out. 134
Posted by Bill on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 09:53 | # Further to my 130. Over at the Telegraph… I note this morning’s Telegraph is running a headline where John Bercow, speaker of the House of Commons has made critical comment about British workers compared with Eastern EU migrants. Nigel Farage is on the case. Haven’t caught up yet what he has to say. Among the 1000+ comments is this gem.
I’ll check later to see if it’s still up. See John Bercow’s pedigree. 135
Posted by Jon on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 10:14 | # Just so you know, Leon, I’m the same person who posted as, “Leon Needs a Haircut”, holding your feet to the fire on the inconsistency of your nominal support (that had to be dragged out of you as I recall) for a free market in that most important of commodities, money, with your calls for a state-imposed fiat gold standard. 136
Posted by Bill on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 11:03 | # Jon @ 133 One thing was clear when my scale fell, this stuff was coming to Britain from America. This was c 2004/5. Much - much water has flowed under the bridge since then. Britain’s and America’s situations are very similar but different. Two things. One. America is a multi racial nation, it is also (originally) a multi national nation of mostly European white stock. Two. America is a vast land mass compared with tiny Britain, American whites still have plenty of space to flee to. To put some distance between. A false sense of security though. Taking these two considerations the latter is the most telling, the filling up of America with third worlders is an incremental long term process, not quite the same thing as being in your face within one’s lifetime. Shock and awe you might say. Another important point is, America has been exposed to the cultural delights of the Frankfurt school for much longer than in Europe. Back in the 1960’s we in Britain were laughing at the silliness of political correctness of the culture war in full spate in America. The impact of all this was, believe it or not had not gained significance here until as recent as the appearance of one Tony Blair in 1997. Only yesterday it seems, no wonder we’re in shock clinging on the ropes. After thousands of years of being an homogenous people, in the blink of an eye Britain becomes multi racial. Will they get away with it? America has been exposed to multi racial propaganda and associated legislation for generations and have drunk the kool-aid. Judging by the video liberalism has gone religion. Then of course American’s have the guns. By necessity a very rough sketch. As I said, similar but different.
137
Posted by DanielS on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 11:29 | # Bill, actually, I empathize with the sense shock that you experience as a native of Britain. I was in shock at the rules that forced me to go to school with and experience Blacks in America. You may think there are places where Americans can flee, but not in culture and law, and more and more, not even in physical proximity. It is always being imposed, everywhere in America. Adding to the shock is how readily Whites, most especially White women, look with disdain and incredulity upon anyone who might question this forced imposition of non-discrimination. Only a science fiction nightmare can capture what the reality has been like. 138
Posted by Jon on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 11:30 | #
Not burning in the underworld, that would be too good for them. Instead, with due inspiration credit to http://www.michael-colhaze.biz/MC53Heidi.html for eternity imprisoned in MacArthur Park, where the denizens therein can’t kill them but only ask, “whachoo doin on my turf, esay?” 139
Posted by Thorn on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 12:21 | #
For the record. You are way off the mark again, kiddo. My bored reaction had nothing to do with the topics of mass immigration and or miscegenation. It was directed at your childish idea of proffering a new religion along with its “Three commandments for white people”. Oh and let’s not forget the juvenile neologisms you introduced @ comment # 99. 140
Posted by Thorn on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 15:18 | # Velociman clearly sees cracks in the edifice. Is it time to exploit them? Are there enough Americanos willing to chance it? In any event, one thing is for sure: the Western world is coming apart at the seems.
141
Posted by Morgoth on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 16:19 | # @ Bill There are a few reasons why our side has more freedom and the cause of it is Facebook and Twitter, mainly. Firstly Facebook and Twitter are only really of use once a person has crossed a certain thought threshold, eventually they will click ‘‘like’’ on a group or Political Party but before that comes the soul searching. The problem is it is hard to reach people using that format if they aren’t ‘‘aware’’ I once had my own group on Facebook and had big hitters from the Anti Fash, EDL and BNP, but it never reached more than a couple of hundred people and they were all involved in the debate, from one side or another. Obviously the EDL has a page of 136,000 and they use it to attack and humiliate the Anti Fash, its a big stick ! each post is floating down the newsfeed of 136,000 people. And that brings me to my second point, the Anti Fash are concentrating around 90% of their manpower on Facebook. This makes sense, using Facebook they can catch UKIPers being racist, disrupt EDL plans and snoop generally on our side. When Paxman hands Tommy Robinson or Nigel Farage a screenshot of racism or hate from people in their organizations it comes from the Anti Fash. The problem they have created for themselves is that by deploying their resources almost entirely on one format they have left open a huge swathe in the MSM that has been filled by Nationalists. Its not that they could win the debates in the eyes of the public, they couldn’t, but they could screech to the mods, report us and so on. This tactical blunder has left our side with a huge vehicle and middle England is getting a steady drip feed of White Nationalism, we are free to post links on the JQ, swap youtube vids of interest and discuss Nationalist ideas, as well as pawning any idiot who pops up and starts to call us racists. The thousands of people reading us will then move on to think about what they have read and send the info on to friends etc. The Anti Fash are showing classic signs of strategic overstretch, they are so busy bailing the water they can’t stop the leaks from coming in. 142
Posted by Suburban_elk on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 16:54 | # Can the feminine mind be curtailed and limited? The effects of sexual selection are what they are but where is the counter point. 144
Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 19:52 | # Jon@129 I don’t think you understood my comment #125 at all. You certainly did not address my central point. 145
Posted by Thorn on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 21:36 | # Paul Weston demonstrates how to criticize race traitors whilst promoting the race realist/nationalist message yet (this is the tricky part) still remaining within the framework of polite society. H/T to Mr Weston. He is a very bright and skillful man indeed. In many ways, he reminds me of Pat Buchanan.
146
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 10 Jun 2013 00:56 | # Tommy Robinson was on Bill O’Reily’s show recently; which can only be a good thing because the more people see of him, the harder it will be to dismiss his English Defense League as a mob of unhinged fascists: EDL Leader Tommy Robinson Makes American Debut on The O’Reilly Factor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH106IsoRjA&feature=player_embedded 147
Posted by Bill on Mon, 10 Jun 2013 07:46 | # @146 Thorn. It’s quite a while since I’ve seen a Tommy Robinson interview, he’s had a torrid time recently, prison and all that. Tommy is working class lad and viewed by the elites as the usual ignorant bigot and draws all the usual degrading left’s demonisation. (Which incidentally is losing its sting as more people begin to see through the charade.) But he’s improving his interview technique, he still tends to chase the ball in the grass then gets cut off by another question. He learning and becoming more mature. His message has changed, it’s become bolder, he now talks of the power structure as being scared stiff and daren’t offend the Muslims. There’s much comment Tommy is controlled so he can only tell it like his handler’s want it. Who is Bill O’Reily? Just another enabling brick in the media wall? On the other hand,we have Nigel Farage entering the ring, Farage (and Weston) is/are no Tommy Robinson, just the opposite in fact, the liberal elite instinctively recognize them as one of their own. Having seen Farage in action a few times now, he’s not going down the the Tommy Robinson road any time soon, if at anytime at all in fact. He shows no sign of ignoring political correctness as of yet but say he will not bow down to it. We shall see. I too am having problems with this site, slow, terribly slow and not accepting my comments. Morgoth @ 141. Thanks for that. I’m struggling to reply. Is there a fear factor at work on Facebook? If as you say, there’s a strong discussion going on among the enlightened ones, then surely those on the outside looking in must be curious at least. It really is puzzling. 148
Posted by Jon on Mon, 10 Jun 2013 08:39 | # Leon: “I don’t think you understood my comment #125 at all. You certainly did not address my central point.” I understood it, I just consider it irrelevant to my question. You admit that despite Christianity’s dominion over the institution of marriage, there is no scriptural basis to oppose interracial marriage (and then try to weasel by saying you can’t “find one”). You go on to say OTOH, that the state, so long as they don’t relax the proscriptions that Christianity does have (Bob marrying his horse or his roommate, Bill, for example), there is no basis either to oppose state regulations on the institution like age requirements, included among them, a ban on interracial marriage. Okay. Very well then. What scriptural/dogmatic basis is there to oppose a state ban on same-race marriage (a law that in the Orwell-meets-Huxley-meets-H. G. Wells-meets-Kafka politico-cultural world that we live in, does not seem so impossible as it did in 1950)? 149
Posted by Jon on Mon, 10 Jun 2013 09:22 | # “What scriptural/dogmatic basis is there to oppose a state ban on same-race marriage” If at the least, you can’t answer that with something like, “Paul clearly laid it out in his letter to the Ephesians, when he wrote that…”, then you should be able to, if you’re not blind and even if you don’t agree with me, understand I how could perceive (or maybe apperceive) that we need a religion that. 150
Posted by Jon on Mon, 10 Jun 2013 09:39 | # We didn’t need protection of Our sacred People from our past religion when the entire culture supported de facto or de jure proscription of inter-racial marriages. When a same-race marriage ban is a no longer something absurd even to countenance, does Christianity help us, hurt us or is it indifferent? 151
Posted by Lurker on Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:10 | #
Reading that a lightbulb came on! The liberal/left congregate where moderation is heaviest and left leaning. Im sure its largely unconscious behaviour but they tend to skulk in the most protected areas, the freer the speech the more easily we defeat them. Thus they avoid conflict. I had thought the divide was between left and right eg the difference in editorial tone between the Guardian and the DT. I had thought that the comments at CiF were leftists because the paper is leftist but its not that, its the moderation that creates that effect. But I think thats a symptom not the cause, the difference is the brutal moderation at The Guardian. If CiF moderation was as relaxed to the degree it is at the DT the debate on there would rapidly come to look like that on the DT. We’d love to comment on Guardian stories but our comments/IDs are erased almost wholesale. The same kind of thing happens on Facebook for two reasons. Leftist groups can set up their own pages and proceed Stasi style to purge any incorrect comments/commenters. And of course they rarely venture onto right leaning pages to make their case as we know. Frankly Morgoth Im amazed you got any of them to comment at all. Secondly most people on Facebook are operating under their real names, thus the lock on discourse is the same as the outside world. But they are just painting themselves into the same trap, retreating to an arena where they can enforce speech codes rather than one where they can win the argument. 152
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:56 | #
Billy O’Reily is a Harvard grad who sells himself as a man of the folk. He hosts the highest rated talk show on prime time cable TV. Of course he works for Fox News Channel (Note: FNC is partly owned by Saudis). Actually Billy O is a traditional right-of-center conservative but at times, he’s known to fall into his pompous ass routine. At any rate, as you might imagine, when push comes to shove, he always toes the PC line. Always. That said, when it comes to the MSM here in the KWA, sadly, he’s about the best we get. But one thing that really caught my attention in the Robinson / O"Reily interview was Tommy’s statements indicating how much of the British economy the Muzzies (especially the Saudis) own and control. If true, that goes along way in helping answer the complicated yet basic question: ‘Why is England being inundated with unassimilable Muslims?’ Moreover, the British press and government find it easy to dismiss Tommy Robinson. According to the elites, the Muslims are noble—even as they behead British soldiers. Only Whites and Christians are evil. 153
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 10 Jun 2013 16:01 | # Word “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize” –Voltaire 154
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 11 Jun 2013 06:59 | # I see whereas Weston is being criticized in some WN circles for not addressing the J.Q. However, if there is anything more radical to White concerns it is in rejecting the negative significance of the attribution of “racism.” It is probably not always the best tact to directly address the J.Q.
155
Posted by Thorn on Wed, 26 Jun 2013 13:26 | # “My name is Paul Weston, and I am a racist” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2kKnzW4d8w&feature=player_embedded —- ALL POLITICAL factions in Britain, left and right, consider Paul Weston, the founder of the Liberty GB Party, to be racist. In this video, posted at Gates of Vienna, Weston, whom readers of VFR may remember as a commenter, agrees that he is racist. “Why am I a racist? It’s very simple. I wish to preserve the culture of my country. I wish to preserve the people of my country and in doing so that makes me a designated racist in today’s society.” read more>> http://www.thinkinghousewife.com/wp/2013/06/paul-westons-racist-credentials/ 156
Posted by DanielS on Thu, 27 Jun 2013 06:03 | # Posted by DanielS on June 11, 2013, 01:59 AM | # I see whereas Weston is being criticized in some WN circles for not addressing the J.Q. However, if there is anything more radical to White concerns it is in rejecting the negative significance of the attribution of “racism.” It is probably not always the best tact to directly address the J.Q.
Actually, looking at this statement of mine from Graham’s perspective, it would be understating the significance of (pseudo) objectivist capitalism in destruction of White interests. However, (pseudo) objectivism would begin to be redressed with the relativizing legitimacy of “racism” and other discriminatory social classification. I see that in this discussion, “I am a racist”, that Weston has dropped the liberal prefix, as in “liberal-left”, that he had thoughtfully used in the statement above. This “I am a racist” statement appears elsewhere besides in the context of false opposition that is the Gates of Vienna site. Whatever the context, as Weston rejects racism as a negative attribution, that would entail legitimizing classification and critical discrimination of Jews along with it. That is why I see these two statements as being in line with White interests. When I said, “if there is anything more ‘radical”, I did not mean ‘radical’ in a Marxist sense, I meant radical as in defiance of the strongest taboos of the prevailing liberal zeitgeist.
157
Posted by Thorn on Thu, 27 Jun 2013 11:57 | # DanielS, So you are in line with Weston’s approach?
158
Posted by DanielS on Thu, 27 Jun 2013 13:53 | # My comments regarding Weston are basically a matter of appreciation of his rhetoric in these two videos. 159
Posted by Thorn on Fri, 28 Jun 2013 18:50 | # The Jewish War on White People Heats Up Posted on June 27, 2013 by INCOG MAN On Tuesday, Megyn Kelly of FOX news was talking about the Paula Deen “controversy” when she brought on the triple split screen a “conservative” black radio host on the left, and on the right Leslie Marshall, for the libtard angle (because FOX is so fair and balanced of course). Leslie Marshall literally starts off her line of bull by telling us “as you can see I’m a White chick….” Now Paula Deen’s admission of using the “N-word” came in a lawsuit deposition due to some creep (probably laughing her ass off now) she used to employ in her restaurant. She was simply describing what she might have said to her husband one night in 1986 after a black bank robber put a gun to her head while working as a teller (before her cooking fame). When all this broke, the media said NOTHING about that part of the testimony, only that she admitted to using the word like it was all so terrible. The truculent and Bigfoot ugly, Rachel Jeantel, testifying in the Zimmerman trial, said Martin told her that a “creepy ass cracker” was following him. The Sheboon was exposed as lying numerous times and is so stupid she couldn’t even read cursive writing. read more>> http://incogman.net/2013/06/the-jewish-war-on-white-people-heats-up/ 160
Posted by Thorn on Sat, 29 Jun 2013 15:33 | # What white-liberals lack, SE Asian have, i.e., a will to fight for their survival. (Maybe “lack” is the wrong term; hopefully what the SE Asian Buddists have lays dormant[temporarily inactive] within Europeans.) —
Post a comment:
Next entry: Four possible paths for the United Kingdom Independence Party
|
|
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— Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) Patriotic Alternative given the black spot by Guessedworker on Thursday, 14 March 2024 17:14. (View) On Spengler and the inevitable by Guessedworker on Wednesday, 21 February 2024 17:33. (View) Twilight for the gods of complacency? by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 02 January 2024 10:22. (View) — NEWS — Moscow’s Bataclan by Guessedworker on Friday, 22 March 2024 22:22. (View) Soren Renner Is Dead by James Bowery on Thursday, 21 March 2024 13:50. (View) Collett sets the record straight by Guessedworker on Thursday, 14 March 2024 17:41. (View) CommentsThorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Thu, 25 Apr 2024 15:19. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Thu, 25 Apr 2024 11:53. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Wed, 24 Apr 2024 22:36. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Wed, 24 Apr 2024 14:20. (View) weremight commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Tue, 23 Apr 2024 04:24. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Mon, 22 Apr 2024 22:54. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:12. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Mon, 22 Apr 2024 14:44. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Mon, 22 Apr 2024 12:34. (View) weremight commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Mon, 22 Apr 2024 06:42. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 23:27. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 23:01. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 22:52. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 22:23. (View) |
Posted by Bill on Thu, 30 May 2013 10:55 | #
With speeches like this it must now be clear to the world’s elite architects that their intentions and preparation for their new order has been sussed, the nation’s herds are becoming more spooked as each day passes.
It is a truly an international convergence.
The thing is, what are they, (the elites) going to do about it? What counter measures do they have up their sleeves to sedate the masses?
The inevitability of all what is happening is inexorably coming to a head, whether it be slowly-slowly catchee monkey incremental, or provoke a crisis and we all go over the cliff together.
The best of it is, we can watch its progress from our fire side chairs. This isn’t a Hollywood sc-fi, its the real thing, where people get hacked to bits on our TV screens.
What has Nigel Farage’s UKIP got to offer?