|
|
|
The LQ and the JQ Let us begin with the question ... If National Socialism was Germany’s preferred answer to Versailles, Depression and inflation, the decadence of Weimar and the revolutionary Marxism of international Jewry, what is the answer to the globalised capital, power elitism, race-replacement immigration, hyper-individualism, racial self-estrangement, and Jewish ethno-aggression of today? Now, the list of ills in either case - 1920’s Germany or the postmodern present - is open to debate. Other factors that pressaged and pressage change may be added. The order of significance - indeed, whether one factor is, alone, significant - may be debated, as we often debate here. But what cannot be debated is that we, by which I mean all the European peoples of the West, do not face less mortal dangers than Germans did eight decades ago. That is evident to anyone who can separate himself even a little from the zeitgeist. But who will subscribe to the philosophical and political muscularity such disaster would seem to commend? We have fallen a long way. If the source of our woes is difficult to agree upon, how much more difficult the path back to a decent and free life for our children. Comments:2
Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:45 | # The threat to Germany, unlike the current threat to the “West”, was imminent. Stalin’s Jews eliminated 10 million, according to some sources, before Adolph took power. The Germans weren’t facing replacement by mass migration. Muslim gangs in Denmark, which is still ~98% European, just don’t measure up, to the mass messianic murder that was underway in the Ukraine and that the Germans feared targeted them. The US story is different. It has faced/encouraged three waves of mass Catholic migration/replacement. The Irish influx was confronted by the Protestant resistance, the No-Nothings. Still the Americans were driven from the Northeastern seaboard especially in places like Boston and New York. American fertility declined. The second mass Catholic migration from eastern and southern Europe was stemmed by KKK Protestantism, but not before the founding people in towns like Altoona, Shenandoah and Lilly had been entirely replaced. American fertility declined. The third mass Catholic migration, faces no American Protestant resistance, in large part because of the work of organized Jewry, but also because of the shift in Protestantism to dispensationalism. American fertility declines further. The first two phases of Catholic migration are now embraced. For WN’s they are a Kodak moment. The sources of the woes are difficult to agree upon because they are not the same. One size does not fit all. 4
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:05 | # GW: Nobody knows what a genetic defence looks like. From reading the sociobiological literature, something like that is personally reflexive, Just as normal males feel more attraction to pretty, smart girls than ugly, dumb ones, so one would naturally feel the urge to defend his own people. In the United States, for example, the Republicans are the party of white gentiles and the Democrats are the party of everybody who hates those white gentiles. Yet two parties are largely indistinguishable except for demography. If we do not survive to live sovereign and free in our own homelands in a very few generations time, our civilisation and culture will fall with us. Fine. The trouble is, sadly, that most of “us” would rather die than support such sovereignty. Neither Christianity nor traditionalist conservatism possess the requisite traction on our manifold ills to effect any useful change. Sure they do. First, they represent the truth, which is always better than lies. Second, even the cultured despisers tended to regret the effects of their own secularism, since it uprooted the protective canopy that kept the West healthy. Society requires a framework to direct the involuntary and often confused products of genetics. Nationalism cannot stop the decay, as the 20th Century taught us. As for traditionalist conservatism, think of it has how White gentiles best strive toward truth, beauty and virtue. The only alternative is madness. Christian universalism is a negative anyway. Fine. The WN objection to Christianity, in its rare moments of coherence, is based on the claim that Christianity is a universalistic religion. Nor is natural law the same thing as universalism if understood as perennial philosophy and not the bedrock of the United Nations. Clinging to it is understandable, but will not lead to anything useful - or else, the last two centuries of retreat under the liberal lash would not have occurred. “It” in the above sentence was the only thing keeping our society together. Reams and reams of Christian writing, both Catholic and Protestant, warn that we live in a Revolution society that will eventually destroy us. Like the Jews, you reject the prophets. Jews pursue their ethnic genetic interest with particular tenacity. Yeah, yeah. So? There’s no overt strategy to kill off white people. Jews do what they do for the same reasons as white liberals: they want to destroy Christianity and its civilization. Among the elites, the behavior of Jews and gentiles are pretty much the same. Talking about “ethnic genetic interest” is the same as economic determinism or gender politics or whatnot. It can only explain so much. Eventually, you are forced to talk about culture and civilization. It is a compulsive behaviour, not a conspiratorial one. Aha! Such compulsive behaviors seem to be normal for everybody except whites. Why? When the issue comes up, WNs cop out and start blaming the Church for everything. 5
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:32 | # White liberals implicitly hate their own race as the carrier of Christianity. I quote from some tandom pro-Obama propaganda. The author is a white guy who gets paid to tell other white people they are inferior. Guttural, effeminate spew like this often tells you how people really think. White privilege is being able to attend churches over the years whose pastors say that people who voted for John Kerry or merely criticize George W. Bush are going to hell, and that the U.S. is an explicitly Christian nation and the job of Christians is to bring Christian theological principles into government, and who bring in speakers who say the conflict in the Middle East is God’s punishment on Jews for rejecting Jesus, and everyone can still think you’re just a good church-going Christian, but if you’re black and friends with a black pastor who has noted… that terrorist attacks are often the result of U.S. foreign policy and who talks about the history of racism and its effect on black people, you’re an extremist who probably hates America.? Let’s pick this confused agitprop apart: He hates Bush because he mistakes him for an orthodox Christian. He thinks the Middle East wars are Crusader wars supporting American interests. He think the centre-right represents Christianity. Granted, this guy is a ignorant, whining douchebag. Still. note that on a core, guttural level, he realizes that “Christian theological principles” and “White privilege” are parallel lines. He fears that “the conflict in the Middle East is God’s punishment on Jews for rejecting Jesus.” Therefore, he wants Obama as a priest-king who will destroy both the Church and white social standing. 6
Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:38 | # Yeah, yeah. So? There’s no overt strategy to kill off white people. There was no overt strategy to kill off the peasantry during collectivzation in 1932 Soviet Russia. However, at least ten million died. Among the elites, the behavior of Jews and gentiles are pretty much the same. It wasn’t always that way.
7
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 01:16 | # Alright, Monitor, every White person becomes a believing Christian, then what? Is that it? Is that all it will take to save the White race? Damn, that was easy. What specific policy prescriptions do you have? What should we do about immigration? What should we do with the non-White immigrants that are already here? What should we do about miscegenation? And, what if we do not stem the tide in time and are consigned to minority status? What should we do then? What are White Christians who give a damn about their race, like you claim to, prepared to ACTUALLY DO about it? 8
Posted by Lurker on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 01:22 | # The capt has hit the nail on the head there. What is it that monitor believes? 9
Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 02:00 | # The Monitor’s Christian obscurantism is a straw that WNs should leave austerely unclutched if only because of that poisonous religion’s close philosophical relationship with Judeao-Communism, the latter, of course, consisting of the former’s society wrecking, faux-concern for the “poor, meek and downtrodden” minus the ghastly and risible supernatural element. 10
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 02:18 | # Dr. MacDonald writes of “implicitly white communities” such as White Christian homeschoolers. He speaks of the need of these communities to become “explicit” in their expressions of Whiteness. Millions of Whites are a part of said, that is, potentially, a sleeping giant. Why don’t you, Monitor, starting tomorrow, push those White Christians within your sphere of influence in this direction. That is something you can do. Or is it all a lot of cheap talk. 11
Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 02:38 | # Perhaps the Monitor can petition those marvellous Christians in the form of the US Bishops Committee on Migration to aid him in his efforts at persuading us of his bona fide intentions. http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2008/09/bishops_seek_en.php 12
Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 02:47 | # I thought I’d found an intelligent Christian leader who wanted to halt immigration (http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2008/09/how_immigration.php ) but a close reading of the text reveals that he simply wants “balanced migration” - an influx of gypsy tightrope walkers, perhaps. More likely a ban on Muslim immigration although the cowardly old Christian, like most of old Jesus’s little lambs, is too effete to state as much. 13
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 03:59 | #
The reason Labour can’t act is 1) it’s getting too much money from Jews (so are the Tories, who for that reason couldn’t act either, were they in power), and 2) the government bureaucracies are too riddled with Jews (as in the U.S. and France, and this of course wouldn’t change under the Tories), and 3) Jews no matter whether Labour-leaning or Tory-leaning simply will never agree to halt race-replacement immigration. Jews see race-replacement immigration as their life’s blood as much as Euros see halting it as theirs. 14
Posted by Cletus on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 05:02 | # This blog is astoundingly wordy. I guess because it’s run by an Englishman? I just can’t follow all this thesis paper-sounding shit in every comment. 15
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 05:20 | # At least you can plagiarize it for your next thesis, Cletus — that’s more than can be said for some blogs. (Likely get an A+, too.) 16
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 07:01 | # I interrupt this argument for a special announcement: GLOBAL DEMOCRATIC CAPITALISM IS CRASHING AROUND US! Bush reigns over death of capitalism Arrogance and greed of bankers lie at heart of financial meltdown Economic slide is result of greed, deindustrialization BURN, BABY, BURN! WHO WANTS PIE? 18
Posted by Robert Reis on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 09:08 | # Very important article on the Financial Crisis http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/ 19
Posted by the Narrator... on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 09:16 | #
As I’ve said before, I personally believe that necessity and reflex will, at some point, answer much of this. We will re-emerge, but we are just now at the end of one era. The beginning of a new one will unfold over the coming centuries. Europe will continue to be the center of gravity as her colonies slide into chaos. So for all practical reasons, Europa is the center of the universe and all strategies and political philosophies must center exclusively on Her and her peoples. (at best, Europe’s diaspora peoples can provide a momentary flank at some point, or perhaps seeing America engulfed in multicultural flames will act as the impetus for a reflex)
These truths will certainly aid and commend the philosophical and political muscle needed in the immediate future…
What exactly is Christianity’s civilization? 20
Posted by wondering on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 09:47 | # Is “The Monitor” actually one of the many pseudonyms of “Prozium”? 21
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 10:59 | # First off: BURN, BABY, BURN! CC: That’s a momentous civilizational shift right there. Keep in mind that Sunday is the most segregated day of the Dr. MacDonald writes of “implicitly white communities” such as White Christian homeschoolers. 1.) Liberal do-gooders already claim that home schooling is segregation. Since you’re only educating your own blood, therefore you exclude others, which makes you an evil racist pig. 2.) These people tend to be white and intelligent. They get angry if their kids try to marry outside the faith, which acts as a proxy for opposition to race-mixing. And they tend to have HUGE families. What specific policy prescriptions do you have? Well, the One Jewish Cause theory, the Race Replacement/Genocide theory and the fallacy that unconscious genetic interests can directly translate into ideology (Hi, GW) are all wrong, Being a Conservative, I oppose ideology anyway. On the other hand, do you expect me to crow for free trade and open borders? BTW: Wondering: Prozium/Bradley Dean Griffin is an atheist, last I heard. I thought he might be Al Ross, who said: ...that poisonous religion’s close philosophical relationship with Judeao-Communism… He sure talks like him, minus the incessant ranting about peak oil. Narrator: Christendom. We all live off its cultural capital. White people = those whose ancestors were Roman Catholic before 1492. You should know this already. Europa is the center of the universe and all strategies and political philosophies must center exclusively on Her and her peoples… Oh yeah, until the Chinese Communist Party decides the time has come to enslave us. We’re all killing time until that day comes, You people who obsess on the JQ and ignore the other Qs don’t see it. BTW, one more time: BURN, BABY, BURN! 22
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:25 | # “America is in the final stages of collapse and with her will go Canada.” - The Narrator There are probably 200 million Whites on the North American continent. We have the numbers to hold on and resist. 23
Posted by the Narrator.. on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:45 | #
Western Civilization only briefly flirted with Christianity.
No, White people = those whose ancestors are indigenous to Europe. (there were Christians in Africa and the middle East prior to 1492. You should know this.)
You took that particular quote out of context, but your reference to China is exactly what I had in mind when I said, “Our battles, present and yet to come, are many and diverse…”. Even after the current invasion of Europe would be reversed, Europe will have to gear up for a confrontation with China on the Steppe within the next century.
Verses about 267 million non-Whites. I hope your right and we can hold on indefinitely, but looking at the demographic projections based on birth rates and “immigration” growth, it’s gonna get grim… 24
Posted by wjg on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:14 | # GW, The Monitor is what Bob Whitaker would call a “Wordist”. It is what dominates the Right today; reason being it is harmless to “them”. It is as Rockwell rightly labeled it: a Kosher Playpen. In my evolution from inside the Matrix to outside I went through the paleoconservative nursery. It didn’t last long. How can it for any man who has declared freedom from the chains of a worldview of ugliness, irrationality, perversity, and (after all that thankfully) death? One can claim loyalty to some exoteric label like “Christianity” but it is the domain of fools if they never look to what it really means here and now. Has it been hijacked and redirected into a mockery of what it once may have been? That should be clear to all with eyes that see and ears that hear. If one wants respectability and to not be shunned by mass-man please stay with the “Right Wing” or conservatism; with Tom Fleming and the other fiddle players. But ultimately these people must look themselves in the mirror and assess what they did with their brief time in life. Many of them doubtless find solace in their “God” and their following “his” will. For escapees from the asylum it is quite clear who their real “God” is. The Monitor is a fraud and a distraction as is clear from his posts taken as a whole. He has no answers. If he did he would not be showing up here to derail us with his energies (since we currently have little power or influence) but would try and change the existing order by debating through mainstream forums. Then again he is a conservative and at heart has no problem with the status quo. It IS therefore it is right. This is the flaccid conservative mantra. I see it all the time amongst the spiritually gelded Whites of the Matrix. Above all else they fetishize power. The real fight is between those who champion the New World Order - the new elite - and those who oppose them, not on their terms but with a desire to really defeat them. This elite is spiritually Talmudic even though its body is not completely Jewish. This new “elite” is inorganic at first glance (i.e. who are they the elite of?) but on closer inspection it proceeds naturally from Judah often in body and always in spirit. This answers the riddle of why the white elite betray their people. Their ascent to power and wealth was only possible by their agreement to follow The Rules. They not only don’t look at themselves as traitors they see themselves as being the doers of great moral deeds. This “cream” skimmed off the Aryan top will personally profit and do what all their upbringing reminds them is right; such as eradicating all the vile -isms. Their consciences have been so twisted by our times that they recoil from their own instincts of racial loyalty. When what had been our elite was finally and completely wrenched from the body it came from is debatable but it has long since passed. For those that argue Bill Gates or some other rich Gentile is really of us, look again. He has been reprogrammed to see everything from the perspective of the Master Race, a race to which he can only hope his children – if he has any – one day ascend. In return for the surrendering of his moral free agency he gains respectability and the ability to retain all his wealth. Unlike the main character in the fable Bearskin it is not the elite themselves that are filthy and reek as perceived by the common man; only those of us who haven’t made a deal with the Devil. This new elite knows who it serves. It will be an interesting dynamic if - as Fred posted in the “Amgydala” thread - an overt mass conversion to Talmudism from Euro stock swamps the current normative Khazaric/Semitic stock. Even Judah will have a tough time weaseling out of being hoisted on its own ideological petard. But then again never underestimate the stupidity of the cattle. Look at John Hagee. Calling him a Goy is an insult to livestock everywhere. The intersection of Aryan Man’s ideology-oriented mind (which grew with us out of the challenging setting of Ice Age Europe) and the corrupting parasite are lethal if uncoupled. Though the reason to focus on the latter is that it is foreign and can and should be extricated from us. The spirit of yearning, searching, achieving, and domesticating are part of Aryan Man. This we must manage to serve OUR interests. It cannot be managed with the corrupter controlling it and subordinating us to their perverse reformulation of it. For men who like challenges - much more so than reaching Mars or climbing K2 - and supporting true righteousness then White Nationalism awaits. We can succeed once a critical mass of our folk acknowledges the essence of our situation. Rational men must look at what can and has in the past worked as true Aryan, progressive societies. The West has run its course and awaits its Rapture. It’s time has passed. We must not pass with it. Even Judeo-xtians are catechized into understanding the truism that the creator is greater than his creation. 25
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:56 | #
This may well be part of why wealthy Euros don’t resist the post-‘60s Jewish hegemony more: fear the Jews will get their wealth away from them, or away from their heirs, as punishment, through hundreds if not thousands of lawsuits, trumped-up prosecutions, and other diabolical Jewish aggressions. Why don’t Euros turn the tables on the Jews and torment the Jewish wealthy with hundreds if not thousands of lawsuits too? Because Euros aren’t diabolical sadists by nature. That stuff sort of has to be in your blood. 26
Posted by Dave Johns on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 14:27 | #
But most Christian churches interweave a message that implies: People of European decent must sacrifice themselves in order to serve the ‘lesser’ peoples of the planet. What I’m trying to say is that traditional Christianity (as it was practiced in Christendom, or even up to Vatican II) for the most part is gone. It has been replaced with a ‘liberal’ Christian light version. To put it bluntly: Christianity has been corrupted by the Left. Christianity, in large part, has become a promulgator of liberalism. Modern liberalism, IMHO, is A phisosophical wrecking-ball that is smashing Western civilization. The Jews play a major role in the destruction of the West because they provided radical Leftist gentiles—who, BTW, despise Christianity—with many philosophical wrecking-balls. 27
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 18:31 | # WJG going ballistic: The Monitor is what Bob Whitaker would call a “Wordist”. It is what dominates the Right today; reason being it is harmless to “them”. How do you find the energy to generate this much invective? It is as Rockwell rightly labeled it: a Kosher Playpen. Note to lurkers: Rockwell refers to George Lincoln Rockwell, the guy who mass-marketed American-style Nazism in the 1960s. He was the idiot who decoded that wearing German uniforms and recruiting psychopaths (i.e., William Pierce) was going to save the white race. Worse, he successfully unified then-mainstream conservative ideas with Hitlerian brutality. This pinhead was finally gunned down by a WN who was nuttier than he. The reference to Rockwell makes me wonder if wjg plays nazi dress-up too. The Monitor is a fraud and a distraction as is clear from his posts taken as a whole. He has no answers. If ever a fraud existed, it was George Lincoln Rockwell. Like I said, the One Jewish Cause theory, the Race Replacement/Genocide theory and the fallacy that unconscious genetic interests can directly translate into ideology are all wrong, If the decline of the West is to arrested, it won’t happen because of paranoia and half-truths. I see it all the time amongst the spiritually gelded Whites of the Matrix. “Matrix?” Oh, I get it. You’ve bypassed Christianity for Gnosticism. He who will not believe the truth will believe anything. This elite is spiritually Talmudic even though its body is not completely Jewish. White people still run things and they have reasons to be rootless and cosmopolitan without much help from the Jews. First, they are anti-Christian, which is self-hating by definition. Second, mouthing PC slogans helps them get laid, because it helps them disguise their misogyny. Third, the dream of a New World Order fuels the Aryan will-to-stupidity, which some call the Faustian Spirit. The intersection of Aryan Man’s ideology-oriented mind… and the corrupting parasite are lethal if uncoupled. Sorry, whites are not victims. Whites invite their crap. In fact, they salute themselves for doing so. Mainstream political cant is full of this. It is too prevalent, widespread, and successful for One Jewish Cause to be a sufficient explanation. Look at John Hagee. Calling him a Goy is an insult to livestock everywhere. Hagee is a heretic who has nothing to do with me or anybody I know. In fact, his influence is quite limited even among Dispensationalists. (Do you even know what Dispensationism is?) The West has run its course and awaits its Rapture. Now you sound like you’re fading the butcher. Is this some kind of disease—and, if so, is it treatable? 28
Posted by wjg on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 21:16 | # Since you are so concerned with lurkers who may be exposed to the heretical thoughts of George Lincoln Rockwell why don’t we let them decide for themselves? Please lurkers read “White Power” written by Rockwell over 40 years ago – and free on the Internet - and see where it is wrong. One place it is no longer accurate is in Rockwell’s assessment of White Manhood. Thanks to those 40 years of Monitor-style “Christian” conservatism White Manhood is now a disgrace. We no longer can fix our system through the system. If we had heeded Rockwell in his time and ACTED as he suggested we would not now be on the precipice. And you have the gall to call him an “idiot”? If anything is revealed by hindsight over these last few decades it is what an abject and total failure Goldwater and Reagan wordist conservatism as Rockwell said in his time. He even prophetically described the fate of Wallace-esque (later Buchanan-esque) stealth racialism as well. Rockwell was so right it is scary. And to you he is an idiot. You focus on uniforms. Brilliant. I think of 1930s Germany and I think of National Socialism as a tool for corporate success in a hostile world – at least until the “Allies” ruthlessly ganged up and destroyed her; you think of “Nazism”, “Goose Stepping”, and “Swastikas”. You are as is often described of conservatives reactionary. You think in Pavlovian ways as you have been conditioned by your betters. Rockwell died trying to wake us up. If he had succeeded you would be singing his praises since it would now be respectable and what he stood for is orders of magnitude more sane, rational, and just than what we now have. Conservatives of your ilk only fill the feminine role; taking whatever scraps are left from the real struggle and knitting a comfortable life out of it and bitching about men who won’t play by Roberts Rules of Predestined Failure. Please prove me wrong and show what you stand for besides meaningless platitudes. Who are your models? William F. Buckley? Robert Welch? Ronald Raygun? Tom Fleming? Hopefully you won’t say Jesus since he was a revolutionary. Read the Book of Revelation for prophesy of a Holocaust that make the Turner Diaries (written by the “psychopath” William Pierce) look like Sesame Street. Martin Luther? Oops – an anti-Semite. You have had many chances to say what you are FOR Monitor and all you do is nitpick and belittle. Where is this blueprint for victory? Short of providing that you are the most tiresome type of troll. 29
Posted by Cletus on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 21:29 | # The Monitor’s a smart dude. Like all moderates he goes to the other extreme of One Jewish Cause — No Jewish Cause — in attempting to counterbalance. Apart from that, pretty much everything he says, all his nitpicking and belittling, is correct. Overwritten, like everything on this site, but correct. GW is also mostly correct, uniquely objective, and highly readable despite sounding even more like a pomo thesis paper (even using the word “tools” when referring to books, mistaking them for method) than absolutely anyone else in all white nationalism. The fact is y’all really are a bunch of rapture bunnies. I think The Monitor is too, but at least he has more sense in pushing civilization before the (inevitable? rapturous? or à la GW, slow-going tenative “metacultural”) re-enfranchisement of white genetic flotsam. 30
Posted by wjg on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 22:35 | # “...but at least he has more sense in pushing civilization before the re-enfranchisement of white genetic flotsam” Class it is time to vote on whether the white genetic flotsam gets to even debate its survival. All in favor - two. All opposed - 21. Well it looks like you crackers are deemed expendable. Now back to our discussion of Snoop Dogg as our civilization’s new Beethoven…. 31
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 22:41 | #
Why don’t you state the problem and its solution much more concisely than anyone here has managed to do, Cletus? We’d all, to a man, appreciate it. Go ahead. You’re in the spotlight. Right now. Summarize. The problem and its solution. Using fewest words, for maximum conciseness. Everyone is waiting, Cletus. 33
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 23:38 | # Good grief, any idiot can be somebody’s hero: Rockwell died trying to wake us up. He got shot by one of his own Hollywood Nazis. In a frickin’ strip mall! And to you he is an idiot. You focus on uniforms. Brilliant. The uniforms were his idea. He thought they were good PR. They make Shriners look normal. Only the drunken bum faction of WN still supports that crap anyway. The Feds like it because it makes good news copy if some crackhead found sleeping with his sister in a trailer park also has a swastika tattoo. Real Nazis would have you shot on sight. Even the SA would spit on you. (And why, oh why, do you think German nationalism translates outside Germany?) I think of National Socialism as a tool for corporate success in a hostile world – at least until the “Allies” ruthlessly ganged up… Hiltler’s Will-To-Be-Stupid, otherwise known as the Faustian Urge, decided that Germany’s destiny required him starting a really big war for lebensraum. You know the rest. The Allies may have ganged up on him, but he wanted that anyway! Ain’t destiny a bitch? Read the Book of Revelation for prophesy of a Holocaust… First, its symbolism. Second, the direct historical context was the destruction of Jerusalem, with was 1900+ years ago. written by the “psychopath” William Pierce That guy was such a loser that he married a non-Aryan alien from a mail order brides’ service. That doesn’t generate confidence. Who are your models? William F. Buckley? Robert Welch? Ronald Raygun? Tom Fleming? Buckley was a fraud, Welch was paranoid, Reagan was a double-minded man, and Fleming is a gentleman and a scholar. How can you hate Fleming? He helped made sociobiology acceptable among conservatives. He only dropped the subject after being pissed off by one too many village atheists. Where is this blueprint for victory? To things: first, the English speaking world need to restore orthodox religion. Second—and the part your care about—is that we need a new political centre that is neither PC nor monomaniacally racialist. Third, the residual neo-Nazis, fascists, paranoids and tards should be dumped in an asylum to keep them from alienating smart people and scaring the horses. Otherwise, we had better give up now and move to Orania because life is gonna look like the nasty parts of a Lovecraft story. Cletus: I think the processes KM talks about are only part of a bigger situation: the culture of decline and decadence among apostate white gentiles. The Jews may be disproportionately represented, but they wouldn’t be there if they didn’t suit Whitey’s purposes. y’all really are a bunch of rapture bunnies. They no more represent orthodoxy than those Catholic Bishops. You guys are worse because you scare people away from rational conclusions. Fred Scrooby: Unbelief breeds revolution. If you want the revolution gone, make the unbelief gone. 34
Posted by Cletus on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:05 | # Class it is time to vote on whether the white genetic flotsam gets to even debate its survival. Not saying that, dawg. Right now. Summarize. The problem and its solution. The problem’s already been summarized a thousand times by dawgz much smarter than Cletus. You don’t need Cletus, you’re just patronizing him. But Cletus asks, how long do we have to schlep about on MajorityRights talking about “the problem”? when does “the problem” become solved, where is the magic formula? Surely out of all the great minds devoted to Anti-Semitic Theory (AST?? a new term; one step closer!) we can, like, distill some formulaic shit and be done with it. Cletus, are you confusing WJG and me? The Jews may be disproportionately represented, but they wouldn’t be there if they didn’t suit Whitey’s purposes. Hell, you might be a Jew after all. Cletus caint figure wah dis “disproportionately represented” don’t hint at nothin to da peopo’ who be repeatin it. Aight. Aight. Whitey invennid da Jew, jes like Sartre said. Sartre was right. Whitey deserve erruthang he gettin cuzza some princes n shit who like, used da Jewz fo usury. Aight. U win, Monidda. 35
Posted by Cletus on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:18 | # Why don’t you state the problem and its solution much more concisely than anyone here has managed to do, Cletus? We’d all, to a man, appreciate it. You’re not struggling for conciseness, and it’s a misunderstanding of yourselves to say that you are; you’ve all far overshot conciseness because your circumstances dictate how you communicate. Conciseness is worthless anyway. Put together the concisest breviary of AST (ha ha ha! AST! like EGI!!!), print it in portablest form, in PDF, for your Amazon Kindle, on tree bark, you’ll come no closer to ... anything. You’ll just have one more damning précis about Jews and “RR” or whatever. I dunno. Life sucks. 36
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:19 | # Monitor, You are a hopeless case. You lay claim to religious faith, yet you have absolutely no respect for your fellow man. The arrogance drips off you. You are not particularly intelligent or wise, so why that should be, I really do not know. Anyhow, you correctly associate “Orthodox Christianity” (actually, any system of religious belief will do) with evolutionarily adaptive life choices. But you don’t make the simple connection that this is the whole function of faith: the increase of “good” or adaptive group behaviours and, through them, ethnic genetic interests. That’s how Nature works (ie. it’s not done by, or for, a sky fairy ... the sky fairy is a tool fabricated for increasing EGI because, as you said yourself, EGI itself is non-salient in human consciousness). Try to understand that the white and Jewish intelligentsia and elites have managed to increase their genetic interests through the present political dispensation (increasing EGI is always the goal). Liberalism serves the genetic interests of the white elites; Jewish nationalism serves the genetic interests of the Jewish elites. They don’t need Yahweh. They’ve got something better. Now, it should be obvious to you that there is a deep fissure between the elites and the Common Man, whose genetic interests are massively reduced by the present dispensation. So an opportunity exists to present a viable alternative to him. You suggest a rediscovery of the Jewish god, and the subsequent re-adoption of adaptive group behaviours. We are saying, nope, collectively we don’t have the hundred years required for that. We are interested in short-circuiting the process by the creation of a new revolutionary elite. That’s a ten-year job. We don’t want to be good. We want to win. 37
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:24 | # Cletus, are you confusing WJG and me? Naw. In that case you don’t make any sense. 38
Posted by Cletus on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:30 | # We are interested in short-circuiting the process by the creation of a new revolutionary elite. That’s a ten-year job. We don’t want to be good. We want to win. I’ve seen Linder say almost exactly that. Revolutionary elite ... goodness bad, winning good. And some other dudes before that decades ago. So if it’s a ten-year job, they all obviously had it wrong somehow, and GW, you, I am sure, have it right. So yo, what it is? You’re like the Jedi Massa of all WN. Tell Cletus what you gon do to advance his genetic interests. Does an opportunity really exist, or does that just sound good — like when leftist academics talk about “creating a space for discourse” or traversing rhizomes? Your writing often exhibits the same studied pomo nebulosity. 40
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:48 | # Cletus, It’s not ten years from today. It’s ten years, maybe twenty, from the completion of the intellectual and infrastructural basis. And that construction has not yet begun. Sorry, I assumed that was clear from what I have written previously. The concept of EGI is important, but it isn’t digestible by Joe Ordinary. We all know that. That doesn’t matter. Only Joe Extra-Ordinary can rise to the practical challenge, and it’s no use talking to him about Adolf or Jesus or Burke. That said, we will improve our language as we shape our ideas. 41
Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:56 | # “The site has been overrun by trolls.” - byron Good. These “trolls” are not half-wit anti-racists. They half-assedly seem to give a damn about our race. When the time comes that more and more of our people wake up (and they will, bank on it, when faced with third-world savagery, they will begin to come together) we will be having these discussions anyways. Why not start now? 42
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 02:11 | # GW: The arrogance drips off you. You are not particularly intelligent or wise, so why that should be, I really do not know. Maybe social skills would be a good evolutionarily adaptive life choice for you. Hint: don’t call somebody arrogant before demonstrating your own arrogance. Do you expect me to cut you some slack because you type with a British accent? On a more direct point, “evolutionarily adaptive life choices” are like cards in a poker game. It’s probability more than strategy. You talk about about this EGI over and over without noticing the obvious. You do the best you can and hope to have children who aren’t mutants. Most white liberals, including you, think the game is over once the brain loses oxygen. Therefore the long-term interest of the race loses priority over one’s material prosperity in the moment. After all, in the end, we’re all dead, supposedly. Whitey gain nothing from the prosperity of him unborn descendants, who may turn out Jamaican anyway. In truth, white people decided they liked the gift over the giver and that led us to where we are now. In this way, we are are like the Jews. Try to understand that the white and Jewish intelligentsia and elites have managed to increase their genetic interests through the present political dispensation… Another hint: don’t say “genetic interests” here. Say “power” like a normal human being. Otherwise you only succeed in being elaborate. That said, we will improve our language as we shape our ideas. You’re trapped in your own nihilism. You want the perks of Christian Civilization (Albion’s seed and all that), yet want to avoid the Christianity and the Civilization. For some reason, you care about the existence of an Anglo-Saxon breeding stock in 2508. I’m not sure why. You think that by reducing everything down to genetic interests that you have the key to social change, So you flail around like crazy looking for answers when the truth stares you in the face. It seems quixotic, maybe Faustian, to me. CC: These “trolls” are not half-wit anti-racists. This shows how WNs have no argument. They can’t handle a challenge from the right. So they pretend that the critic (me) is actually an anti-racist from the Left, who “half-assedly seem to give a damn about our race.” This is to pretend that the criticism does not exist. 43
Posted by wjg on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 02:15 | # Monitor, My point on the uniforms is who gives a shit, not that I like or dislike them. Your focusing on them is intentional distraction from substance. Rockwell was theatrical and this sometimes backfired regarding his image but he saw more clearly than any of the mainstream “rightist” politicians of the 60s as hindsight shows. I would think you have the capacity to focus on ideas. Rockwell had many good ones. As a matter of fact if you ever got the nerve to read White Power you may see what a brilliant thinker he was. Back when I was a judeo-christian I never would have. Regarding the manner and location of his assassination it is best not to mock him and I’ll leave it at that. National Socialism worked in the past, is working in the present (though not for Whites), and can work again in the future. For dissemblers who go on about the exoterics of 1930s German NS give it up. That is not of much interest to any of the advocates of modern NS I have come across. It is the fundamentals of NS that should be of interest to all serious White Nationalists. There may be other structures that work better in a given situation but abandoning the one model that ACTUALLY WORKED the only time in the last hundred years that Aryan Man has liberated himself is idiocy. NS has a very holistic worldview unlike any of the kosher approved alternatives we are now stuck with. Then again for you - an avowed enemy or at least vocal critic of WN - to talk about what is or isn’t acceptable within it is total bullshit. I see that after weaving a few more straw men that you then burn with relish you actually propose something positive. Bravo. The first point is uselessly vague (what is orthodox? what the pontificus maximus wearing a tacky curtain and hat so ridiculous it would be wise not to belittle Rockwell says? I only mock his attire because it is actually an improvement over post Vatican II papal bulls(hit)) and points two and three shows the whole proposal as unserious but still it is something. Your talents might prove of greater service to your desired orthodox imperium if you made World Magazine the future home of your visits since you claim Christianity as your central identity. That is your place if you want to make a difference not here. You may actually hinder them from ushering in Armageddon - or speed it up depending on how much you persist. 44
Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 02:29 | # Monitor, GW is right. We have another two decades tops to secure the existence of our people by peaceful, political means. After that we will have lost the ability to guarantee our survival by any other than violent means. A project of Christian, cultural renewal will simply take to much time. We do not have it. We must speak and act directly for the survival of the White race. If you expect us to do less, to sit back and watch while all that our ancestors have built (most important of this, our very blood) over thousands of generations burns to ashes you ask too much of us. We simply will not do it. In the final analysis, those of us who are not traitors and cowards, will literally stand and fight to the last man while we scream, “Death to our enemies!” That must be the level of our resolve; or else it’s Rhodesia. 45
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 02:41 | # wjg: 2.) National Socialism was not white nationalism. It was plain old nationalism plus eugenics and the quest for living space. It didn’t work. It backfired to the point that it induced modern liberalism. 3.) South Africa was much closer to what you want, but it was too heavily Christianized for you. As I would expect, once the church caved in the 1970s, apartheid was toast. Anyway, the Afrikaner project was based on an explicit claim that they were a Christian people surrounded by savages. See: Irving Hexham, The Irony of Apartheid, Lewiston, Edwin Mellen, 1981. 46
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 02:43 | # After that we will have lost the ability to guarantee our survival by any other than violent means. No insurgency has any hope of overthrowing NATO. Besides, it wouldn’t be discussed on public blogs anyway. 47
Posted by Cletus on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 02:46 | # It’s not ten years from today. It’s ten years, maybe twenty, from the completion of the intellectual and infrastructural basis. And that construction has not yet begun. Ok. And I say you’re temporizing — by which I mean, artificially projecting this notion (even so much as its mere beginning) into the future. There’s plenty of material for you already. It’s simply a matter of being supersmart enough to arrange it in just the right way. That said, we will improve our language as we shape our ideas. I don’t know about that. I think you’ve got yourself caught up in the “linguistic turn”. Your writing doesn’t drip arrogance — you’re the least guilty of that of all wn leading lights — but there is a pompous note in, e.g., your first statement, for which I do not blame you, but the literary milieu to which you’ve exposed yourself. It sounds nice to talk about a grand “intellectual and infrastructural” basis (project?), but that’s the shtick of every marxist academic the world over, and alike in pompous vapidity. You don’t need to put this off indefinitely like that. You could finish it off tomorrow. But that would mean ... 48
Posted by Cletus on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 02:53 | # Another hint: don’t say “genetic interests” here. Say “power” like a normal human being. Otherwise you only succeed in being elaborate. Oyez, oyez! 49
Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 03:31 | # “No insurgency has any hope of overthrowing NATO. Besides, it wouldn’t be discussed on public blogs anyway.” - The Monitor You are being glib. Intentionally, for rhetoric’s sake? Unintentionally? If, by that time, sufficient loyalty has not been aroused in a sufficient number of our people that they will at least not fire upon their own people then all is lost. If “Nato” has nothing to fire with but muds and our people will not resist then all is lost. We strive to see that all is not lost. We strive for the physical salvation of our people. You, at least I’m sure you think, are closer to God than I. So…as His chosen intermediary I will ask you this: does God give a damn if our people survive? Nay, does He command each and every one of us capable men to do and strive unto our last breath all that is in our power to ensure the survival of our people with the consequence of having not Eternal Damnation? “So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.” I can dig it. 50
Posted by zorn on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 03:56 | # really, genetic interests is much better than ‘power’—does anyone doubt that european-derived people are ‘in charge’ and possess the lion’s share of power in america, canada, germany, norway, etc? but these people are actively working against their own genetic interests—even if they are able enrich themselves & their immediate family thru the importation of cheap labor, they’re betting on a losing proposition in the long run. 51
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 04:41 | #
So true. As the saying goes, “You can lead a horse’s ass to slaughter, but you can’t make him think.” 52
Posted by zorn on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 05:03 | # right, the ultimate ‘prize’ is the carrying capacity of your territory and that depends greatly on its demographics (see zimbabwe and also south africa in < 15 years). the elite are trading their (and all of our) posterity’s inheritance for cheaper labor to work in chicken-processing plants. but what’s the ‘mexican-ization’ of a first world nation compared to another 500k in the hand, eh? 53
Posted by John on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 06:26 | # The elite are trading their (and all of our) posterity’s inheritance for cheaper labor to work in chicken-processing plants. but what’s the ‘mexican-ization’ of a first world nation compared to another 500k in the hand, eh? Saying their their motives for race replacement are limited to “cheap labor” is like saying that they pulled 911 so they could make a few millions shorting airline stock. 54
Posted by the Narrator.. on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 07:24 | #
Talk about a contradiction in terms. And again Monitor, where is this Christian Civilization you keep referring to? 55
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 09:29 | # Monitor, I see arrogance in the way you clamber over the body of WN, having imagined that it is slain by your arguments. Your programme for a Restoration consists in calling in the briefest possible terms for a return to Yahweh. That very brevity leads me to think that you are not really interested at all in ideas for their revolutionary value - even your own. You are interested in them as a means of levering you into a standing position over the body of WN. Your own personal transubstantiation. And what, of any relevance, follows from that, pray? Nothing, obviously. But you’ve got what you want ... your little inner victory. Now, it happens that we have an example here of how to do the Christian thing without all that. Fr John is a faith-gener who comes here frequently to participate from a Christian perspective. He doesn’t needle people or try to put them down. In return, he is, I think, read as carefully as anyone else, and he isn’t flamed by Al Ross! I think you need to examine your motives. Your religiosity places certain demands and expectations upon you. I’m not required to be a good man in my dealings with others. I’m only an English nationalist. But you are an exemplar of your faith, which is a faith of the humble and low. Know thyself more. Love thyself less. 56
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 09:54 | # Zorn: Why should they care? If you say the Bible is just fairy tales and we’re all dead in the end anyway, they probably shouldn’t. Who cares what happens in 75 years? We’re not going to be there, even in the vaguest metaphysical sense. The globocrat has the better non-Christian argument because he can show short term gains, even if the end result is genocide for other people, Christianity is material nihilism. After all, Christ’s kingdom is not of this world, remember. You missed the context. Christianity is not of the world of Second Temple Judaism, because it rejected him to make room for the Mishnah and the Talmud. The truth went to gentiles, who set up lots of state churches. And again Monitor, where is this Christian Civilization you keep referring to? It survives in fragments. We’re spending the surviving cultural capital just to survive. At any rate, Christianity gives you a reason to care about future generations, whereas our atheist elite turns the very thought into a hate crime. To even care about your race, part of your brain is forced to admit the Christian world view is correct, however you may resent it. If you strip Christianity of its Western veneer, There’s no such creature. Even the African and Asian versions attempt to copy the West, except one is very loud and emotional, while the other is stoic and serene. Europe is not the Faith, sure, but it certainly is the consequence of it. 57
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:26 | # GW: Well, yeah, I’m writing in this little text box, so it pays to be curt, especially when the other side thinks phrases like “your own personal transubstantiation” and “faith-gener” means something. Look, I have nothing to win. I want to see if echoes of a Right exist which is neither PC-toadying or genetic reductionism, such as we had pre-1945. 58
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 11:32 | # If you have nothing to win, Monitor, then you have nothing to attack, either. Your stated aim of seeing if “echoes of a Right exist” does not require you to label nationalism reductively as white nationalism, and to reduce white nationalism to having “no arguments”. Our argument is nationalism. I understand why you would think that the search for a founding principle in Nature is genetic reductionism, but that too is a labelling exercise. EGI is only a way of expressing Nature’s will to continue. The latter is a phenomenological fact - “the thing that is” - even if its linguistic interpretation in Frank Salter’s formula is subject to the usual frailties of the thinking, constructing mind. I see no reductionism here. I see a pure principle that can, with sufficient care for its real meaning, inform all our thought. The days have gone when nationalist ideologues could wax lyrical about a destiny of collective glory. Nationalism must be able to answer the question: “Is it true?” 59
Posted by the Narrator.. on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:15 | #
Actually the “truth” went to the jews who were scattered throughout the Roman Empire. Most of the new testament is addressed to them. But, Christianity was certainly wrapped in a Western veneer as the new testament writers were semites who grew up in a Hellenized (and then Roman ruled) area and era. They both hated and admired The West and thus Christianity reflects their double mindedness about it. This is why the god in the old testament is so decidedly different from the one portrayed in the new, yet both are, ostensibly, given the same name. And this is why Christianity was only briefly flirted with in Europe. In passing, it appears to reflect European sentiments and tastes, yet on closer inspection it looses all appeal due to it’s semitic genesis.
No, it is jewish elites operating out of genetic self interest that makes White survival a “Hate Crime”. As for a “Christian worldview”, I’ve already explained how it came into being and mutated into its current form, which presently manifests in about 35,000 different interpretations. Why would White Nationalism or Racialism want to get itself bogged down again in something that is both transient and diametrically opposed to it (namely Christianity’s obsession with equality and multiculturalism? It just makes no sense… 60
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:19 | # Cletus: There’s plenty of material for you already. It’s simply a matter of being supersmart enough to arrange it in just the right way. That’s not me you are talking about. I’m not super-smart. This work is for the best people we have. Don’t assume we haven’t thought about that, haven’t discussed it at different times, and are not deeply interested in it. I think you’ve got yourself caught up in the “linguistic turn”. The question is: Is the “turn” simply intellectual short-hand for convenience’s sake, or is it put on the page for want of a proper understanding? If it’s the former, well, my apologies for getting lazy. If it’s the latter you have every right to complain. As an example of lazyness (I hope), I can re-quote my little linguistic sin, “the intellectual and infrastructural basis”. I do believe, in common with others, that nationalism generally still has to re-intellectualise. If you look back to the century and more before WW2 you will find a living stream of thought. One or two giants from that age survived to write into the 1960s - Carl Schmitt, for example. Ernst Jünger is another. Of the post-war generation there’s de Benoist and Faye, Steuckers, etc. But no political life has come from any of it. What politics we have is European nativism - the natural impulse of the loyal heart. And there’s the second problem. Between the nationalist thought, weak as it is, and the great swathe of loyal hearts there is no political cadre, no revolutionary elite. In England we get Richard Barnbrook instead, brave and dogged though he is. So “infrastructure” is, first, human infrustructure, because without that, obviously, there cannot be the mature party, funding, media, policy and advocacy structures that really signify an escape from the ghetto, and an engagement in the political process. That’s how I understand our position all across our lands. It’s bad and, unlike The Narrator, I cannot trust in Necessity to engineer the will to live. I can only trust in my own hand. 61
Posted by Z on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:24 | # Christianity (AKA Jewish invented gutter-religion) is now largely dead amongst a very large percentage of younger Whites/Europeans, and it’s not coming back. You really should wake up and face the facts Monitor…the quicker Whites (and ALL other peoples, too) shake off Jewish-invented systems of religion, morality, law/justice, media, and economics the sooner we can all begin to heal. It is clear that we need to resurrect the native/indigenous religious systems and spiritual forms of The West and stop clinging to this divisive and ridiculous Near Eastern nonsense. I am a fan of Jesus as the raving anti-Jewish activist-philosopher that he was, but to actually believe that some random, charismatic Roman-era kike was the Son of God only shows you to be the utterly indoctrinated fool which you are. Monitor: judging by how fervently you cling to laughable beliefs it would seem that your priest, Sunday school pastor, and/or the principal at your Christian private school must have spanked you a bit too hard when you were younger and made you write “Jesus is Lord” on the blackboard one too many times. 62
Posted by the Narrator.. on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:04 | #
Nor should you, nor do I advocate it. Today’s Western man is an urban creature (of the pop-cultural variety), either in fact or in cultural practice. And it is a lifestyle that is hardly sustainable, as we see it crumbling about us already. And as I’ve said before, despite media portrayals to the contrary, Western man is actually more lucid and clear thinking in a calamity than he would otherwise be… 63
Posted by wjg on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:07 | # Monitors says… “2.) National Socialism was not white nationalism. It was plain old nationalism plus eugenics and the quest for living space. It didn’t work. It backfired to the point that it induced modern liberalism.” Sure it was White Nationalism since it was Nationalism practiced by a particular ethny of Whites. Don’t throw around the straw man of White Nationalists expecting all Whites to be subsumed in one big mono-culture with no variation. Most of us who use the label WN use it as the uniting charactersitic for Euro Man - as an umbrella under which all our different peoples must confederate - not as a judeo-communist/capitalist/christian humanity commoditizer and diversity destroyer. So GW’s English Nationalism is a variety of WN. There’s no contradiction. “3.) South Africa was much closer to what you want, but it was too heavily Christianized for you. As I would expect, once the church caved in the 1970s, apartheid was toast. Anyway, the Afrikaner project was based on an explicit claim that they were a Christian people surrounded by savages. See: Irving Hexham, The Irony of Apartheid, Lewiston, Edwin Mellen, 1981.” Another one of your straw men is that any who oppose YOUR effete post Vatican II “Christianity” (I’d label it judeo-christianity but you seem to recoil from the name of “god’s” precious pets) are against the healthier variety that existed before. If the lion’s share of White Nationalists in the good ole USA were Christians I’d have no problem with that, in fact I’d be elated. The problem is that Christianity as it now stands - as Al and the late great Revilo Oliver say - is simply the spookified flavor of the Marxist Revolution, while atheist liberalism is the supposed rational (what a laugh) flavor. This wasn’t always so. IT HAS BEEN CORRUPTED. It no longer produces fruit. To be opposed to the corruption is the mark of sane men. To cling to the former institution that is gone in all but name is for flat earthers and rapture bunnies. As you say the Afrikaans were betrayed in the end by the “liberalized” church they still turned to for spiritual guidance. It sold them out because it had already sold itself to a new master. So you rightly raise a flag of warning to any future nationalist revolution that is founded on words and not blood. All ideas must serve the body from which the ideas flow not the other way around. If the ideas no longer serve the body they must be treated as Jesus said to handle a tree which no longer bears fruit: to cut it down and burn it. 64
Posted by wjg on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:19 | # One more point… German National Socialism didn’t “backfire” and “induce modern liberalism”. That is a complete crock. It was used as a pretext for the next stage in the nation wreckers grand scheme of which modern liberalism is simply a tool. If there hadn’t been a NS Germany “induction” would have simply been found in another source. 65
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:39 | # Good commentary in this thread. The comrades are doing a good job. But as I’ve said elsewhere, I personally don’t reply to The Monitor because engaging in debate with him is like injecting yourself with cancer. I saw that long ago over at Proze’s blog where this form of cancer hung around for what seemed like ages. 66
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:42 | # They’re going to have to put that in the medical pathology books now, “The Monitor, a new form of cancer.” (Actually, it’s a form of cancer that’s as hold as the hills, when you think about it. There’s nothing new about it.) 67
Posted by Dave Johns on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:35 | # A comment from the left side of MR’s bell curve:- Rabid anti-Christian sentiment is where the radical left (Marxists) and the radical right (WN) overlap. How ironic is that? What whites need is more Palin and less Caligula. 68
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:50 | # Can you blame them for being mad at Christianity, Dave Johns? Where is any official Christian body openly and explicitly opposing genocide of whites today? Where is any official Christian body openly, explicitly refusing to collaborate in genocide of whites today? Nowhere. 69
Posted by Dave Johns on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:05 | # “Can you blame them for being mad at Christianity?” No, Fred. I’m just as mad at the Church leaders as you are, but I’m not going to trash the teachings of traditional Christianity because of bad leadership. Just like I’m not going to trash the Constitution because we have a pro race-replacement liberal [George W Bush] in the White House. 70
Posted by Rusty Mason on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:55 | # Dave, Can one separate the two, the mass and leadership of the thing and the thing itself? For the masses and all of the subleaders, a thing is what the leaders at the top say it is. If all of the US government employees are working to my personal disadvantage, I hate not only them but the government they work for, regardless of what the Constitution and Declaration of Independence say it should be. Can enough of Christianity be saved to do us any good? If so, will this tiny population of true Christians still remain hostile to those White pagans/heathens (a very large and growing group) who have given up on it? I wonder about this all the time. 71
Posted by Dave Johns on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 23:48 | #
I think we can separate the two, Rusty. The fact that government’s leadership is working against your/our personal disadvantage doesn’t mean their underlings are to blame. What it does mean is that our leaders are traitorous. The bastards sold us out to the highest bidders. Too, let’s not stoop to Tim McVeigh’s mentality; he callously viewed innocent government employees as “collateral damage.”
I’m not sure if enough Christianity can be saved to do Euros any good, it may be too late for that. Most of Christianity fits into the wacked-out catigory What I do know is Traditional Christianity, when it was practised, provided the masses a moral backstop. Without such a moral backstop, the masses tend to be led straight into a hedonistic cesspool. It’s happening as we speak. Just look at what secular liberalism and postmodernism has wrought since the 1960s. This is what the ” liberal progressives” (led mainly by the Jewish academics) have bought us: 43 million abortions in the U.S alone since Roe v Wade . Gay pride parades. A public school system that allowed the Gay Rights lobby to insert, Jennifer Has Two daddies and Heather has Two Mommies as part of the elementary grade school curriculum. Fifty-plus percent divorce rate, the proliferation of pornography, out of wedlock birthrates and single parent households skyrocketing, materialism (i.e., keeping up with the Joneses), childless marriages (by choice), massive non-white immigration, forced racial integration, affirmative action, celebration of miscegenation in the pop-culture, etc., etc. etc. The malevolent Left are having a field day, everyday. They’re corrupting the masses with every sort of moral perversion imaginable. Our enemies on the Left are loving it! Last but not least: Bush is a liberal!!! 72
Posted by snax on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 01:15 | # Narrator:
Or ‘dogs’ as ‘He’ preferred to call people who aren’t Jewish. 73
Posted by snax on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 01:56 | # Z:
Too strong for my tastes, that kind of assault. Lots of the best people on our side are comitted Christians offended by such talk.
I agree. Just let our Christians shake it off for themselves - don’t let’s shake them off!
Are people clinging to Christianity, or is it now largely dead? Resurrecting something that really has been almost dead for 1500 years plus, will be much harder than reviving the muscular christianity that served Europeans quite well for most of that period. Personally, I don’t think either articial respiration is strictly necessary. The atheists and Christians and pagans of the BNP manage to get along fine. That’s not to say nationalists shouldn’t refine their religious thought. As GW, says for nationalism, so it is for religion, the all important question these days is: “Is it true?” The most durable spiritual movements of the future will also be able to answer “yes”. Shades of Obama, too - watch that!
I don’t know where you get this from? Running the moneylenders out the temple? That was to defend the mass of Jewry. 74
Posted by The Monitor on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 01:59 | # Sidebar: Something that has always bothered me about most racialists is how they manage to systematically misunderstand Christianity. Ergo, how much value can I put in their conclusions about Judaism? After all, the rabbis do everything possible to make themselves seem both banal and inscrutable. While I’m not saying this to be an anti-anti-semite, this issue has always bugged me. 75
Posted by Tom on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 03:12 | # Monitor, you said in the thread above word to the effect that asian and african christianity are an apeing of western Christianity. Would you agree or not that the Christianity practiced by non whites is dependent on the existance of a functional white model to immitate? I remember reading about a bishop in Africa incorporating chicken sacrifices in mass. The bishop became excommunicated I believe, but it’s an example of how Christianity can decay without the oversight of the church in europe. I suspect that Orthodox and Catholic Christianity in Africa and Asia has been able to keep it’s form because of the until recent strength of the European, white example of Christianity. Without this European model Christianity will lose its focus and morph into heresy. Once europe falls to turks, arabs, blacks, etc, the church will lose its way. With the fall of the west even the Catholic stronghold among nonwhites in South America could quickly revert to a strange mix of ecstatic christianity and indindigenous and african traditions. 76
Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 03:35 | # If Christians refuse to explicitly exhort the genetic continuity of the White race they are useless at best and a hindrance at worst. The Monitor, despite several attempts by various commentors to get him to do so, has not. Why? I suspect because then the White race would be center stage and not Christianity. Christianity would have been reduced to a utilitarian consideration, not an end to be pursued for it’s own sake. What if Whites could just miscegenate with high IQ, peaceable Chinamen and still remain good Christians and maintain a high civilization (which I think is plausible), would The Monitor oppose said miscegenation in that case? From all that he has written here it can only be concluded that he would not. That being true, The Monitor is a race traitor - bottom line. 77
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 04:30 | # If Christianity continues unable to clarify that the faithful may oppose government-enforced race-replacement, it is colluding in the attempted genocide of its own flocks and is no better than a Jim Jones’ suicide cult, and should on those grounds be abandoned by the people it is trying to genocide. That’s obvious. It’s also obvious that Christianity permits (not obligates, permits) its faithful to preserve the traditional racial identities of their communities and resist efforts of degenerate or hostile groups to undo those identities. The reason Monitor can’t see any of the above is he’s an asshole. 78
Posted by The Monitor on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 06:08 | # Are people clinging to Christianity, or is it now largely dead? Church attendance in the USA hit an all time peak in the 1990s, if I remember correctly. I’m not saying all these people are orthodox, but the infrastructure is out there. If Christians refuse to explicitly exhort the genetic continuity of the White race; they are useless at best and a hindrance at worst. Most sociobiology wonks refuse to explicitly exhort the genetic continuity of the White race; they are useless at best and a hindrance at worst. Most nationalists, even the fascists, refuse to explicitly exhort the genetic continuity of the White race; they are useless at best and a hindrance at worst. Most village atheists refuse to explicitly exhort the genetic continuity of the White race; they are useless at best and a hindrance at worst. Ha! The Monitor, despite several attempts by various commentators to get him to do so, has not. Did too. Did too. I simply do not believe there is an ongoing government-enforced, Jewish policy to demolish the traditional racial makeup of Anglo-Saxon communities via race-replacement. What if Whites could just miscegenate with high IQ, peaceable Chinamen and still remain good Christians… 1.) Most Asian Christians virulently oppose race-mixing. They are open and public about this, since they can get away with it. Even after a huge propaganda campaign by the Left, most American fundamentalists, including the Zionists, oppose what they call “interracial dating,” even though they keep quiet about it. 2.) Let’s assume the God-is-dead scenario that undergirds WN. Many non-Christian rightists would prefer to sleep next to a high IQ, peaceable non-white than an educated, feminist, white shrew. Look at John Darbyshire, Henry Makow and, yes, William Pierce. After all, if death is the end, who wants to die alone? 79
Posted by Whoopi Goldberg on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 06:42 | # Monitor: You’ve made some compelling points against “atheist White Nationalism” (for lack of a better phrase). You’ve laid down some crunk-ass baselines. You’ve also jammed-out some truly-TARDacious riffs. For example:
Fail. Neither you nor anyone else has ever proved that genetic interests aren’t fundamental movers of human behavior. On the contrary, all of the research supports this (rather obvious) conclusion. Why are you so skittish about admitting the Jewish role in the West’s decline? What are your motives for denying and minimizing something so patently obvious? If you think being coy about the JQ will in any way immunize you from Establishment abuse when addressing the race issue, you’re laughably off-base. Relying on Jewsus for backup will leave you equally helpless. Face it: To the powers-that-be, and especially their Jewish cohort (an elite-within-the-elite), you’re just as much of a freak, geek, and carnival-bug-eater as the “Hollywood Nazis” you so desperately ridicule.
What makes you think you don’t belong in the same asylum? News flash Monitor: As far as anyone outside of MR and the “Neo-Nazi fringe” is concerned (including your dubious idol, Tom Fleming), you’re just another dirty, unwashed “hater” in need of a bath. Love of Jewsus notwithstanding, no one differentiates between you and the “Neo-Nazis,” “village atheists” and Neo-Pagans you so fecklessly try to convert.
True. But so is the converse: Talking about “culture and civilization” is the same as [environmental] determinism or gender politics or whatnot. It can only explain so much. Eventually, you are forced to talk about ‘ethnic genetic interest’ [or race or biology].
More Auster-esque worm-tonguing. More “conservative” cowardice. Why do you feel the need to minimize Jewish aggression? They killed your Jewsus (according to YOUR Christian doctrine). Now they are a hair’s-breadth away from dancing the Hava-Nagilah on the grave of YOUR Christianity, too. Remind me again of the scriptural passage that commands all Christians to apologize relentlessly for the transgressions of Jews. Where in YOUR Bible does it command you to be a minimizer of Jewish culpability? I would reverse it thus: “Sorry, Jews are not victims. Jews invite their crap. In fact, they salute themselves for doing so…” “Al right, Monitor, every White person becomes a believing Christian, then what? Is that it? Is that all it will take to save the White race? Damn, that was easy.” (Captainchaos) Now we get to the real crux of the matter. Captainchaos is absolutely right to ask this simple question, which you have failed to address, Monitor. Whence cometh this revival of all-things-Jewsus? I see little evidence of it. For better or worse, we live in an atheistic, scientific, and generally post-Jewsus world. I agree with you that we would be better off (in most respects) if we could turn back the clock to the masculine Christianity of yesteryear: The un-neutered Christianity of the Middle Ages effectively sidelined and quarantined Jewish power for centuries. E. Michael Jones, among others, has pointed out that Jewish power waxed proportionally as Catholic and Christian power waned. Decadent aristocrats and the urban nouveau riche found Schmuel the Banker better company than Jewsus the Messiah. Like the Liberal Leftards of today, they sacrificed what felt good (in the short term) for what was good (in the long term). Today the trend has metastasized to near-death proportions. But again, here’s the thing: The Renaissance and Scientific Revolution have done irreparable harm to the Jewsus myth. Too many people (myself included) who see and appreciate the former role of Christianity in protecting Western Civilization simply can’t believe in Jewsus again. We just can’t resurrect a dead myth once science has laid it to rest. How would you, Monitor, deal with people like us? (Not with an Inquisition, I hope.)
How, in practical terms, will a Christian revival address any of our racial problems? “Oooooh! Look what I just found: a new, heretofore hidden Gospel of Jewsus! It says: ‘Thou shalt not race-mix!’ Right there, in red letters!” I have more than a little sympathy for your arguments, Monitor, but I just don’t see how you propose to put the toothpaste back in the tube, or the Schmuel back in the shtetyl (along with the Gentile Globo-Tards). This is a legitimate question, and as Captainchaos and others have pointed it out, you appear unable or unwilling to furnish an answer. What is YOUR big idea? (And hopefully it’s better than doing nothing, shutting up about the JQ, and waiting for Jewsus to come back and bail us all out.) 80
Posted by The Monitor on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 07:51 | # Monitor: You’ve made some compelling points. I can’t believe I’m talking to a transgendered brownshirt: 1.) Do you attack the Inquisition because it opposed cross-dressers? C’mon, Hitler fetishists have no basis to criticize somebody else’s authoritarianism. Even worse, they can’t complain about a move to drive the Jews out of Spain! 2.) Yes, while genetic interests ARE fundamental movers of human behavior, they are also precognitive and irrational. Mostly they boil down to greed and fear. And while I hate to invoke sociobiology’s least favorite phrase, I should point out that human nature, like life in general, is irreducibly complex. 2.) If you reject Christ, you are like the Talmudists, whom you pretend to despise. There’s no significant difference between self-hating Jews and self-hating Gentiles. You hate yourself for not being born Jewish, so you blaspheme the One whom they hate. (Maybe that’s why you call yourself “Goldberg?”) Anyway, you are the hopeless one—and not just because you look awful in high heels. You think you’re going to going to die and blip yourself into non-existence. Thus your unbelief and self-hatred can go unpunished. It doesn’t work that way, as you will eventually discover first hand. Unfortunately for you, nobody believes Hitler rose from the dead, not even Savitri Devi So you made an idol out of an imaginary demon called “Jewish Race Replacement Conspiracy. It reminds me of this guy: 81
Posted by The Monitor on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:10 | # GW: You seem to love vague ideas—and nationalism is one of the vaguest. It just means that some group claims the right to some benefit ranging from loyalty to self-determination. To use the term as self-definition in this case is to hide behind ambiguity as a way to escape refutation. Worse, you have your own substitute religion. You are like the Jews who say that Zionism is the embodiment of the Messiah. Instead, you yearn for the “new revolutionary elite” that will protect Whitey’s evolutionarily adaptive genetic life choice strategies. It’s the same thing. 82
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:58 | # Monitor, You will have to do a lot better than that to score a point in your Virtual War for Monitor. Look back at what I have written about nationalism and its axiality ... it’s stretching out between a conservative, self-conscious Volkishness and palingenisis. Then think about the single, teleological axiality of religion. Also, really try to think outside of your faith-box. I accept that it must be difficult, because faith - religious exotericism - completely intoxicates the mind. It does not free it. That is not its purpose, but the purpose of esotericism (which is again bi-axial, and is not dependent upon faith). Exoteric religion is the product of the expressed faith gene. The latter’s very wide distribution confirms not the reality of gods, but the reproductive benefit (ie, genetic interest) of an external augmentation to tribalism. I hope this brief reply will not be too cryptic, or I will incur the wrath of Cletus again. But there is in it a full reply to your assertions. 83
Posted by Whoopi Goldberg on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:48 | # Weak, Monitor—Far too weak. Jewsus would be disappointed with your slipshod presentation, had he an existence outside of your fanciful Goyische-kopf. Lame jokes and clumsy evasions do not an Evangelist make. If you can’t handle the simple questions and down-home concerns of a single black-lesbian-Jewess Embrace Jewsus or burn in hell? It’s pathetic, Monitor, and I think you know it. I bet even a “Hollywood Nazi” would rather get Bar-Mitzvahed than Baptized once faced with so lackluster and anemic a Jewsus-salesman as yourself. “Oy, your spiel’s all wrong!” (But don’t worry, Monitor. One good thing has come of this: On salesmanship alone, at least now we pretty much know you’re not Jewish. That means things can proceed more candidly and comfortably on these issues from here on out.) But seriously, dude: Returning to my post above, and to the question already raised by Captainchaos and others, what is YOUR big idea? You’ve hammered at the “Hollywood Nazis” enough. (Although few at MR really belong in that category. It’s a convenient Leftard/Judeotard label at best.) How will White Nationalist ideas be any more successful if they are cloaked in the language and liturgy of Jewsus? Isn’t it a bit naive to assume that the elites and their Jewish watchdogs somehow won’t notice the ruse? The racialist and Jew-exclusive ideas we have in common, whether or not they are dressed in the garb of Christian Traditionalism, are anathema to the Globalist Establishment. I don’t see that changing anytime soon, no matter how many reams of scripture we have on our side. Again, I wish you would do a better job of answering my original questions. I am not a “Believer.” Few on this site are. From a strategic point of view, I have no objection whatsoever to Christian Traditionalism as a means of White Revival. If someone—you, for Jewsus’ sake!—stepped-up to the plate with a plan to reconstitute White Christendom; I’d be all for it. I would even mumble the refrains, don the robes, and go through the motions if I thought it would contribute to our victory. I just can’t guarantee that I’d really believe. But does that really matter? It’s the place of Jewsus to judge—not you, Monitor. In the meantime, why can’t we work together on a purely pragmatic level? White Nationalists and Traditionalist Christians could meet each other half-way: You shed your Semitophobia (meaning cowardice in addressing the JQ) and we’ll shed our anti-Christian sentiment. We’re not the enemy. We just plan to go separate ways once our common enemies have been defeated. 84
Posted by The Monitor on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:50 | # GW: Look back at what I have written about religion and the decline of Western Civilization. Also, really try to think outside of your postmodern, sociobiological box. I accept that it must be difficult, because social science exotericism - completely intoxicates the mind. It does not free it. That is not its purpose, but the purpose of esotericism (which is again bi-axial, and is not dependent upon psychbabble and garbled jargon). Exoteric social science is the product of the expressed ideology gene. The latter’s very wide distribution confirms not the reality of social science fads, but the reproductive benefit (i.e., power, status) of an external augmentation to tribalism. 85
Posted by The Monitor on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:35 | # Put simply: There is no an ongoing government-enforced, Jewish policy to demolish the traditional racial makeup of Anglo-Saxon communities via race-replacement. If it existed, there would be documentary evidence. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof, after all. If I hold the ongoing genocide claims strictly to the ordinary requirements of critical thinking, inductive reasoning, and good research, Rational people, who have something to lose by accepting this proposition, are not willing to accept the plausibility of the claim unless the evidence is extremely strong. Based on its own merits, the race replacement theory is either impossible or extremely improbable. Something so huge and pervasive should have lots and lots of evidence. Instead, I see a little religion based on paranoia, in which True Believers try to one-up each other on the Jewish Question. It ignores evidence that contradicts the approved dogma, twists mainstream reporting out of context, or just make things up. For example, how could one not question the race replacement theory? Think of all the people that would have to run such an operation—and keep it secret. Considering how the birthrate works, this genocide will take centuries. In addition, a plurality of Jews prefer living among white than one another. Revealingly, none of the WNs ever mentions these problems or provide scenarios of how “the Jews” could pull it off without getting caught. While we Anglo Saxons face plenty of dangers ahead, spreading false claims can only make thing worse. If my little qualitative study here tells me anything, it is that White Nationalists are ideological and modernist to the core. Worse, they tend to see the world in paranoid, irrational, and childish ways. If people want that sort of decadence, they can get it from liberalism with no threat to their workaday worlds. The WN (or in GW’s case, N) ideology is based on a systematic misunderstanding of power relations and human nature, which results in failure to clearly examine the issues. The ideology serves as personal therapy, a genetic interest for dealing with with the cold, uncaring world of multiculturalism, especially for people who refuse to accept traditional understanding about Christendom. Since WNism provides superficial comfort that the System is out to get him, the adherent often acts as though they need no burden of proof. In fact he will typically say that any critic is in bed with Jewish power. This sort of delusion would do L. Ron Hubbard proud. I hope this brief reply will not be too cryptic, or I will incur the wrath of Guessedworker again. But there is in it a full reply to your assertions. 86
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:55 | # Monitor, Facetiousness is really not very helpful, is it? If you will not engage on intelligent terms you succeed only in damning yourself. However, to try to answer you, there is no equality between reason and superstition. Science is not ideology. Neither is politics per se, but an interest in the power to meld life to one’s individual and group interests. Because you cannot prove your case - naturally enough, because it is faith-based - you are reduced to wilfully misinterpreting and mischaracterising those of your opponents. So we are stuck, for example, at “white nationalism has no arguments” ... I “seem to love vague ideas” ... “Jewish policy to demolish the traditional racial makeup of Anglo-Saxon communities via race-replacement”, etc. You never ever take what is said to you on its own terms, never attempt to penetrate or respect its meaning sufficiently even to disprove it. You just paint a face on it and come back as if nothing of any content had been said. There is something disturbing and very needy in the repetitiveness with which you do that. I see little hope that you can “turn about”. Fred was right at the beginning. 87
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:54 | # A good letter by a Roman Catholic to Vdare.com gets it right about the Catholics and their support for what the letter-writer calls “demographic displacement of Americans by Mexicans or anyone else” (what many at MR.com know as “race-replacement,” the word “demographic” today being a euphemism for the R-word):
(All emphasis added) 88
Posted by the Narrator.. on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:44 | #
Like, for example, the fact that the White population in America has dropped from around 90% to about 55% in just 40 years? Yeah, pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.
See above.
This from a guy who claims to believe that a sky spirit is watching his every move and that out there in the nether world somewhere is a mischievous entity plotting to overthrow the universe. Yes, Fred was right about Monitor… 89
Posted by Desmond Jones on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 21:39 | #
Just today’s Jesuits?
In Boulder, the Rocky Mountain American, a Klan newspaper, took frequent potshots at Catholics, including this poem in its April 24, 1925, edition:
90
Posted by Desmond Jones on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:10 | #
A Jewish “policy” is not needed. Just the pursuit of their own ethnic interests. The redoubtable Jacob Schiff, financed the 1905 Russian(?) revolution and underwrote loans to Japan’s navy;
Schiff fought to keep America’s doors open for his people, US business wanted cheap labour, with the end result being the total transformation of small towns like Altoona.
Voila, race-replacement. 91
Posted by birch barlow on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 03:28 | # From my post from another thread:
Well, I tend to think some form of managerialism is unavoidable. That is not to say managerialism is desirable, much less morally upright. By managerialism I mean soft totalitarianism—ie Soviet Communism/German Nazism/Japanese Imperialism minus all the mass killings and concentration camps (tho the massive number of people in jail and prison in the U.S. may make some think of concentration camps). All in all, managerialism isn’t such a bad thing for the upper middle class. However, the quasi-aristocrats who make up the CEOs and other top people in corporations, as well as the working class, will probably be screwed over. I hate to say it, but *both* people like JW Holliday who call cognitive elitism “proto-Stalinism” and left-wingers who call cognitive elitism “Nazism” may have a point. There is definitely a managerial aspect to C.E., especially with people like Godless Capitalist and myself advocating more government funds for scientific research. I think greatly increased funds for scientific research would definitely be a good thing (hopefully leading to a better environment, less dependence on Middle Eastern Islamic wackos for oil, drugs to cure the myriad of mental illnesses that plague humanity, anti-aging therapies, etc), but it could also lead to corruption amongst scientists who are as power-hungry as any other group of people. 92
Posted by Lurker on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 03:28 | # Speaking as a lowly grunt here and Im hoping to be polite… Ive largely stopped reading anything by Monitor (or Silver). Their signal-to-noise to ratio is the problem. In fact the ratio is so poor its hard to tell if there is any signal at all, which is the whole point I presume. A few good points here and there are supposed to sanitize the clutter they churn out the rest of the time. Or perhaps they might be described as exhibiting destructive interference. 93
Posted by The Monitor on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 03:32 | # Facetiousness is really not very helpful, is it? You asked for it, mate. “Faith gene,” my fanny. Don’t you think there is something disturbing and very needy in the repetitiveness with which you do that? ...there is no equality between reason and superstition. Who gets to define “reason” and “superstition?” You? What you really mean is that atheism is pre-theoretical and may not be questioned. Or are you just repeating slogans? Science is not ideology. Hey, it worked for Stephen Jay Gould! It worked for Einstein, the card-carrying Communist! Who are you to say otherwise? Because you cannot prove your case - naturally enough, because it is faith-based… Really? Have you proven YOUR case? I keep bringing that little point up. Fred was right at the beginning. Like Fred, do you believe there is an ongoing government-enforced, Jewish policy to demolish the traditional racial makeup of Anglo-Saxon communities via race-replacement? 94
Posted by Lurker on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 03:41 | # Monitor - you’re typing words but its just a collection of meaningless characters across the screen. Dont you get bored by such an empty exercise, dont you wish that sometimes you could drop the act and actually say something? 95
Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 05:17 | # President Clinton stated that he was eagerly looking forward to Whites becoming a minority in the US, so yes, there is an official policy of race replacement and that policy is promoted by influential, nation-wrecking Jews (tautologically speaking). Any few, small Jewish voices raised against the Thirdworldisation of the US are aimed at immigrant unwillingness to assimilate whereas true Americans dont care whether or not the unwanted interlopers are prepared to do so, wishing instead for a cessation of the invasion. 96
Posted by The Monitor on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 06:01 | # Monitor - you’re typing words but its just a collection of meaningless characters across the screen. No, that would be something like this: WNs eith ways. If it. The plausions false proud. In about getting can of pream replacements intextrading, and good research, Ration, a liberational scenary religions anding to serves they tendom. Sincur the claims of Westerictly main. Also, ream realittle adher againstribaline not which is try providers are not that to there is in be difficism - confirms can on psychbabble. If possibled documention that ignores and modering to requiremely to acts an only see an nature, which of that sorting white t0. Hey, you brought it up! 97
Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 07:11 | # Kevin MacDonald quotes Earl Raab:
Theodor Herzl, English translation by H. Zohn, R. Patai, Editor, The Complete Diaries of Theodor Herzl, Volume 1, Herzl Press, New York, (1960), p. 196.
98
Posted by silver on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 07:19 | #
You overestimate yourself; you’re probably just retarded.
Monitor either wilfully or from ignorance misconstrues every point he (ostensibly) replies to. Having set up his strawmen he proceeds to knock them down by stacking non sequitur on non sequitur. Quite hilarious. (Good job Mon. And remember, it’s not race-replacement (a) unless the Jews are documented to be causing it and (b) while there’s still a single white left. That’ll keep ‘em bamboozled.) 99
Posted by The Monitor on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 08:37 | # silver: Having set up his strawmen he proceeds to knock them down by stacking non sequitur on non sequitur Did you actually read what I wrote? What straw men? Yes, I am caustic, but also very specific in what I’m pointing at: First, the claim of a Jewish ethnic strategy is what keeps WN alive. I guess that without it you could say Whites are trying to wipe themselves out. That just sounds silly. At any rate, I don’t see evidence of an organized attempt to wipe out white people, with or without Jews. It seems that Whites developed self-hatred as a genetic interest and genuinely believe that diversity is a strength. They believe that all non-whites can be appeased and educated into Anglo-Saxon bourgeoisie. If Whites mind their own ethic displacement, they don’t mind enough to stop it. Even in majority-states likes New Mexico, California, and Texas, whites still run things. Again, somebody has to show that there is some organized plan to get rid of whites. Otherwise, this is paranoia. It is equivalent to the Americans who are convinced that Osama intends to establish a Caliphate on top of them. while there’s still a single white left I never said that. That’s your straw man. 100
Posted by The Monitor on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 08:46 | # President Clinton stated that he was eagerly looking forward to Whites becoming a minority in the US, so yes, there is an official policy of race replacement. That doesn’t follow. I’m happy that the market is tanking—BURN, BABY, BURN!—but I did nothing to cause it. Clinton loved the dot-com bubble, but there was no organized plan to create one. 101
Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 10:12 | # Clinton’s executive actions regarding racial quotas, non-White skewed immigration and pro-Israel foreign policy demonstrate the president’s deliberate efforts in creating a ‘post-racial’ America in which Whites will be replaced by the anthropoid garbage of the Third World. Clinton also supported that lover of Subcon influx, Bill Gates, when the Microsoft founder blithely announced that his eponymous charitable foundation would grant no scholarships to poor White candidates, although naturally the president publicly chided the Deep Dixie Bob Jones University for not admitting Black students in sufficient numbers. You are a rather stupid person, Monitor and sadly there is no cure for that often genetic ailment. 102
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 10:43 | # Monitor: 1. First, the claim of a Jewish ethnic strategy is what keeps WN alive. 2. Again, somebody has to show that there is some organized plan to get rid of whites. Which is it? An ethnic strategy or an organised plan? What we are saying is that it is a compulsive behaviour. In typical mode, you paint a silly face on that and claim that WN is, basically, what you would want it to be. Can’t you see that, rather than addressing what we actually say, you are wish-fulfilling here ... creating the terms (for yourself) on which you can your (own) argument? 103
Posted by The Monitor on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 10:45 | # You are a rather stupid person, Monitor and sadly there is no cure for that often genetic ailment. You make illogical. Mr. X does Y and Z, which may lead to result R. X even says he wants R. Therefore X could only have done Y and Z as part of an organized plan to cause R. It doesn’t follow. Yet you call me “rather stupid” for pointing out your logic. Go ahead, insult me until the cows come home. The truth ain’t on your side. Compare another grand scheme: world government. Elites have wanted this since the days of Thomas More. There’s all sorts of 20th Century primary sources where people and group detail at length that they want a global state and how they hoped to get it. People even ran political campaigns around it. Yet ad hominems rained down on any critic who dared notice these thing. With the Soviet Union gone, this idea isn’t as popular, but is still around. Where is the Race Replacement equivalent of Wilkie’s “One World?” Where does this movement openly discuss exterminating Whitey? Your one example of this is “Race Traitor,” which has is a one-man operation that has been moribund for years. The ADL, AIPAC and other usual suspects never make such a claim. There’s lots and lots of talk about diversity, but zilch about eliminating whites. 104
Posted by The Monitor on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 11:01 | # An ethnic strategy or an organised plan? Pick one. You guys swap these concepts back and forth. So do I. It was my conscious decision to do so. You say strategy. Fred says plan. I’ve tried to avoid the phrase “Jewish Conspiracy,” because you would say I am baiting you. This verbiage about “genetic interests” and “ethnic strategy” is like an inverted form of PC. Yet I see no practical difference between the two, because political radicals tend to blurt out what they really think anyway. If Abe Foxman or Ariel Sharon wanted the gentiles exterminated, they would say so. After all, there are WNs (perhaps not in present company) who say they want the Jews wiped out. As far as I can tell, the Left wants Whitey around as a proletarian class, to work endlessly at dead-end jobs so he can pay reparations to his new masters. That’s not the same thing as genocide. Even the Left hates Zimbabwe. 105
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 11:50 | # 1. Most here are content with MacDonald’s formulation of an Jewish evolutionary survival strategy. 2. Read Salter before you pass judgement. You are in ignorance of the fact that it is applied genetic science, not “verbiage”. 3. You really think that race-replacement can be reduced to an overt, public campaign to “eliminate whites”? Not subtle, my friend, and you need to be. It is manslaughter, not Homicide 1. Evidentially, the effect is enough to convict ... rather as with Marc Dutroux, the Belgian paedophile who built a secret cell in his basement, imprisoned two young girls there and then ommitted to tell the police about them after his capture. They died of thirst. For your information, Article 2 of the 1948 Geneva Convention for the Punishment and Prevention of Genocide states:-
The UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, approved last September, has a lot in it that induces a wry smile among European nativists, since the elites have been at pains to restrict their definiton of “indigenous” to archaic Third World tribes. But here’s Article 8:-
Now, these instruments are pretty widely drawn, especially the Declaration. So is there in any sense in which, say, 2 (b) and (c) from the Convention and 8 2.a, b, c, d and e from the Declaration could apply to the position of Europeans? Could they call into question the integrity and intention of our elites, Jewish and European alike? Well, don’t worry. The UK Ambassador to the UN Karen Pierce has spotted that one, and was quick to state that, “National minority groups and other ethnic groups within the territory of the United Kingdom and its overseas territories did not fall within the scope of the indigenous peoples to which the Declaration applied.” ... an act of ommission that is as good as any act of commission. But visible to us. 106
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 11:53 | # I think, really, it is incumbent on you to:- 1. Disprove MacDonald. 2. Disprove Salter. 3. Disprove the link between political and business interests and the demographics in our homelands. 107
Posted by Dave Johns on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:48 | # “Again, somebody has to show that there is some organized plan to get rid of whites. Otherwise, this is paranoia.”—The Monitor There is no organized plan to get rid of Whites per se. What there is, however, is a sick twisted philosophy which demands that Whites believe they are inherently evil. This inversion of reality is being taught in the public education system and propagated in the mass media outlets under the guise of multiculturalism and tolerance. It’s a philosophy that teaches Whites to loathe both themselves and their heritage but demands that we embrace the-other. It is based on myths such as Susan Sontag’s proclamation that “whites are a cancer on society.” These anti-White philosophies invariably grow out from the radical-Left and are rooted in something pretty sick. What is so vexing is high IQ doesn’t seem to inoculate Whites from participating in these self destructive autogenocidal ideologies; on the contrary, people with college educations are most affected by those ideological perversions. Some of the difficult questions we must grapple with are: How can we, as White Preservationists, change the mindset of our own brainwashed race; a prevailing mindset that compels the brainwashed masses to turn in on themselves in a self-destructive manner? Given the fact that liberals are firmly entrenched in power in most institutions and at all levels of society, how do we go about defeating liberalism? What is the best course of action we should take? How can we fight the constantly changing multidimensional beast? (Scratching head.) 108
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 14:16 | # Actually, Dave, “White Preservationists” is a good term. It has the great virtue of being irrefutable on moral grounds. 109
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:00 | #
Why is Susan Sontag’s famous proclamation even known, Dave? Why didn’t it remain completely unknown? She was an unknown New York Jewish fifth-rate hack “writer” (which is what she remained her whole “career”). Who hyped it to the hilt? Was it “liberals” or an ethnic group? Why did this group hype it? And why were they the only ones who hyped it? Why did they keep hyping it for twenty long years afterward? What was their aim in artificially hyping this proclamation? Susan Sontag didn’t make herself and her proclamation famous. She and it were made famous. By a group with the power to elevate and suppress. Why do they choose to elevate that which they habitually elevate and suppress that which they habitually suppress? “Whites” in the expression “whites are the cancer of history” is Jewish code for “Euros, the enemy of Jews.” The Jews in making that statement, and the Jews in hyping for twenty years, were NOT saying “Since Jews are white, Jews are the cancer of history too, along with Euros.” No. Definitely not. They were saying “Euros are the cancer of history, something Jews have nothing to do with. Euros are guilty, Jews innocent. Whites means Euros.” That’s what they’re saying. Period. End of story. It was and is an ethnic attack by Jews on Euros. 110
Posted by Dave Johns on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 19:55 | # Who hyped it to the hilt? Was it “liberals” or an ethnic group?—Fred Scrooby We all know a group of Jewish academics hyped Susan Sontag’s “whites are a cancer on history” myth. We all know why they are continuing to do so. That’s easy to figure out; and of course KMD explains the reasons in great detail in CoC. The larger question is: Why is it that a small group of Jews can have such an impact on Western Society with their corrosive/degenerate social policies? Why are Euro intellectuals en masse embracing and promoting such vicious anti-Euro venom? I say it’s liberalism. Without liberalism, the Jews would never be able to do what they are doing. Liberalism provides them the ideal enviornment for them to thrive in. Liberalism to Jews, is like water to a fish. BTW—The average Joe or Jill on the street never heard of Susan Sontag let alone understand the complexities of how Jewish supremacist influence is shredding the social fabric in all Western Nations. Most white people are completely oblivious to what the Jews are doing to us. But what I find ironic, is the blacks I work with sure are hip to the Jews! Maybe they’re not so dumb after all? 111
Posted by Desmond jones on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 21:26 | #
It’s a Jewish strategy that keeps mass demographic transfer (race-replacement) alive.
There always been competition on an individual as well as group level. Mass migration in US history has always seen mass resistance to the displacement. The East St. Louis race riot is but one example. However, framing that competition as bigotry, disarmed it, as Raab asserts. The result being a growing heterogeneity that Raab asserts is irreversible. However, if the nurturing of bigotry is removed and the quest for survival is made virtuous, as it naturally has always been, how much will change? 112
Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 21:41 | #
Not true. Official Jewry discovered in the 30s that advancing Jewish interests starkly, met great resistance. It’s clear a shift was made to a human rights campaign, because it was more effective.
Canadian Labour Reports. Credit: Canadian Jewish Archives. 113
Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 19 Sep 2008 23:06 | # The West is now officially dead. What stands in its place? An experiment in dysgenics, a giant breedery for muds. White man: you live to serve - muds. 114
Posted by Lurker on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 00:59 | # Thanks for the charming response Silver. My problem with you is I just dont where you are coming from, you dont seem to have a coherent response. As Svigor would say, you need to get your ideaological ducks in a row (same goes for Monitor). Then there is the literal, are you Indian, Serbian? In UK or Australia or is it Thailand now - or do you just move a lot? It shouldnt matter which, but you keep changing your story. 115
Posted by The Monitor on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 06:21 | # GW: Why? You imply that I disagree with you, therefore I must be an anti-racist or neocpnservative. There is no organized plan to get rid of Whites per se. Then you’ve conceded my point: the elites do not make policy with a race replacement endgame in mind. 116
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:42 | # Monitaaaargh! You are utterly, fatally focussed on your tiresome “points”. You just don’t see what is being said to you. Look, I follow the golden rule that it is never profitable to discuss race with negros. Europeans, yes always. Negros never. But you are fast approaching prognathous levels of disinterest and incomprehension of the other side. I bet you don’t even understand that the effort that has been mounted here to converse with you isn’t one of anger or defensiveness, but of Samaritan care. I really don’t know what more we can do to penetrate your carapace of stubborn egoism. One last try. No, there is not a Jewish plan or conspiracy, with every little soldier slotting into the line of command and following his orders to the letter. There are only ethnic interests which unfailingly manifest as a very characteristic, hyper-aggressive degradation of host interests. There is conscious awareness of this (of what is “good for Jews”). There is, therefore, satisfaction at the results. But awareness and satisfaction still fall short of conspiracy, since in place of that there is only the urgings of blood. The elites are more complex since they are an alliance of congruent interests centred around the ideal of internationalism and the ambition of building an internationalised power structure. The internationalist dynamic emerged from the nature of the victorious Federal North, and it is the purpose today to which the drive for American global hegemony is put. To understand this is to understand why nations must be broken, and why that necessitates the breaking of the bond between European blood and European soil. The effect is a European genocide. Essentially, it is a policy effect, somewhat like the effect of Stalin’s policy of collectivisation in the Ukraine. It is the Dutroux effect - not something of the blood, obviously, but of the calculating mind. I urge you to pull back from your tendency to assert glib black and white conclusions. It’s as if you employ the same type of faith judgement in the field of intellect you would for moral behaviours. Perhaps that explains why you cleave so doggedly to your conclusions in the face of so much explanation to the contrary. It’s all faith with you. 117
Posted by The Monitor on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 11:45 | # You are utterly, fatally focussed on your tiresome “points”. You just don’t see what is being said to you. I know what is being said and have tried to pin it down. This is not “stubborn egoism,” just trying to make clear and consistent was is almost always expressed in hyperbole. If anything, you are probably facing the most empathetic critic you will ever find. Words mean things. You can’t use bloody shirt language when you can’t decide whether you have either blood or a shirt. Is there an ongoing elite strategy to “break the bond between European blood and European soil?” If so, what kind of strategy is it? Is it conscious? Would it exist if not for the Jews? Or is it just the White obsession with universality run amok? If it does exist, is it genocide? Or just something that would, over a long, long time (after we are all dead) produce a result that is equivalent to the devastation? And how does this explanation differ from those stated by Pat Buchanan or Nick Griffin or Alain De Benoist? The comparison was between the alleged race-replacement campaign to globalism. Or compare the American neocons who claim Islam is a “religion of people,” yet cannot hide their bloodlust. People with intense internal conflicts tend to let loose what they think. In other words, we would expect to see all sorts of disconnected people blurt out that they want whitey dead. Yet the only people who talk like that are the “Race Traitor” people, who have no following, and illiterate street criminals. The Left doesn’t really expect that Whites will stop running the world, even as their/our numbers drop. You will say that there is no strategy, except when you turn around and say there is a strategy. So the way you get out of this mess is by saying that there is an unconscious drive to destroy the outgroup. Somehow the Jews are hard-wired to try and wipe out Whitey. But whatever. I am repeating myself. 118
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 12:35 | # GW strives for gentlemanliness in dealing with Monitor but that’s not how you deal with a cancerous tumor. You don’t try to be gentlemanly with a cancerous tumor, you excise it, cut it out. This site now has a cancerous tumor growing on it. It’s time for radical surgery. 119
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 13:09 | # [I’m pasting the following here, copied from another thread where I had mistakenly posted it, so if need be it can be erased from the other thread (and Monitor’s reply erased along with it).]
For a while I wondered why there was no white élite resistance. There was only the wacko fringe white resistance that nobody listened to, none of the mainstream variety that people would listen to. How come? How come the mainstream variety hadn’t materialized? Then I realized the mainstream variety had materialized, plenty of it, but thanks to the way it was cast by the mainstream media it was viewed generally as wacko fringe: “mainstream” and “wacko fringe” are determined by the mass media. The other side’s counterpart of Sam Francis, for example — whoever that might be; take your pick — would be and has been cultivated by the MSM as mainstream, while Sam Francis was demonized as wacko fringe. So if there were fifty Sam Francises out there, all of course successfully cast as “fringe” by the Jewish media barons, we’d be saying, “Well yes, there are all those Sam Francises, but they’re fringe — how come there’s not mainstream resistance to what’s going on, resistance people will listen to?” But that would be the mainstream resistance we’d be looking for, those fifty Sam Francises the Jews had succeeded in tarnishing in everyone’s mind as “fringe.” We’d be looking around for the “mainstream resistance” when in fact it would be all around us, but we couldn’t see it because we’d have been conditioned to view it not as mainstream, not as “respectable,” but as “fringe.” Then the Jews turn around and promote someone like Adorno, who is rightly viewed as lunatic fringe, as mainstream, and all the goys, us included, believe them, and stand around waiting for “mainstream resistance on our side to mainstreamers on the other side like Adorno.” That mainstream resistance to “mainstreamers on the other side like Adorno” will never materialize as long as the Jews control the press, the media, and Hollywood, because the instant any does so much as stir it’ll get strangled in its cradle by being cast as “wacko fringe” by the Jews (and strangled in other Jewish ways). Whether or not Sam Francis is mainstream is determined by the MSM. Whoever controls the MSM controls who is “mainstream” and who is “fringe” in the public’s eyes. “Why are Euro intellectuals en masse embracing” what’s going on?, asks Dave Johns. Lots aren’t embracing it, but we’ve been conditioned to see the ones who aren’t as “fringe,” when there’s no more reason to view them that way than there is to view the ones the Jewish media cultivate as “mainstream.” So whether or not “mainstream” resistance has arisen is to a large extent a matter, not of whether or not any has arisen — plenty has — but of who controls the MSM. Which is more wacko: 1) the Jew, or the homo, malcontent, misfit, or degnerate hyped by the Jewish media owners, who says whites throughout the Eurosphere are the cancer of history and should be racially replaced (this today is considered mainstream opinion) or 2) the man who says whites have done nothing wrong and certainly should not be genocided via the demographic weapon? Obviously the latter is less wacko, more reasonable. But the Jews control the media images, so the former gets presented by them as mainstream, the latter as fringe wacko, “fascist,” “racist,” “merchant of hate,” and so on. So there has been white resistance. It’s been present right along. But the other side has got responsible, normal, perfectly reasonable white resistance pegged in everyone’s mind as fringe or worse. It’s not that no resistence has arisen, it’s the ease and effectiveness with which that reasonable resistance gets tarred with the “fringe wacko” brush mainly by the MSM. White resisters have been writing top quality opinion and analysis all around us for upwards of sixty years. What’s Yockey considered now, fringe or mainstream? Fringe, of course. But in fact he was mainstream material that got successfully pigeonholed as fringe by the (fill in the blank) ______-controlled mass media. So there’s an answer to the question, “Why no élite white resistance?” There’s been élite white resistance but it gets cast as fringe, not respectable. 120
Posted by The Monitor on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 13:13 | # GW strives for gentlemanliness in dealing with Monitor but that’s not how you deal with a cancerous tumor. Aha! You claim, over and over, that the crisis of our age is not just “ethnic interests which unfailingly manifest as a very characteristic, hyper-aggressive degradation of host interests,” but something entirely different: race-replacement as state policy. In fact, “forced race-replacement” is what you’ve been saying since at least 2004. If there were a difference, you would say so. No, you go to bed counting race replacement instead of sheep. So GW’s denial of “a Jewish plan or conspiracy” is pretty hazy. If it was serious, you’d be going nuts. Except that both you and he assert the same sort of inverted Zionism. So your first thing on the civilization is to find your enemy (hint: not the Irish) and them cook iup an apologia for the fight. GW prefers the soft-science approach while you enjoy an angry flame-fest. It’s time for radical surgery. You’re not suggesting THIS, are you?
121
Posted by The Monitor on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 13:15 | # So your first thing on the civilization is to find your enemy (hint: not the Irish) and them cook iup an apologia for the fight. Should read: “So your first thing on the civilization question is to find your enemy…” 122
Posted by silver on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 14:20 | #
Lurker, it’s all there if you’d only open your eyes (and a bit of your heart) and look, instead of rushing off to get the third party lowdown on what I’m “really” about. Eventually a person ties of apologising, but one more time, just for you: I’m sorry for what I said as an anti; I no longer feel that way and support the aims of white racial (as well as cultural, which is what drives my support) preservation, which, in practical terms, requires territorial racial separation, which I support as a good in itself since homogeneity, for the most part, is better (simply that: better) than diversity, and this is a position one can hold without having anything to do with anything “white.” That’s it, kiddo. It’s not more complicated than that.
Mine are, Lurker. It’s the hodgepodge “WN” movement that needs to clear the cobwebs from its collective mind; the bulk of my commentary here is aimed at helping it do so. A VNN article about a “White Arts Movement” said: As we work towards separatism, we want to avoid an art of rage and violence. We don’t want our movement wiped out before it gets organized. We prefer salesmanship to brute force, education to violence. I’m working “towards separatism,” too, albeit for my own reasons, but “Ally,” for reasons not well understood and to the movement’s severe detriment, is an alien concept in WN circles.
No, Lurker, there is no such issue. None. By now, only the most complete fucking idiot—or poisonous, snide, self-interested critic—could possibly think so; which are you? (I’m leaning towards the former.) One last time: I’m ethnically Serb, of mixed Serb-Greek ancestry.
Look, I’ve mentioned quite a few times that I’ve spent most of the last few years in Thailand, pursuing certain business interests. I should have said “I am currently living in” rather than “I live in,” but only the two aforementioned categories could really consider this something to hang me with.
These sorts of misunderstandings are solid evidence of Scrooby’s pernicious influence. “Race-replacement” itself is not immediately obvious or readily intuitive and even the committed racialist often requires explication in order to get it; forced race-replacement is orders of magnitude less obvious still, and only has currency because motormouth Scrooby himself recites it at every opportunity, brute-forcing every bit of circumstancial evidence he can lay his hands on into it. 123
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 14:45 | # Monitor, Alright, I will suspend the judgement of egoism. But what explains your refusal to mentally process the complexity of the world? Everyone else here manages it. Why not you? Stupidity would be an unfair answer. A better one would seem to be that you habitually seek to make the world known and simple - a product of your faith requirement. You end up with a conclusion befitting a stupid person, but it’s just unfortunate! “Is there an ongoing elite strategy to “break the bond between European blood and European soil?” Strategy ... a conscious strategy? Look, in June I posted a list of the Bilderberger 2008 attendees, and asked:- Why was Harold Goddijn of the Dutch car satnav specialist TomTom invited to participate? RFID? Well, why? Only about 130 people normally participate at a Bilderberg conference. But why new-money Harold this year?
OK, so Harold’s a businessman on the cutting-edge of satellite tracking. But satellite tracking is “a craze”, and clearly an irrelevance employment- and tax base-wise. And, obviously, he doesn’t have anything to add to the strategising of globalisation ... and precious little, really, to the future of the digital age. He’s there to be hooked up with others who can use him ... let’s say in the field of “personal mobility”. No one needs to say “RFID” at this stage. So does Harold now have a conscious strategy to “break the bond between European blood and European soil?” Never over-simplify. 90% of the 6000 “important people” who make up the globalist class are not party to any overtly-stated strategy. Some are always innocents like Harold. Most, though, are not, and are united by a congruency of interests which, in their broadest reading, require the collectivisation of power and wealth since the exercise of the one and access to the other is maximised thereby. These people obviously know more than Harold. They know what elitism is, and they like it, profit from it and owe their allegiance to it. But ... then there is the remaining and conscious 10%. In December 2006, I wrote a foundational piece for MR on the extraordinary, treacherous phenomenon of power elitism. In it I wrote:-
World government cannot be established over the democratically-expressed will of Europe’s children. The West is the only part of the world in which this is true, because you and I and those whom we naturally love are individualistic people evolved in a different manner from the Asiatic Jew and Han and Turkomen. Even white Russians are Asiatised in this respect, deferring to authority far more readily than Europeans of the West. They do not present the same stumbling block to elite ambitions. Now, Capitalism + Marxism = elite power and wealth. After all, was it a “happy accident” that Theodor Adorno, arch-Marxist revolutionary, Frankfurt Schooler and father of culture war in the West, was lifted out of pre-war Germany by the CIA and immediately put in charge of Rockefeller’s Radio Project? At the level within the elites that this simple formula, Capitalism + Marxism, is understood and acted upon there is your conscious strategy ... there is full agreement to the purpose of “breaking the bond”. Of course, it need not be an explicitly stated goal even then. The conversation can be about “weakening” the “old-fashioned” and “unstable” polities, which have “visited upon Europe so much harm and misery in the past”. But the effect ... the effect is understood fully, and approved of. 124
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 14:57 | # “Aha! You claim, over and over…” - The Monitor “You?” How about “you people” instead, more appropriate? Do you realize you have been conversing with more than one interlocutor? There is likely to be some diversity of opinion. Or do you impute to us the “Asiatic hive-mindedness” that you claim we impute to Jews? “It’s time for radical surgery.” - Fred Scrooby “You’re not suggesting THIS, are you?” - The Monitor The Monitor prefers the “soft-science” approach and the even more flaccid theology approach and when he is feeling particularly triumphalist he enjoys an “angry flame-fest” which he perceives as satire. But, what dark psychological forces really underlie his aggressive satirizing laden with violent imagery? Could it be that the Monitor, at least unconsciously, holds the conviction that Whites who are not “good Christians” deserve a horrible end? If Whites are not Christian they are not worth saving for the insufficient reason that they are our people? Just what would the Monitor do, if his malevolent impulses were given opportunity to vent? Maybe what the allies had in store for Germans? Incineration by the hundreds of thousands, ethnic cleansing, starvation, and torture. That would teach those heretics, wouldn’t it? 125
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 14:59 | #
Do you deny it? Do you deny that forced, specifically, government-enforced, race-replacment of Euros is exactly what’s taking place? (Don’t say races won’t mix if the individuals comprising them don’t want to: people who don’t want questionable food and water will comsume both if what they prefer is kept from them long enough. Why is the anti-diversity preference of the majority being permanently overridden?) And do you deny that the Jews are its central driving force and organizing culprits, not by themselves sufficient to pull if off obviously but neither could it have been pulled off without them who were more indispensable than any other member of their alliance? Do you deny any of that? Don’t ask how the Jews could be responsible. Just look at the blindingly obvious evidence before your eyes that they are. When Rutherford shot alpha particles at foil he never expected any to bounce straight back. When lots did, he didn’t say, “I don’t believe what I’m seeing,” but “I didn’t think it was possible, but this shows that atoms must have extremely dense centers.” When we see what Jews are pulling off, we don’t say, “I don’t believe what I’m seeing,” but “I didn’t think it was possible, but what we’re seeing shows that, however they are doing it, Jews are in fact pulling this off, so here are speculations x, y, and z to get the ball rolling on figuring out finally how they do it.” 126
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 15:13 | # Silver, I presume you have read Salter, yes? He uses the term “Race-replacement” in OGI, which was published in 2003. So the phrase pre-dates Fred’s usage, though I wholly accept that Fred thought it up independently. It is a useful phrase. The “coerced” aspect is also highly arguable. Without it we would not have constraints on freedom of association. We would not have hate speech law. We would not have AA. We would not have the demonisation of nativist political parties and nationalist opinion. We would not have the Holocaust Project, and the laws which, in certain countries, prevent criticism of its claims. We would not have the vast tranche of propaganda that is shoved our children’s throats at school. And so on. Does it add up to coercion? It would be a difficult job to deny it, I think. 127
Posted by silver on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 17:47 | #
It was the “forced” I was taking him to task over.
Here’s the thing: once multiculturalism/diversity—an “improved” social ordering designed to overcome failings of the past, as its proponents see it— has been decided on the social controls you’ve listed basically suggest themselves, each of them appearing obvious and crucial to maintaining order and the agreed upon course. It’s all very well for critics to howl about being muzzled, but muzzling is what Diversity requires; it can’t function if it’s allowed to be criticized. A few years ago, I had a Dutchmen tell me plainly that a referendum on Turkish EU accession couldn’t be permitted because people would vote against it. That’s the kind of thing people committed to the big D reflexively blurt out without realizing how it sounds to the other side. Allowing criticism contains within it the possibility that, as critics grow in number and their voice grows louder (one GW is easily dismissed; 10,000 saying the very same thing begin to exert a gravitational pull), you’ll allow yourself to be convinced the whole project is a massive failure, with all of the dread implications such failure carries. It’s just so much easier to muzzle the opposition and continue the game of let’s pretend everything’s fine. Isn’t it simple human nature to excuse and justify a course of action you’ve invested yourself in rather than to accept criticism of it and alter it? People have an innate desire to believe they’re doing the right/wise thing and can’t stand to hear they are wrong, and even if they do admit they’re wrong, maintaining that “it’s not so bad” is still often preferable to changing course. That’s breathtakingly petty when you consider the stakes, but petty is what humans are. I think it almost always pays to consider base, petty motives before subscribing to complex, intricate plots. The picture is complicated, however, by Jewish influence. But I think even that has its beginnings in something much more innocent than the tangled web that has resulted from having to justify those beginnings. Anglo-Saxon America didn’t just roll over for the Jews/immigrants. Battles were fought in which Jews attempted to justify their presence on American soil. Being the intellectual sort, and having their specific history, a great deal of overkill was produced, some of it ulterior (Boas et al), but some of it, I can’t help but think, simply pragmatic (Zangwill, melting pot). That overkill took on a life of its own and later developments were in large part a result of it. And the result which is of greatest concern here is race-replacemet. That’s what all of the above results in. But was it the result intended at the outset? My reasoning suggests not. 128
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 17:57 | # Silver, “Life as accident” is an interpretation for which I have a lot of time. But not all life is accidental, hastily followed by justification. There is also intentionality. There is design. I take you back to the comment I made earlier on this thread about the appearance of leading Frankfurt School intellectuals - sworn enemies of capital and inequality - in America before WW2. This was not the actions of Jews, but of the American Establishment. Like Monitor, you are trying to force a single interpretation on everything. Those it fits, it fits. Those it doesn’t, it doesn’t. It doesn’t fit the creation of the MultiCult, or postmodernity, or whatever name you wish to give it. 129
Posted by silver on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 18:15 | #
Nothing I wrote denied this. Communism was designed with a certain end in mind but it sputtered along for years after its failure to adequately meet that end was apparent. I’m simply more interested in why these processes continue than in their genesis—isn’t this the more important question? 130
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 18:41 | # Well, the most important question is: how to end them? But, that aside, and since we are talking about elite decision here, the question of why they continue is the same as why they began. Of course, the methodology of continuation differs from that of initiation, and that’s the difference you are really pointing to. 131
Posted by silver on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 19:00 | #
Race-replacement from T=0? Why is it so necessary for you to believe this? 132
Posted by Desmond Jones on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 21:16 | #
Katz, “Jim Crow,” 9. For a discussion of how the emergence of Ontario human rights legislation reflected a shift to reform liberal values, see Howe, “The Evolution of Human Rights Policy”; R. Brian Howe and David Johnson, Restraining Equality: Human Rights Commissions in Canada (Toronto 1999), chapter 1. 133
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 21:50 | #
They continue because the other side, essentially the Jews, wants race-replacement of Euros. They want it; more than want, they crave it like some Jewish religious nirvana, like heaven, like their idea of heaven for Jews, for several reasons including fear, jealousy, and hatred of Euros as a race. You see the Jews all across the political spectrum right, left, and center, favoring race-replacement and not just favoring it but clinging to it for dear life, supporting it with all their strength, donating fortunes to guarantee it, cheering it, working to bring it about, sacrificing for it, with a religious fervor, as if for Jews it’s a life-and-death issue, or their sole chance at happiness in this world, something like that. The Jewish role in race-replacement is blinding it’s so obvious. 134
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 20 Sep 2008 22:05 | # The Jews have been actively waging war on the Euros since at least 1860, some say since the French Revolution. Euros don’t know it. 135
Posted by The Monitor on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 00:00 | # chaos: Or do you impute to us the “Asiatic hive-mindedness” that you claim we impute to Jews? Interesting point! I wish it were so. Such tactics, even if they tend toward bureaucracy, have been widely successful for the Asiatics. I never made the claim you refer to, but if it wouldn’t necessarily be an insult from me. Why is “Asiatic hive-mindedness” such a bad thing? That’s why even we individualists tend to dream up things like rule books, law codes, standards committees, party platforms and whatnot. We survive better with common understanding. It is certainly better than our own society, where five intellectuals hold ten opinions, all PC. the conviction that Whites who are not “good Christians” deserve a horrible end? You have it backwards. I’m saying that when the White elite went secular, in the name of “right reason” or whatever, that generated self-hatreds which helped direct us to our present mess. Right-wing Christians, Catholic and Protestants, have been warning about this for generations. Unbelief produces consequences. So the anti-Christian WN is stuck looking for an ethnic strategy to replace the religious orthodoxy that he hates. 136
Posted by Desmond Jones on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 00:11 | # How soon we forget Postville, Iowa.
137
Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 01:14 | # “So the anti-Christian WN is stuck looking for an ethnic strategy to replace the religious orthodoxy that he hates.” - Monitor Get this, even Revilo Oliver, the arch “anti-Christian WN”, tried mightily in the 60’s to work the “religious orthodoxy” angle as a means to provide some impetus to resist our dispossesion. Guess what, it didn’t work. If Christianity can be of some assistance in our struggle, fine. But White Christians need to speak and act explicitly for the benefit of their race. None of this “lets talk about culture” and slip race in the back door. That is the same silly game that con-servatives have been playing for decades. I honestly fail to see, Monitor, just what is your hang up with explicitly advocating for the interests of our race. You obviously think that ‘orthodox WN’ is a threat to Christianity but then in the next breath characterize said as comically crude and inept. Sane WNs who are secular honestly couldn’t care less what other Whites believe so long as they act in a way that is pro-White. So, are you willing, in theory at least, to work with secular WNs in advancing the interests of our people? Or is it the Monitor’s way or the highway? 138
Posted by silver on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 10:20 | #
Regardless of how much they might want it, they can’t guarantee it. So my interest is in why whites continue to enable it.
Their role in the processes that will result in final replacement are obvious (when one takes the time to look), but I’m not completely convinced they “want it” with the fervor you boldly assert. Further, I can’t see how the fixation on having everyone agree with you that they want it, really, really want it, as a drowning man wants air is necessary or helpful. If you end or reverse the processes that will result in replacement, it won’t matter a wit what jews ever wanted, thus I suggest your energies would be better spent on ending or reversing those processes than shrieking about the jewish role in race replacement. Consider: if the processes are ended/reversed by people with no inkling of the jewish role, won’t that be just as good as if it were done by people who long obssessed over the jewish role? 139
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 11:26 | # Silver: So my interest is in why whites continue to enable it. Enablers have various motives and ways of dealing with reality which simply coallesce into a single stream of harm. Being a bought politician melds with making money from the system melds with being a blind egalitarian melds with being a “caring” person melds with being a violent anti-racist freak melds with fear of being labelled as a racist melds with being an acquiesecent and self-absorbed tool, and so on. There isn’t really any mystery to it. Three-quarters of our people don’t understand ... don’t care to understand ... don’t have the intellectual capacity to really understand. They are camp followers. If we were in political power they would follow us in exactly the same way they follow Jews and the politically and culturally liberal elites now. Revolutions are made and led by two or three per cent of the population. Fred, in my view, is only guilty of sometimes forgetting that “the Jews” and “Jews” are not interchangeable terms. Jewish race activists, in all their ubiquity and many guises, are not “the Jews”. But “the Jews” produce them - unendingly, it seems - and provide extraordinary financial support. So the picture is always mixed. if the processes are ended/reversed by people with no inkling of the jewish role, won’t that be just as good as if it were done by people who long obssessed over the jewish role? No, because Jewish race activists would re-insert themselves in the political and cultural structure and re-start the goddamned processes. 140
Posted by The Monitor on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 12:20 | # Just what is your hang up with explicitly advocating for the interests of our race.. Like I said, we agree that whites have interests. We agree on survival and self-determination, to the extent that existing, self-hating white elites must be replaced by people who seek the corporate interest of the whole. What after that? The real problem with Nationalists is that, in the long run, its ethnostatist vehicle won’t carry it home. Even after securing the survival of our people, White Nationalism would have done absolutely nothing to stop the progress of the disease that created the current mess. I suspect that if the New World Order was ever overthrown—and the Jews repatriated to Madagascar— many of you would gravitate to the Left: abortion rights, sodomy rights, secularism, managerial social control, corrosive pop culture and modernism. All that garbage would be just fine, if Whites get to peddle it. You would say that civilization is saved and go home. Victorious Nationalists would likely refuse to re-assert the Christian consensus at the cornerstone of White society. No progress would be made in legislating morality, rebuilding republican government, establishing healthy gender roles, respecting orthodox church authorities, or stopping our cultural and ethical dispossession by White degenerates, moderns and elitists. Indeed, with the race issue gone, our Nationalists would unexpected common ground with the anti-Western technocrats they just ejected. In fact, I assume many of our current leaders could chop the prefix “multi-“ from “multiracialist” in their political platforms and carry on as before. I guarantee you that the David Camerons, Nicolas Sarkozys and John McCains of the world would do just that – because everybody loves a winner - and you’d be happy with it. If white people can only survive as barbarians, we are already dead. 141
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 13:05 | #
No “fixation on having everyone agree” with me: take it or leave it. Why even point it out then? Because we’re on here trying to get to the truth of the matter, since the Jews who own the mass media will never permit discussion of the topic of why Jews are race-replacing Euros — will never permit discussion of it in their print, TV, Hollywood, radio, or other media outlets: Jews stifle discussion of their Jewish-directed genocide everywhere else, so we have no choice but to discuss it here. I’d be delighted to see discussion of the fact that Jews really, really want race-replacement as a drowning man wants air in the Jew-controlled mass media but ain’t gonna happen, of course, so we do it here. That’s why guys like me bring it up. I’d much rather it be brought up on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and <strike>LOX News</strike> FOX News.
Go for it! You’ll have my full backing!
Any race-replacement-opposed stirring among whites that might have mainstream leadership potential is immediately nipped in bud via various techniques honed to perfection by the Jews who run the mass media. Take Kevin MacDonald or Peter Brimelow for example — or even David Duke: take David Duke, for example: nothing of what David Duke says on the subject of the current forced race-replacement régime is such as can’t be discussed in a civilized, respectful way in the MSM. The Jews are always trotting out their favorites on the side diametrically opposed to someone like Duke and giving them respectful hearings, so much so in fact that, exactly according to Jewish plan, their side has become mainstream since the 60s while it’s no more intrinsically legitimate and no less intrinsically “shocking” than Duke, not one bit. We’ve been brainwashed by the other side, the Jewish side, for forty years, and not permitted to hear one, not one, view in opposition expressed that hasn’t been expertly demonized by the Jews. No potential for peaceful political mainstream opposition leadership means no peaceful political organized mainstream opposition, leaving only sporadic armed rebellion as a choice, which has, naturally, a greater activation energy or threshold energy. But if they keep it up, that energy requirement may end up being met.
This may be the case even for the educated class: I wonder if this stuff is intrinsically hard to grasp even where intentions are pure and minds aren’t closed off?
That gets added to the “Never truer words were written” file.
No, I understand that it’s not one hundred percent, only 99.99999999999999999999999999999%, I understand that. It’s not all of them, far from it — there’s that very important 0.000000000000000000000000000001% of Jewish mavericks, don’t worry I’m not forgetting them. 142
Posted by Dave Johns on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 13:34 | # ”[W]e’re on here trying to get to the truth of the matter, since the Jews who own the mass media will never permit discussion of the topic of why Jews are race-replacing Euros — will never permit discussion of it in their print, TV, Hollywood, radio, or other media outlets ...”—Fred Scrooby You are correct but there is an achilles heel to Jewish dominance of the media. It is the Internet. Please check this out, Fred, and let us know what you think about it: 143
Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 14:54 | # “You would say that civilization is saved and go home.” - The Monitor Yeah, your probably right about some of us. I suspect that what gets the juices of some WNs flowing is heroic, palingenetic, revolutionary struggle. I’ll confess my own thrill the prospect. But that is not maturity. Personally, I like what Putin’s clique is doing in Russia. Just a little tweaking (start paying those “baby bonuses” to Whites exclusively!) and it would be pitch perfect. 144
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 15:07 | # Dave Johns that was an excellent article and of course the internet is vital to us and will remain so. It’s our central nervous system. The Jews are working hard on squelching our internet access. They must not succeed. If they did, it would force the opening of the final chapter no one wants: it would force massive violence and armed rebellion, as it would leave no other choice to the oppressed and the genocided. The Jews must not succeed in shutting down our side’s access to the internet. Why do I say “the Jews” this and “the Jews” that more and more lately — nearly all the time, in fact? Simple: I say it because they’re the ones mostly doing it, mostly doing the evil; they are by far the most important element in the alliance currently ranged against normalness and in favor of degenerateness, and this is no time for euphemisms. If it were the Amish mostly doing it I’d be saying “the Amish” this and “the Amish” that. But it’s not the Amish mostly doing it. It’s someone else mostly doing it ... Each one doing it must be named. The Pope must be named, the Jews must be named, the Catholics must be named, the Archbishop of Canterbury must be named, clueless women in the voting booth must be named, WASP race traitors like the Clintons, the Bushes, Blair, and Cameron must be named, Negroes must be named, Third-World mystery meat in all its variety and mystery must be named. Each one doing it must be named, and the one doing it the most must be named the most. That’s why I post what I post. 145
Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 16:40 | # “If white people can only survive as barbarians, we are already dead.” - The Monitor There comes the question, “What should we strive for?” A world of concrete, cookie-cutter McMansions, and strip malls? LOL! The answer to The Question of a palingeneticist would be: We have it within our power to turn this world into a garden. We have it within our power to extirpate the superficiality, degeneracy, and narcissism that plagues our people. Imagine a world: of beautiful architecture; great art and literature; scientific progress; healthy, morally sound White children; green, spacious cityscapes; pastoral landscapes; and a protected, thriving wilderness. We strive for nothing less than the absolute salvation our people, both spiritually and physically. It is a Beautiful Dream! Can our mortal hands lay hold of it? Shouldn’t we try? The Bold will say, “YES!” 146
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 19:28 | # Here‘s an excellent example of not shying away from explicitly referring to the ethnic-warfare dimension inherent in all these Jewish attacks on Euros that have gone on non-stop for the past forty years and more. This piece shows exactly the way it needs to be done, and of course there’s nothing “fringe” about doing this — it’s a perfectly ordinary description of an important aspect of reality, one that in many ways is what makes the world go round, namely, inter-ethnic jockeying for position through ethnic attacks on rival ethnicities: if an article about ethnic attacks and counterattacks between, say, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots neglected this ethnic-rivalry dimension it would be neglecting one of the central aspects if not THE central aspect of the subject matter and would be inferior journalism, in fact worthless as journalism. The same dimension should be included in discussion of a common type of ethnic Jewish attack on Euros — touting open borders, for example — which is usually misinterpreted as generic “liberalism” or “leftism” on the part of Jews but is neither, and is, instead, an ethnic Jewish attack on a rival ethnicity, Euros. Something else that needs to be done is to always refer to those Jewish-owned media which generally take a typical Jewish anti-Euro line (such as the New York Times, the LA Times, the Washington Post, Time Magazine, Newsweek) as “the Jewish press,” which is very simply and accurately what they are. The New York Times has consistently acted like a Jewish ethnic newspaper in taking anti-Euro stances of this nature, so let it be called what it is, a Jewish ethnic partisan newspaper fighting an ethnic war against Euros. Let it be called a member of “the Jewish press.” 147
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 19:40 | # National Review, once non-sectarian but with obvious Catholic “leanings,” is characterized now by obvious Jewish leanings, and in important ways can even be considered a member of the Jewish press. 148
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 21 Sep 2008 19:56 | # Question: What’s the first thing you see wrong with this article? Answer: The person they’re talking about isn’t “far right” or “far” anything, but strictly centrist/middle-of-the-road. Question: What’s the first thing you see right with this article? Answer: The way in which its labeling of this middle-of-the-road person as “far right” faithfully depicts one of the tactics of the Jewish press as represented in this case by Time and CosherNewsNetwork. So, this Jewish Time/CNN article is both truthful and untruthful at the same time. 149
Posted by silver on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 03:28 | #
Ending/reversing the processes, as I meant it, presupposes ultimate separation from jews (just as from everyone else), however, and severely limiting their ability to cause havoc in the meantime. They’re not bloody supermen. What chance was there they could do a damn thing in Hitler’s Germany or Hitler’s Germany+30 years, say, had he not warred, for example? Thirty years is a long time!
The “enabled” also have ways of dealing with reality, a great deal of which made it possible for them to so easily be “enabled” by the enablers in the first place. For someone who insists so much on philosophy it’s surprising how little credit you give to the new views about reality that emerged during the period in question which threw into turmoil all the previous assumptions about race and nation. Yes, some of it was propaganda, but much was also eminently plausible. You’ve only focused on politicians. What about the universities which prepare them and the newsmen who cover them? It may be easier for them to just go along, but they certainly don’t have to. They could start singing a different tune tomorrow, and you should be doing all you can to help them do so, since that will also ease your way to taking power. It seems to me that far too much of your energy is dissipated by—yes, I’ll say it—hating. You’ve been at it so long you probably no longer see it, but it positively oozes from almost every paragraph. Trust me on this. What a tragedy it’s be to fail to exert all the influence you potentially could for something so stupid and—again I’ll borrow from the liberal vocabulary I was weaned on—unhealthy. 150
Posted by silver on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 03:43 | #
When almost all you’ve been talking about for the last five years is the jews, you’ll understand that it can seem like a fixation on having everyone agree. It just seems to me that JQ-pushers believe that as soon as everyone is agreed on how pernicious jews are and have been since God knows when then magic will happen. What actually happens, however, is a sort of contest in which WNs try to one-up each other by how much of their plight they can blame on jews, quite the way white liberals try to outdo each other’s tolerance by “uncovering” ever greater levels of “racism” in white culture. (See VNNforum.) Why devote so much time to that? Wouldn’t a more effective use of your time be engaging the unconverted? If you’d spent the last five years doing that, you might by now have honed certain techniques that ease the way to understanding, rather than crude muds-are-duds/ugly/criminal-just-ADMIT-it-already techniques WNs favor, which are noteworthy only for being spectacularly counterproductive (I’m exaggerating, of course, but not about the retardant effect of standard WN discourse). 151
Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 04:26 | #
No. Why?
152
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 06:01 | #
Oh we trust you on this. We certainly do, Silver. Which is exactly why we trust you on nothing else whatsoever. Just this.
In college, “bringing the unconverted up to speed” is known as the unconverted taking the course pre-requisites. Once you’ve got those down you can take the course without sitting in the lecture hall completely lost, unable to understand a word, which is your situation at this site, Silver. You’re lost. When Carole Ward was blogging I went to her site a few times and was totally shocked and outraged at many of the things she said. This was something like 2001 or 2002. Then I learned the pre-requisites, and as a result I now know every word she wrote to have been not only true but tame. You’re like a student who doesn’t have the pre-requisites down, Silver, then enters the lecture hall and arrogantly tells everyone to shut up because, not having had the pre-requisites, he thinks they’re all talking nonsense.
Scrooby’s Law: Anything whatsoever said by a gentile about anything will be perceived as anti-Semitic by Jews somewhere. Thus did we learn from the Jews that the Lord of the Rings movies, which weren’t about Jews whether directly or indirectly, were “anti-Semitic.” It turns out that everything is anti-Semitic, everything in the universe, and it’s impossible for any person or thing to not be anti-Semitic. It’s only possible for a Jew not to actually call you anti-Semitic at any given moment in time, but it’s not possible to not actually be anti-Semitic. Breathing is anti-Semitic, eating is anti-Semitic, sleeping is, thinking is, not thinking is, moving is, not moving is, existing is. Everything from atoms to rocks to trees to dogs to cats to cars to people to you-name-it, is anti-Semitic: you name it, and if it exists I can prove it’s anti-Semitic. There’s nothing in the universe that’s not anti-Semitic, nothing — that’s impossible. 153
Posted by silver on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 06:02 | # So because Jews prevent you from reaching everyone you shouldn’t attempt to reach anyone, instead retreating to your closed circle to, in effect, sulk about it? (Mind you, I mean reach anyone in order discuss race and society, not to bitch about jews’ influence on each, which is all that all too many want to do.) 154
Posted by silver on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 06:40 | #
No, you’ve misunderstood me (not for the first time). I agree with you (to a point, anyway). I just don’t think, and can’t see how, it matters that much, or is the point most worthy of explication; I consider it a side issue. You’re talking about who is responsible for a problem while the vast majority still don’t even perceive the problem, or at least don’t perceive the magnitude of the problem. My point is that, pragmatically speaking, it doesn’t even matter who was responsible for the problem; solving it is much more important. Now, of course, you’ll counter that you can’t solve it because the jews block. I think there’s another metaphor I’m looking for that hits the spot better than this, but “a bad workman quarrels with his tools” comes to mind. The jews are there. They are a feature of the landscape. If you can’t go through them (and 50 years says it’s no mean feat), you have to go around. I’m not asking you, personally, Fred Scrooby (or Desmond Jones, or anyone else), to minimize the jewish role or forgive it; I’m suggesting you put it aside and concentrate your energies on more important matters. The evidence is there, it’s been gathered and demonstrated and it’s not going away. Great, but why harp on and on and on and on about it, as though the more you harped on the more you helped your cause? That’s a recipe for ongoing failure. If a jew breaks your kids nose, the first thing to do is get your kid fixed up, not sit around and sulk that it was a jew who did it—and that’s true even if all the doctors who might help but refuse to are jews themselves. First things first. Too many intelligent, sentient whites waste their time bitching about jews or gather in net circles with each other and sulk about their plight when I could think of a dozen more productive activities off the top of my head, but the main one is stop preaching to the choir, which is “easy online racialism” at its very best (worst).
Who is “we”? Come down from your high horse, Scrooby. Any normal white reading through our exchanges would consider me normal, you a frothing fruitcake. I don’t mean that as an attack on you; I just want to highlight how moping around racialist sites for five years has removed you light years from mainstream discourse. Having your hands on a few important forbidden truths doesn’t entitle you to talk down to those you have differences of opinion with, even those you distrust, the way you do me; that’s something worth keeping in mind since you like to think your opinions are not necessarily at all “extreme.” Alternatively, keep doing your thing—I’m sure your easy online fans will love you for it. 155
Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 07:13 | #
It’s exactly what the ADL does, except it has a public forum, is protected and continual raises massive sums of money doing so. Every year a new report is published, a new group is target and even litigation does little to slow it down.
156
Posted by The Monitor on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 07:17 | # You’re talking about who is responsible for a problem while the vast majority still don’t even perceive the problem, or at least don’t perceive the magnitude of the problem. What makes anybody think that the vast majority would ever want “the problem” to go away? Most of us like living like bricks in the wall, as long as we get MySpace and cable TV. Our people like nihilism, atheism, scientific materialism. So do white nationalists, for that matter. If three kids bully a WN—and one is Jewish—the WN would focus all attention on the one and ignore the other two. If a Jew is partially responsible for a bad act, then he must be wholly responsible. Thus the WN carries one-third of the truth. Having your hands on a few important forbidden truths doesn’t entitle you to talk down to those you have differences of opinion with, even those you distrust, the way you do me… The problem with forbidden truths is that they don’t negate the other truths that are easier to find. BTW, Scrooby is not all bad. He doesn’t babble blasphemies, for example. He is much more articulate than the homoerotics on those other Web sites. 157
Posted by The Monitor on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 07:20 | # It’s exactly what the ADL does, except it has a public forum, They do this to magnify the level of their opposition and thus keep their funding. Who is Alex Curtis? 158
Posted by the Narrator.. on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 10:56 | #
You’re absolutely right. And it’s even more elemental than that. Jews are not a part of us. They are a completely alien grouping subsisting on and bleeding dry their current host body, Western Civilization. Comparing the actions of a few deranged Whites (in working against their own) to jews, is comparing apples to oranges. The jews have their own country today, let them return to it.
Monitor is stuck in a hopeless loop because he continues to trip over a false starting premise. Namely, that White Civilization had christianity as a cornerstone (the complete opposite is actually closer to the truth). For him, there were no White people prior to 1000 c.e. Anglo-Saxon England, Gaul, Germania, Roman Empire, Greek Civilization….all myths in Monitor’s mind. 159
Posted by wjg on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 13:30 | # There’s another reason to “name the jew” ad nausea in whatever small venues where that is still possible contra to their naming us mega ad nausea through all their controlled channels. And that is a people does need an enemy to stay vigorous and alert - whether the enemy is real and perceived or simply perceived. (Take away the cheetah and Thomson’s gazelle will slowly whither.) Now in the case of Judah they are a real corporate enemy if there EVER was one but they are largely not perceived for exactly the reasons Fred has mentioned. They control our perceptions. As a people Whites are unconsciously incompetent – the absolute worst quadrant of awareness/skill to be in – in regards to them. Jews are unconsciously competent in regards to us; the highest state. This seeming unconscious/instinctive Goyiphobia renders the necessity of a “conspiracy” and smoking gun moot. The stories of Esther (slaughter and replacement of Gentile elite and whoring of Jewesses to serve that end), Joseph (deception of Gentile leaders and swindling of Gentile masses), Passover (Massacre of Gentile children), Exodus (theft of Gentile’s land and their genocide), etc. are internalized by all Jews - whether literally (Orthodox/Lubavitchers) or as myth (Reformed/Atheists) matters not to us – proclaiming their sanctification as a separate and superior form of humanity and Gentiles as fit for nothing but scorn, rapine, and death. How to break through this matrix which addles a critical mass of thinking Whites is the biggest challenge facing Nationalist advocates. Yes it is simplistic to paint Judah as our eternal bogeyman and according to Aryan standards not always fair but the greater question is ‘do we want to live’? Life is not always fair, sometimes damned unfair. “They” (witness the works of Theodore Kauffman, Susan Rosenblatt, and Noel Ignatiev for a minuscule sampling) have no qualms about tarring us en masse and playing an integral part in genociding us en masse so why not learn to reciprocate? If we don’t reply in kind then it shows even Nationalists are servants to one of the more pernicious elements of the very liberalism we often mark as enemy number one – universal morality. Acknowledging the primacy of the role of Judah in our current plight does not absolve the Gentile collaborators. They are our time’s Ahasuerus’ and Pharaoh’s. If we ever escape the fate they played a large role in ordaining there must be a large price paid by these traitors. But the bulk of Whites are simply deluded by the spirit of our times. If we are ever able to get to the center of the hive and kill the queen then it’s just a matter of time before the corrupted workers die off. If the queen is not dealt with then fighting her offspring is a holding action at best since they are easily replaced. 160
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 14:28 | # Silver, I assume people such as you who don’t like my stuff (there are plenty who don’t) won’t read it. As long as 1) I’m not banned, and 2) I don’t change my mind as to what’s going on, it’s what I’ll continue to post. I don’t read Monitor’s or GT’s stuff: do you likewise with mine. People don’t come here to read the latest squabbles between you and me. They come here to read discussion of the issues. Incidentally, your qualification of what GW is doing at this site as “hate” was a jaw-dropper even for me who haven’t trusted you from day-1, and shows conclusively all by itself, no other evidence needed, that you haven’t a clue as to what’s going on at this site. Here, I’ll cite what you wrote for any readership interested (you’re addressing GW here, if I understand right):
I took one look at that and rubbed my eyes, it was such a stunner, and felt on the verge of asking myself if it was Heidi Beirich who had wandered onto the site and posted it. To post that, you are a piece of trash, Silver. You are, furthermore, dishonest, creepy, devious, malicious, selfish, and a supreme time-waster, as well as being an enemy of what this site stands for. Everyone here who has paid attention to you has not just wasted his time, he has allowed himself to be drawn into the sewers of someone who wishes failure on the MR.com project. 161
Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 15:47 | #
If Jews don’t rescue the NAACP it collapses into bankruptcy. If a Jew doesn’t donate an enormous sum of money to the Sierra Club, it opposes immigration on an environmental basis. If the Canadian Jewish Congress doesn’t finance the Canadian Nazi Party, it never exists and hate speech laws are never passed. In every case a Jew is only partly responsible for the actions of these groups, however, without Jewish support nothing happens. 162
Posted by silver on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:54 | #
I was thinking of WN online racialists wherever they post, actually. Virtually every point on your side could be made without resorting to the language you do. As I said, you’ve been at it so long you have no idea how it reads to the unconverted. (Of course, internally, you’re quite free to hate to your heart’s content.)
Sigh.
wjg, Why not join a skinhead organization while you’re at it? They’re proven winners, too. (I saw a skinhead at the gym here a couple of weeks back. A real ultra-blond type with “Blood & Honor” in gothic script tattooed across his back. I wonder how the “testers” would fare waving their lab reports at him.) 163
Posted by silver on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:55 | #
The strategic positions you occupy can hardly be compared. 164
Posted by Dave Johns on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 17:04 | # Did the “Jews” do it?
The Reasons Americans Equate Truth with Racism and Hate
Historian William Linds’ paper entitled, “The Origins of Political Correctness,” states,
165
Posted by Dave Johns on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 17:09 | # Just in case anyone isn’t aware of what “wishing it into the cornfield” means, here is where it originated:- 166
Posted by wjg on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 18:26 | # Silver, A counter-proposal of the proper weighing of the LQ vs. the JQ would help. Then again sniping and sarcasm are easier. I posit things as I see them and welcome constructive criticism from brothers who want the same things since none of us are omniscient. Even though you occasionally show flickers of high intelligence and awareness it is not at all clear to me where you are going or want to go. You are seemingly young and are new to this whole “thing” so forming and sharing a fledgling worldview might be a good next step. Are you here to try and move “us” forward in our struggle? If so how? 167
Posted by Dave Johns on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 19:24 | # wjg, You’re right, our boy silver does provides some very useful (even at times brilliant), insights into the sorry state of affairs we as whites find ourselves in. However, it seems to me, silver has some personal issues he has to work out. If one reads closely what silver has to say, it becomes evident he has a serious identity problem. First, he complains he doesn’t fit in with the “Anglo” crowd in Australia, yet he accepts an job assignment in Thailand - talk about a race/culture shock! Too, he boasts he could fit in and live comfortably around Puerto-Ricans. Very strange! To top it all off, silver has stated more than once on this site that he doesn’t consider himself white; yet in the same breath, he insists he is of Serb/Greek decent. Go figure???? 168
Posted by silver on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 19:29 | #
Relatively young and new, yes. But I’m a quick study and have matured quickly and I honestly believe I’ve developed quite a comprehensive worldview.
In a variety of ways. Firstly, insofar as your (Ameicans’) aims are to secure a racial future for yourselves, you have my full support. Securing that future will require confronting obstacles. I both want to help you avoid obstacles (especially the most easily avoidable) and overcome those you must face. It’s all well and good to quote Rockwell, and I too found myself thinking he’d essentially encapsulated everything that required saying with pithy, biting phrases and simple but apt metaphors, but he’s for another day; the gulf between today’s whites and Rockwell is too wide to breach. If this were 1960 I would not be taking the position I do today; I’d be a jew on it, to be honest. But it’s not 1960 and time and events have proven Rockwell correct. However, Rockwell, like today’s white right, fatefully erred: he failed to consider the age he was living in. Rockwell’s error was forgivable, as the new age was only then dawning. Today that age is well-established yet the white right acts as though it were still 1960. It isn’t 1960 and the majority today have, however misguidedly, been imbued with a new set of verities that prove remarkably resistent to the rhetoric of the last fifty years. Secondly, if I can be so bold, by perhaps broadening your horizons. To me, your struggle goes beyond simply securing a racial existence for yourselves. I envision a new order emerging from it and feel compelled to consider the impact it would have on ‘the other,’ in which I include myself. I’ve become convinced all peoples, even your “enemies” of today, would ultimately stand to benefit, though there would surely be losers over the short term. “Expanded Sailerism” might be one way to think of it. How much use of it the white right might wish to make of it is questionable, but its tenets lend themselves to alliances with you and that’s the point I wish to impress upon you. In my opinion (and I risk further opprobrium), WNs are too willing to accept advocacy by whites too far on the spectrum than they have any intention of ultimately embracing, which is disengenuous, while simultaneously being too unwilling to form alliances with outsiders whose goals are compatible with WN. Admittedly, the numbers of the latter are miniscule, yet every attempt seems to be cynically greeted with jeers of some “mud” or “jew” not only soiling your movement with his presence, but threatening to destroy it. Of course, we’re not talking about any great intellects here (nor in WN in general, sadly, apart from some notable exceptions). But intellects or not, they do effectively dampen enthusiasm. There’s no effective way of removing them, but at least if others are aware of their pernacious effect it can be mitigated. That’s enough for here. I’ll pick it up with you on your blog if you like. As for contributing to LQ vs JQ, I wait until others have contributed to threads and generally diverted them before commenting. 169
Posted by silver on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 20:04 | #
Having personal issues or identity problems is not uncommon and shouldn’t be held against a person. Truthfully, you (collectively) make more out of my “problems” than I ever have.
I haven’t “complained” (whined, moaned) about not “fitting in.” I “fit in” at least as much as any other southern euro has, and likely much more than most. But racially, no, I’m not there; never have been, never will be. Thailand isn’t any great culture shock, really. All the modern conveniences are to be found here. Westerners are present in significant numbers and the Thais are friendly enough, and certainly timid and unproblematic (except when attempting to rip you off, but you quickly learn the ropes). I don’t know for a fact whether I’d be able to live among Puerto Ricans. My point in mentioning them was to say if I can live around people as racially different as Thais, why not among people much more racially similar like Puerto Ricans. These people don’t strike me as wildly different to many s.euors http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0b6L3rAOYy8 (I know they’re triracial including negroidal. I didn’t say I’d want to breed with them.) I wasn’t suggesting it was the duty of every s.euro to embrace Puerto Ricans; I was just saying that it was something I was prepared to do if it would be seen as a selfless act that advances the cause. People routinely give their lives for peoplehood (and much less, see Iraq); voluntarily excluding myself from a group I otherwise belong to to live with a group there’s an obvious relation to and which I could reliably expect to be accepted by and reasonably compatible with is much less severe than giving my very life.
That shouldn’t surprise you, dave. Most aussies (and plenty of Americans) don’t consider us “white” (or “white enough” for the standards of racial nationalism, if you prefer). I lean more toward the Greek (itself hopelessly imprecise), and tan easily and prefer to keep a perma-tan. Most negroes in America mistook me for “Italian” (having in mind Sicilians, I suppose), with one memorable panhandler hitting me up with “hey cuz, us Italians gotta stick together man—gimme a dollar.” That’s usually enough to earn one the ‘dago’ appellation (but, no, sorry rienzi, no ‘big-jawed arab’ here) and have him fleeing from anything smacking of WN. I don’t want to get caught up in this discussion, though. It takes place many other places with such frequency and intensity that nothing I might say on it is of any particular value or novelty. 170
Posted by The Monitor on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 20:15 | # Anglo-Saxon England, Gaul, Germania, Roman Empire… .all myths in Monitor’s mind. These people did not see themselves as subset of a common whole. “Western” just means that your ancestors were Roman Catholic before 1492. wjg: Why do you identify with the losing end of the OT? Were you hoping to sacrifice your babies to Baal?’ “They” (witness the works of Theodore Kauffman, Susan Rosenblatt, and Noel Ignatiev for a minuscule sampling) “They” are the radical extreme and they don’t even agree with each other. Desmond Jones: Without Jewish support nothing happens. Then why, when there are no Jews are around, do white people still rail against racism, sexism and homophobia? Silver: Most WNs embrace the bizarre, outlandish beliefs. That’s why most WN sites are weirder than this one. On the other hand, you attacked me for making a straw man when I made just this point. What gives? 171
Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 20:23 | #
Example? 173
Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 21:10 | # How does that site buttress your position, white people railing? The “normalizing” of homosexuality, in the 20th century, began with Hirschfeld, running to the Franfurt School, Marcuse, Eros and Civilization Dennis Altman and the Red Butterfly Collective, a Marxist faction of the Gay Liberation Front, disproportionately Jewish organization. 174
Posted by The Monitor on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 21:56 | # The “normalizing” of homosexuality, in the 20th century, began… among the European ruling classes, then was made fashionable by various Victorian social climbers, to the extent that the untrained cannot tell where British influence ends and “gay” begin. The UK even has an absurd libel law system to protect the sexual deviance of its ruling caste. In the USA, the whole “creative culture” thing in which gays are considered good for urban centers, reflects a mix of gay radicalism with upscale Anglo-Saxon taste. While Jews may be disproportionately homosexual and pro-gay, the gay culture that whites consider “normal” is a rip-off of the Anglo-Saxon. Whites will tolerate a gay man like Anthony Sullivan, not one like Harvey Fierstein.
Is this a homosexual or just an Oxbridge graduate? 175
Posted by The Monitor on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 22:10 | # More examples of how gay liberation is not Jewish: 176
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 22:31 | # Monitor, Do you have Jewish blood in your veins? Do you believe that Jews have an ethnic interest in subverting certain aspects of the European life? 177
Posted by The Monitor on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 23:14 | # Do you have Jewish blood in your veins? Not one drop. I looked it up. I’m not gay either, unlike a disproportionate number of WNs. Do you believe that Jews have an ethnic interest in subverting certain aspects of the European life? The ethnic interest is ultimately a _religious_ drive based on their rejection of Christianity. They fit in with the White ruling class because of a shared hatred of the true faith. After all, the Jewish percentage of the European population has always been in the low single digits. Had the “ethnic interest” been a successful strategy, it would have worked a long time ago. If the Jews want subversion, it is not a means to genocide, but revenge for 2,000 years of Christianity. They had a shot at the ground floor and ran away from it. So they resent us to the extent they rewrite history as the mechanizations of evil white Christians. You, GW, have your own vested interest in subverting European life. Your views are hardly different from the left-wing Jews that you pretend to oppose. Both you and they dream of a secular, modernist state run on social engineering, exaggerated claims of rationality and scientism. At least the Jews have an ethnic justification for the ideology. What’s your excuse? 178
Posted by JWH on Mon, 22 Sep 2008 23:37 | # but, no, sorry rienzi, no ‘big-jawed arab’ here) Dear obsessive fraud: if you are dark enough to be viewed as potential kin by a Negroid pan-handler, then that’s your problem, and not indicative of any other person or ethny. 179
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 00:15 | # Monitor, Try not to allow personal feeling into your advocacy, no matter the perceived provocation. Your writing technique will improve, and you won’t keep bouncing back spiteful little non-sequiteurs. For a Christian it should be easy. The thing is, Monitor, that long, long ago it happened, in the evolutionary way that these things do, that Teleology was found to serve ethny. The teleologically-capable out-bread, out-fought, out-survived plain men ... and gods were born. Teleology in your case is faith in the myth of a Jewish fairy. I agree that Christianity is a sore point for Jews, to put it mildly. There is a very deep hatred of it, which Auster has described. But Christianity does not explain the aggressivity of the tribe, and the supremacism which informs it. There are no references to Jews in Heredotus or Strabo. But here’s Tacitus writing of them within a century of the crucifixion:-
It’s a recognisable picture, isn’t it? But, of course, that was then, but now - two millenia of Ashkenazic wanderings later - the evolutionary survival strategy has refined itself further, as one would expect. Why do you expect European peoples awakened to this phenomenon to treat it with equanimity and even indifference? If you are offended by the uncouth outrage that you encounter in your wanderings across the nationalist internet, dwelling alone as you do, the Christian response should surely be forgiveness. Let them be. They are a problem for us, not you. 180
Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 00:20 | #
181
Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 01:28 | #
No it’s a racial drive founded upon the Jewish holocaust. The hatred for one of the Anglo-Saxon tribes is apparent. The British are hated because of their resistance to Jewish immigration to Palestine. The Americans because of their restrictionist immigration policy. Dr. Steinlight:
Ditto Canada.
There is also steep resentment that neither the RAF nor USAF chose to bomb the railway lines to Auschwitz. There is a strong belief that the Anglo-Saxon races collaborated in the wartime effort against the Jews. 182
Posted by torgrim on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 01:31 | # “If white people can only survive as barbarians, we are already dead.”—The Monitor “There comes the question.” “What should we strive for?” There is a formula for developing strip malls and the attendant housing…. and nothing of the decision making ever gets input from the local Joe or Jill, it is all engineered in the interlocking directorates of our cosmopolitan elites. And damn them for what they have done to California! They have made their percentages, their cut and left us with teeming millions and the bills are coming due. 183
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 01:35 | # Desmond, the Jews’ hatred of Euros far predates all those causes of resentment which you cite (not bombing the rail lines to Auschwitz, not letting Jews immigrate to Palestine, the U.S. national origins immigration act of 1924). Had none of those happened, the Jews would still, right now as we speak, be devoting huge energy, cash, and resources to getting Euros genocided through forced race-replacement. 184
Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 01:37 | # By Geoffrey Wansell
185
Posted by torgrim on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 01:49 | # “Anglo-Saxon England, Gaul, Germania, Roman Empire..all myths in Monitors mind.”—Narrator These people did not see themselves as subsets of a common whole. “Western” just means that your ancestors were Roman Catholic before 1492.—The Monitor I will probably regret not taking Scrooby’s advise about responding to, The Monitor, especially after his last response to GW. First of all, a lot of Scandinavia never fully became Roman Catholic, at least not in the modern sense. The elite, at least professed Christianity, a large percentage of the rural folk, continued in the Folkways until the diaspora of the 19th Century. Your definition of “Western”, is just way to brief. Europe, had law before Church law, it was and is Anglo-Saxon common law, tribal in origin, based on order, morality and useage. 186
Posted by Dave Johns on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 02:12 | # “Most negroes in America mistook me for “Italian” (having in mind Sicilians, I suppose), with one memorable panhandler hitting me up with “hey cuz, us Italians gotta stick together man—gimme a dollar.” silver, I said you have “very useful (even at times brilliant) insights into the sorry state of affairs we as whites find ourselves in,” but you make one lousy bullshitter! Admit it, silver, that incident you described never acually happened, did it? I suspect you read a post I wrote awhile back explaining why blacks try to expand the definition of who is black to include Euro Meds. Why you may ask? Let me clue you in: they do it for political advantage, only! Their stradegy is divide and conquer. Many staunch White Nationalists unwittingly fall into their trap. Moreover, negroes are notorious con artists, accomplished liars, and skilled actors; however, their true “color” emerges, for example, when, say, a Sicilian cop uses a little too much force effecting an arrest of a thug brotha. Then the racial component of the situation is framed as: A racist white cop committed police brutality on a defenceless black. You see, silver, blacks will always use race to their advantage ... and their willing accomplices in the MSM are always right there to aid and abet them. 187
Posted by DJ on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 02:16 | # Why you may ask? correction: Why do blacks do this you may ask? 188
Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 02:44 | # Monitor shows us a picture of a homosexual Jew , Stephen Fry, in a post purporting to show that gay lib isnt Jewish. Nice going, genius. 189
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 03:07 | # a homosexual Jew , Stephen Fry Whoops! Fry seems to have studied, them rejected Christianity. That misled me. 190
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 03:27 | # Torgrim: Your definition of “Western”, is just way to brief. Europe, had law before Church law, it was and is Anglo-Saxon common law, tribal in origin, based on order, morality and useage. Most of the West was united by Roman civil law, even today. The Anglo-Saxon common law, is the exception to the rule—and it developed largely after the Norman Conquest. Common law makes English-speaking people a special corner of the West and provides a nifty stumbling block for globalists. tribal in origin, based on order, morality and useage. Tribal means tribal. People did not think of themselves as White, just as aboriginal Americans had no idea who “Indians” were. Even Hitler was not so much pro-Aryan as pro-German. WASPs in New England only considered themselves fully civilized until recently. 191
Posted by IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 06:37 | # Re The Monitor “While Jews may be disproportionately homosexual and pro-gay…” “I’m not gay either, unlike a disproportionate number of WNs.” Monitor: So both Jews AND WNs are disproportionately gay? Which is it? What I see in the heavily Jewish mass media is pro-gay degeneracy all over the place, and a very large percentage of gay urban Jews who are doing all they can in decadent cities, the gutter fashion industry, colleges and universities, and in the mass media to turn faggotry in to a cool and hip thing for the now confused Western masses. However, I see very little of this sympathy for faggotry among WNs who are clearly not represented in the gay-friendly mass media at all. If anything, most WNs are conservative-traditionalist types who believe in home and hearth and in defending the traditional more of heterosexual man-woman monogamy in Western countries. 192
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 07:16 | # Teleology was found to serve ethny. By that logic, ALL the ideas in our heads exist to served GI. For example, the claim, “my dog has floppy ears,” is only remembered because it aids genetic survival. So how do we know anything for sure? Regardless of GI, either “my dog has floppy ears” or not. This assumes that there is a dog, that there are ears, and that they flop. Granted, all this may best testable. Yet my GI may need this belief is floppy ears that it will generate a false belief that they exist. I’ll try another statement: “Weimar was decadent.” You say yes. I say yes. Yet since GI determines what propositions we accept, how can we know if the statement is true? Better yet, you would be forced to say your belief in GI is itself a GI! 193
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 07:23 | # What I see in the heavily Jewish mass media is pro-gay degeneracy all over the place. Gay is not just about politics, but who has sex with whom. If gentiles were not willing to co-operate <ahem>, there would be no gay community. There’s 12.9 million Jews on the planet. If ten percent are gay, that’s only 1.29 million people scattered around the world. Yet the gay population in the USA is estimated at 8.8 million people. 194
Posted by silver on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 08:44 | #
Oh, Christ, I give up. Dave, he was obiouvsly being sarcastic in an effort to ingratiate himself. It sure got a chuckle out of me at the time and from everyone else I’ve shared the story with. You’re the first one to read a political angle into it.
I read these comments from bottom to top. Another idiot reading politics into it. When was the last time any of you enjoyed a laugh? (If your blog enabled one to contact you, I’d link you to a thread discussing you elsewhere. Classic stuff and puts to shame anything I could say.)
What gives is you insist on characterising “hollywood nazis” and stormfront hypberbole as the sum total of what WN stands for (or could stand for if enough intelligent people put their minds to it). You’re being humored here on the assumption that you’re anglo and because these people have little else to do with their time, but you’re clearly out of your depth. I recommend taking a break and reading more background material—you might learn enough to be able to formulate a credible counter-argument. 195
Posted by the Narrator.. on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 09:03 | #
No, Monitor. The West includes everything from Russia to Ireland. And history and genetic research would seem to disagree with your other contention. Modern DNA research has shown that very little mixing took place between Europeans and non-Europeans. No doubt a few strayed from the herd, but the evidence proves that the vast majority did not. And once again Monitor, your definition of “Western” is entirely of your own creation. The West has always meant (simply) European. And historically, the earliest (recorded) manifestation of Western Culture was articulated by the ancient Greeks over a thousand years before the time of Christ.
Yet they were referring to those aboriginal Americans as Redskins at least as early as the 1600’s.
No, it was implemented uniformly after the Norman invasion. It pre-existed their arrival.
So now you’re agreeing with us? Because I assume you realize that Roman Civil Law was 100% Western and thoroughly un-christian (as it pre-dated christianity by centuries).
Nothing better illustrates the bizarre, hypocritical and confused mental state of christians (a group who desires to see the whole world unified and collectively ruled beneath their banner) than their concern over globalists and a one world order… 196
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 09:37 | # What gives is you insist on characterising “hollywood nazis” and stormfront hypberbole as the sum total of what WN stands for… I’ve only mentioned Stormfrontism it a few times, responding to people who are obvious American Nazis. On the other hand, even this group has some mental bugaboos that are endlessly repeated. It isn’t ust hyperbole. People often believe their own slogans. I get shouted down because I played with their sacred cows. you’re clearly out of your depth What about you? Ever read Yockey? Oliver? Levin? KM? Taylor? Francis? Do you physically own any of their printed books? Ever read the paleocons or the traditionalists? Do you even know who the German Revolutionary Conservatives were? Ever read the rabid zionists or the neocons in their own books? Can you wade through Leo Strauss? From another angle, do you know why Thomas Nelson Page is an important author? Do you know why Douglas Reed is unique? I recommend taking a break and reading more background material… Really? I’ve pretty much read all the major WN works and I did so YEARS ago. If I were unschooled in this material, I would be making anti-racist blunders of the sort that the “Tired” girl was making a few days ago. Do I pick fights about WWII, the Klan, whether Israel “has a right to exist,” or whatnot? No. Do I make bogus claims that intelligence is environmental? No. Do I deny the validity of genetic research? No. Rather than tell me how to “formulate a credible counter-argument,” perhaps you ought to pay more attention. 197
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 09:56 | # Narrators: The North Africans are all gone and the Middle Easterners identify as Arab. Neither were were Roman Catholic before 1492. What point of mine are you trying to refute? Are you trying to say that the Vikings thought they were kith and kin with the Celts in something called “the white race?” Yet they were referring to those aboriginal Americans as Redskins at least as early as the 1600’s. My point was that aboriginals did not think of themselves as a pan-American ethnic group. And historically, the earliest (recorded) manifestation of Western Culture was articulated by the ancient Greeks over a thousand years before the time of Christ. Outside of Greece, nobody cared. It was not the touchstone of whiteness until much later. Were the Picts reading Plato? The Anglo-Saxon common law… was implemented uniformly after the Norman invasion. It pre-existed their arrival. No. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law#History_of_the_common_law/ 198
Posted by the Narrator.. on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 11:05 | #
No and No. Monitor if you are ignorant of something, just admit it. Don’t argue over it.
I not only said it, I backed it up with evidence.
Neither was half of Europe before 1492, neither was half of Europe after 1492, yet ALL Europe is and has always been, The West; The home of White people.
You are a liar sir. That was not your point. You said, People did not think of themselves as White, just as aboriginal Americans had no idea who “Indians” were. And I demonstrated that you were wrong. Live with it.
Race is not a social construct, Society is a Racial Construct. Western Civilization is genetic. It is White exclusively.
YES. You see Monitor this is the kind of information they hide in books. Try Frank M. Stenton’s ‘Anglo-Saxon England’ for starters. Wikipedia is not a serious source.
But aside from that, you have, in this thread, persisted in lying, twisting, misrepresenting historical data and altering your own prior views during the course of exchanges with others. Unless and until you can learn to govern your emotions as well as your prejudices and grow up, people will assume you are either a troll or just a confused, angry and lonely zealot… 199
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:11 | #
Well put. I like that. And, one might add, race-denial is a Jewish construct. 200
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:37 | # It was wise of you to drop the defense of Christianity as it was childish as well as unsustainable. Here we go. This is what the game is really about. You hate Christianity and you think a race-based secular control-state is a better blasphemy than what we have now. After all, genetic interests are just vehicles of religious interests. 201
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:50 | # This complete fraud who signs as Silver keeps trying to point up the darkness of Serbs’ looks. But Serbs aren’t dark. Serbs aren’t dark. Serbs aren’t dark. Serbs aren’t dark. This includes the Bosnians who are Moslems: neither the Serbs in Serbia proper, who are of the Russian Orthodox religion, nor Bosnians in Bosnia who are of the Moslem religion, are dark. Both are light. Not as light as Finns, to be sure. But not dark. Not vismins. Some Americans imagine the Moslem Bosnians, the Moslem Kosovars, and the Moslem Albanians to be dark-skinned dagoes because they’re Moslem. They imagine them looking like Osama bin Laden or Muammar Qadaffi. And by extension they imagine the Orthodox Serbs to be dark-skinned dagoes as well, because they’re in the same place. And they figure it all only makes sense because not only are these people all near Turkey, they were occupied by Turkey for centuries, on and off. But they’re not dark-skinned dagoes, none of them. I don’t know what Bulgarians look like, so I’m leaving the Bulgarian portion of the Balkan peninsula out of this. (For all I know they’re light too, but I don’t have a feel for what they look like so I’m not commenting on the Bulgarians.) But the Serb-Bosnian-Albanian world of the Balkans is not a dark-skinned dago “vismin” world. It’s a light-skinned slavic world, like Poland. So Silver is lying through his teeth in the most fundamental point he’s tried to fob off here since the day he first showed up, the way in which his Serb ethnicity made him a vismin in Australia. Whatever made him a vismin in whatever place he grew up in, it wasn’t “Serb ancestry.” He’s not straightforward but devious, dishonest, and likely ill-intentioned. Serbs are no darker than slavic Russian Muscovites. Would a story make sense that had a Negro panhandler walk up to a slavic Russian Muscovite in the streets of Manhattan and say what the Negro did in Silver’s anecdote? No. Likewise this thing he keeps spouting about supposed natural Serb-Puerto-Rican mutual affinity because of racial fellow-dark-feeling. It’s all bullshit, as Dave Johns says. Silver is a bullshitter. He’s a slimy, viscous, creepy liar. And yes the word I put there is viscous, meaning slimy, not a typo for vicious, though he’s vicious too, in his own passive-aggressive way. Finally, I am not by any means convinced this person is ethnically Serb. 202
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:59 | # Silver may himself be part-Negro, which if true would of course explain everything. This story he consistently gives of his Serb cousin marrying a Negro may be an oblique reference to his own mother or father having married a Negro, he being the offspring. Way back when Silver first showed up here , one of our guys, I forget who, thought he might be a mulatto. There may be truth to that. 203
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:05 | #
Albanians of course aren’t slavs. (Albanians, to stray from the subject a little, may in fact be closely related to the race of the ancient Greeks.) But my underlying point still stands. 204
Posted by The Monitor on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:15 | # This complete fraud who signs as Silver keeps trying to point up the darkness of Serbs’ looks. Don’t you understand the SERBIAN Question? I thought you were a good WN! The highest interest in human life is genetic interest, and Serbs pursue their ethnic genetic interest with particular tenacity. The advancement of Serbian EGI is achieved over the prone body of Europe’s children. This is why Serbian actors have traditionally been drawn to agitate for the subversive, the schismatic, the decadent, the destructive. It is a compulsive behaviour, not a conspiratorial one. Any few, small Serbian voices raised against the Thirdworldisation of the US are aimed at immigrant unwillingness to assimilate whereas true Americans don’t care whether or not the unwanted interlopers are prepared to do so, wishing instead for a cessation of the invasion. 205
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:33 | # I can’t believe how much time Monitor saves me — since he’s been filling the site with his posts, I’ve gotten more work done than I have in years, because there are so many comments (his) I don’t have to read! I have so much spare time now! What a time-saver! It’s GREAT! So much free time now! 206
Posted by torgrim on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:07 | # “Tribal means tribal. People did not think of themselves as White, just as aboriginal Americans had no idea who “Indians” were.”—The Monitor The example of Iceland and Greenland come to mind. Iceland was settled by a Norse/Hiberno mix. Celts and the Norse, interbred and must have seen themselves as a similiar tribal people and White. On the other hand, the Americans of Greenland, the Inuit and the Norse did not inter-breed. NO, it was a racial issue and the White tribes obviously identified with like Whites. http://www.amazon.com/Greenlanders-Jane-Smiley/dp/044991089x 207
Posted by torgrim on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:23 | # “Anglo-Saxon common law was implemented uniformly after the Norman invasion.”—The Monitor “It pre-existed their arrival”.—Narrator “No”—The Monitor Germanic law is the term used by Professor Laurence M. Larson in his book, “The Earlist Norwegian Laws”. This has recently been the subject of study, as to one of the causes of the turbulent Viking age, that is, the wholescale change in customs and law, with the coming of the Church. 208
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:26 | # I wrote: Teleology was found to serve ethny. Monitor wrote: By that logic, ALL the ideas in our heads exist to served GI. For example, the claim, “my dog has floppy ears,” is only remembered because it aids genetic survival. So how do we know anything for sure? I mean, before gods there was “becoming”: the new desire to be something and not just nothing. And Man saw a light in it, and that it was good for his increase and the increase of his tribe; and he intensified the light with faith in becoming, and he thought that the light created darkness where becoming was not. He called the light god and goddess, and the darkness he called faithlessness and sin. So the evening and the morning were the first religious day, but they were not Man’s first day. I hope that clarifies matters for you. Floppy ears are not a “becoming issue”, in any sense. The reason we know empiricially but only believe religiously is the test of falsifiability. What can be tested can be known. What cannot be tested must be believed. 209
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:35 | # Most of the people in these hundreds of thumbnails, http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/the_lessons_kosovo_teaches/#c59338 are Serbs. To see them close-up click on each thumbnail. (Then click where it says “Zatvori” in the upper right-hand corner of each close-up to close it). (Don’t click on the first URL in that list — it’s there by accident, and doesn’t link to any photos. Click on the others.) Look at close-ups of several dozens of the people in these photos. Look at more than that if you have time. Do most of the people in these hundreds of photos look like vismins (“visible minorities”)? The obvious answer to that gives the definitive lie to Silver. This guy is not being straightforward but is inventing something. The central claim he’s made since day-one, namely that second-generation Serbs in Australia (just like him supposedly) are vismins, is an invention, an obvious lie. Anyone who’s ever met or even gotten a good look at a random assortment of Serbs in sufficient number knows that this claim of Silver’s is bullshit — and this is the central claim, the central theme, of all this guy’s posts here from day-one: it’s his central point, the central source and wellspring of all the ethnic anguish that’s supposedly torn him apart spiritually, the reason for the supposed eternal impossibility of his ever fitting into Australia ethnically: the central theme of all of his commentary here, in other words, has been pure, transparent bullshit, every word of it. 210
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:38 | # “Serbs aren’t dark. Serbs aren’t dark. Serbs aren’t dark.” - Fred Scrooby But Pakis are. 211
Posted by Dave Johns on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 00:29 | # JWH, do you have something personal against Scrooby? If not, please explain where he is he wrong about Jews? And of course, be specific. 212
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 01:06 | # Dave, he has nothing personal against me. He runs warm and cold in regard to my commentary, mostly cold (“cold” as in “minus 273º Kelvin” cold). It’s mostly my calling Euro sub-races “races” instead of “sub-races,” and Negroes and Euros different species, he disapproves of, plus other stuff such as my references (rare) to David Stennett and some other stuff of mine he dislikes. I, however, consider us to be comrades, so I certainly take no offense and continue of course to respect him highly. 213
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 01:09 | # Excuse me, make that “273º Celsius,” not Kelvin (I meant “zero degrees Kelvin”). Anyway, you get my point ... 214
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 01:17 | #
As I recall, Rnl who used to post here hated that too. Really objected to it strongly. Hey a guy can’t please everyone. 215
Posted by David Johns on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 01:34 | # 459 degrees fahrenheit below zero (absolute zero). That’s where liberals’ find their logic! 216
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 01:41 | # I mean, before gods there was “becoming”: the new desire to be something and not just nothing. According to you, we are nothing anyway, so why not stay home and watch football? 217
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 06:07 | # Jewish TV producers and writers are trying to make everyone believe WASPs still run things in this country, instead of the Jews. I think they do that because they themselves can’t face what the Jews have done to completely destroy this once-great country. Jews can’t stomach looking at what they’ve done so they pretend the WASPs still control it. 218
Posted by silver on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 08:30 | # Scrooby, you are the most laughable character I’ve ever come across online. You are my intellectual and moral inferior and I really have no obligation to answer your infantile “charges” whatsover. I’ll do so this one last time. I haven’t claimed or even insinuated that serbs, on average, are dark. Some tan easily and I could spend all day posting pics of tanned Serbs, Croats, Greeks that WNs would consider racial ‘others.’ So we can forgive your ludicrous claim about “none of them” as part of your standard hysterics, as well as the similarly ludicrous claim of “as Russian Muscovites”—as though their very humanity depended on it. No, my claim is simply that morphologically we’re not of the vast majority Germanic/Tuetonic/Anglo-Saxon stock that makes up white Australia, and that those people were aware of it and it created tensions among us. None of this remarkable. It’s the Australian version of early 20th century NE America that Desmond so often refers to. I’ve never claimed to feel any sort of undying loyalty to some sort of unified “white race” but I don’t have anything against germanics, and I find them culturally familiar and likeable, but I, as most other serbs, most other greeks, most other s. italians tend not to have very much to do with them—save for picking up their relatively easy women. This is such common knowledge I’m surprised anyone would even bother to deny it or pretend otherwise. (Check the race boards if you disagree.)
My job here isn’t to convince you of anything. There are better social arrangements and there are worse. Today’s is particularly silly and I’d like to reform it. WNs tend to feel the same way, but far too many are given to high hysteria to advance a realistic platform. Fine, that’s your game; I consider it a complete loser, but feel free to play it.
No, but he’d do it to a Serb-Med mix in the middle of July in the SW USA. (Did you even get the joke? You know, the negro’s making himself out to be Italian? I thought it was hilarious. You’re such a racial hardass I suspect you didn’t.)
Ah, thems fightin words, Scrooby. It’s probably a cover for your own racial insecurities. It says quite a bit about the sort of people this site attracts that you’ve managed to achieve a following. I mean, what with your pathetic, overt ass-kissing, the way you suck up to Peachtoast every time he/she posts his cryptic remarks without as much as an acknowledgement in return, for example, or the solemn solidarity you pledge with beleagured denizens of The Emerald Isle or Albion every time a news item is posted as though you were of that soil yourself, or your lyrical diatribes about pristine ivory which you admit your genes despoil (“I don’t want them to look like me”). Fred, you struck me as a loon from the very first day. I’m done with you. If nothing is achieved in the way of what I’ve taken to terming “racial reform,” it will be sweet consolation indeed to know you, you antihuman, will live out your days writhing in agony. 219
Posted by the Narrator.. on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 08:47 | #
That, plus shows like this help to convince many White Americans that their eyes are deceiving them and that they are really still the vast ‘majority’ and still firmly in control.
Somewhat off topic, but I’ve often raised the following point to biblical literalists,
“Heavens” means sky. Where did the waters come from?
Who made the water? Nobody. And of course the connection to Amniotic fluid seems obvious. It’s possible that mythologies were originally scientific in derivation. That is, “scientific” in the sense of the ancient times and understanding in which they were written. If that be the case, then many mythologies/religions (ironically) may very well have been “secular” in their genesis and intent. Their purpose, of course, being to inform, validate and empower The Tribe. After all science did indeed do those very things for The West up until the 1940’s… 220
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 10:17 | # Silver: You’ve restated much of my point. Part of the issue is that there’s a difference between marginal ideas and marginal people—and you can accept one without joining the other. 221
Posted by snax on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:15 | # Fred -
You’re right about the Serbs, dead wrong about Bosnians.
If this means visible *ethnic* minorities as opposed to racial ones (usual meaning, not your preferred), even Serbs are easily visibly differentiated from the English as a group. 222
Posted by n/a on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:58 | # Haha. For his sake, I hope “The Monitor” is merely trolling. Morrissey = Irish Frye = Jewish Wilde = Irish Of course “Florida” is a typically Anglo-Saxon surname, so I have to give him that one. 223
Posted by wjg on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:10 | # Monitor, Now that it is clear you would rather not be sullied with marginal people, by all means join a respectable group and get busy with a respectable solution. You know what? I’d rather not be spending my valuable spare time trying to keep my people from committing suicide since I’d rather they just be healthy and whole and we all just get on with our lives. Bring back the Christianity of our forefathers. Most (myself included) but not all here would cheer. 3-4 years back I was in my Evangelical/Conservative/largely Republican/flag waving/Bible Study group trying to raise some interest in opposing the Fag-agenda (believe me I didn’t call it that then) being put through in the Fairfax County, VA public school system. No one was interested; hell, I was even rebuked for not being meek enough. All they wanted to do was say Jesus Saves and talk about whether the Rapture (not if there will be one) would come before or after the Tribulation and that what happened on this Earth didn’t much matter anymore. Talk about Gnosticism! That is your mainstream Monitor. Feed the homeless, hand out tracts, literally adore Jews, render unto “Caesar” most everything including their sons to die in the desert, read Left Behind, pay the tithe, say amen, and most of all, don’t be “legalistic” or “hate”. That is your non-marginal people Monitor. There are millions of them. I was into Christianity for 12 years; worship services, bible study, fellowship groups, rallies; not the Easter and Christmas variety but full bore before I had a different kind of Road to Damascus experience. In a world like this who is in the Asylum and who is not? Is it that hard to see? And this type of “Christianity” is now everywhere; liberal, fundamentalist, evangelical, Catholic, Unitarian, JW’s… What all these Christians debate are the very things atheists debate as far as secular things go. But between themselves they haggle over biblical minutia to the last jot and tittle. The spiritual state of their children is generally pathetic. I tried helping in that area for several years and the Christian parents and co-teachers had no interest in setting their children apart in a positive way. This is not to say there were not some exceptional Christian parents raising strong children since there were. It’s just that they were a rarity and probably about as common as strong “heathen” parents. We live in a God-damned death cult and Judeo-christianity is not fighting it but simply flavoring it with a little Jesus juice. Talk about the opiate of the masses! And you say White Nationalists want all the liberal poison currently polluting the mainstream? Open your eyes. Why the hell do you think most of us are here in forums like this? Because just about everything is broken and not only are few interested in fixing things they look at those of us who state the obvious as the madman or hater. After several weeks of some interesting debate but mostly straw men and flim flam it is clear where you have chosen to plant your flag and it is at odds with the healthy physical and spiritual life of our people. Many of us have recently left a sinking ship and you are here to call us back to it, not to patch it up so that it will float. Patch it up first then call our folk back to it otherwise woe to you! You have been using whatever weasel words you can to win a petty debate akin to a Pharisee or a Scribe rather than as Aryan edification. We don’t have time for that. 224
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:16 | # Lots of bracing truths there, posted — as usual — by wjg. (Nice job putting Monitor in his place, btw!) Thanks, comrade! 225
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:31 | # Comments such as that one by wjg and the many by The Narrator, CC, and others, essentially put contemporary Christianity in the dock, exactly where it should be. The title of the log entry could have been The LQ, the JQ, and the CQ (The Liberalism Question, the Jewish Question, and the Christianity Question). During the era of the Apostles the Jews violently rejected Christianity. Maybe there was a good reason. Maybe they saw something in it the goys couldn’t see, something that would ultimately prove the ethnonational undoing of whatever group adopted it. The Germanic Saxons of course also violently resisted it (it ended up forced on them by their fellow germanics, the Franks), as did the Scandinavians, the ancient Balts (it ended up forced on them by the Teutonic Knights), and of course lots of other nations and tribes. Maybe Christianity is intrinsically sick and maybe lots of tribes saw that but couldn’t resist the force of the inheritors of the Roman Empire who were spreading it, so succumbed. It’s time to have a look at exactly what’s wrong with Christianity that it has gotten one hundred percent behind government-enforced race-replacement of white people everywhere on the planet they exist. 226
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:39 | # There is no question that Christianity does not mandate forced race-replacement of white people. <u>It does not</u>. The priests of all Christian religions today, however (except the Eastern Orthodox), are either telling the faithful that it does mandate it, or are deliberately letting the faithful mistakenly believe that it does mandate it, as they watch whites slowly march to their own demographic extinction. Why? These priests from the Vatican and from Lambeth Palace on down have to be put in the dock and required to account for their actions. As things now stand they are collaborators in genocide. 227
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 15:08 | # Harsh criticisms of MR.com by JWH here, à propos of this thread. I believe this criticism (what he calls “the MR Question,” or “MRQ”) is aimed partly at me, but I’m not certain as to the precise details implied. (It may have to do with my use of the word “dago.”) Whites are now being genocided deliberately. Onlookers gazing at this spectacle get mad. We sometimes use certain strong words and strong language. When we do, it’s understandable and excusable given the circumstances. 228
Posted by the Narrator.. on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:28 | # I agree with Fred, wjg’s post hits it out of the ball park….painfully so. Christianity is dead. Killed by its followers. And I don’t say that to gloat. I can just feel it in my bones as much as I perceive it in thought.
There seems to be only one alternative to your postulation above. And that is that God is there, and he has already passed judgment on us and damned us (all of us). And that’s why Christians everywhere are stumbling blindly in the dark looking for a light that will forever be denied them. I don’t believe that though. Down deep I know there is no world beyond. And I think most people feel the same way whether they are willing to admit it or not. I still frequent Christian blogs and sites (protestant ones) and I can see a surging madness, even nihilism, everywhere. There are even sites now called “discernment ministries” that point out the ever increasing insanity in churches, yet even these discernment “ministries” themselves ooze a sort of madness. There was a time when I would never have imagined that I’d reject Christianity which I had been immersed in all my life. Yet here I am. I’m not a “spiritual” person. But I’ll give anything the benefit of the doubt. I still pick up the bible a few times a week and all I see is an ethno-historical book that has absolutely nothing to do with me or my people. In fact it is contemptuous of my people. (it’s odd that the jews still hold Jesus in such low regard as he had nothing but love for them and hatred for all other peoples.) The genie is out of the bottle now. We understand how weather functions and where the sun goes at night. We have been to the heavens and there was no god(s) there. I think there is written evidence that our people have always, ideally, pursued the notion that the universe functioned not as an outcropping of magical or supernatural powers, but as a natural phenomena. I don’t blame Christianity as the sole cause of Western demise anymore that I would allow that it was the cause of The West’s rise to preeminence in the first place. Of all that I’ve read, I believe that Prof. MacDonald has most aptly hit upon the cause and circumstances of our current plight… 229
Posted by skeptical on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:47 | # There’s no sense in singling out Christianity for special rebuke in our discussions. I’m sure that just about everyone reading these threads would agree that all of our once proud institutions have been twisted and despoiled into something damn near unrecognizable. Is it really any surprise that our historic religious institutions, and their followers, haven’t escaped this degeneration either? Nevertheless I agree with much of the criticism that has been lobbed against “The Monitor”. His problem is that he’s living in the past and would want us to spend our energies resurrecting the spirit that animated a pre-modern Christian Europe. Such a project is impractical, especially when one considers the immediacy of our destruction. 230
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 20:50 | # wjg: Yes, these are Gnostics. If anything, I hate them more than you do. I could explain more, but it goes beyond the scope of this site. Believe me, I hear you. I can’t explain Christian doctrine here, for obvious reasons. But if you think I’m calling you to the Southern Baptist Convention, no way. 231
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 20:53 | # Skeptical: So, in other words, we need something practical, like what? Odinism? Military coup? Passing out fliers? 232
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 20:55 | # Narrator: Now you’re borrowing punch lines from the Soviets, Interesting bedfellows there. 233
Posted by snax on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 21:30 | #
Practical like building consensus for our ethnic nationalisms - you can’t not have noticed that this is the broad thrust of people on this blog. If ethnic nationalism isn’t your thing, you’re in the wrong place. If the best tactical ways of achieving ethnic nationalist consensus that you can think of are Odinism, coup, or distributing information in the street, you should expand on this. If they are not, you should offer better strategies. Don’t waste your time discussing anything that’s meaningless by your own judgement. What are you - nuts? 235
Posted by skeptical on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 22:21 | # The Monitor,
A childish reply, none of the above are seriously considered at MR and you know it. Snax has right, our primary focus is to try to stoke the fires of ethnic nationalism. Getting our people to care about the collective Western body once more has to be the first step. Hell, getting our people to care about anything other than their own petty materialistic indulgences would be a first step. 236
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 22:23 | #
They’re the same race, Snax. The exact same. No difference. Nearly all the Serbs I’ve personally met, around fifty or so men, women, and little kids, have been Moslem Bosnian war refugees. (The rest have been Orthodox Serbs.) It’s a very weird feeling to be shaking the hand of a white man standing before you with ordinary Euro looks, fair skin and eyes and straight light-brown hair and completely Euro stance, bearing, and personality, who could be an Englishman, Frenchman, any Euro, but is a pious Moslem, with his little blond nine-year-old son standing politely at his side with hand extended to be introduced, and the father, beaming with pride, gives the little blonde boy’s name as Mohammed, and you reach down and shake hands with the little tow-headed gent (who in looks and personality is indistinguishable from any typical young Vermont lad down the street from my home playing on his bicycle), saying, “How do you do, Mohammed.” That’s what these people look like, these Bosnian Moslems. They’re white, not dago. The limited sample I’ve personally met are at least as blond as the native Vermonter Anglos around here, eleventh generation who still have deeds to their farms from the English Crown lying around in their farm drawers: they’re as white as they.
Let’s cut right to the chase, Snax: no, second generation Serbs in Oz will have no trouble whatsoever integrating, assimilating, being fully accepted. Yes I’m one hundred percent certain of that and no, I’ve never been to Oz. Don’t have to have been. Two plus two equals four down there in Oz, as it does on the planet Mars, on the Rings of Saturn, and on the third star to the left in the Andromeda Spiral Galaxy. I’ve never been to any of those either, and don’t have to have been. And I’m just as certain that Silver is a lying ill-intentioned nuisance. 237
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 22:33 | # Can the asshole posting the interracial pix (presumed either a Jew, a Subcon, or a homo) (who’s obviously not “wjg,” btw — the creep, whoever he is, is posting under wjg’s name) — can this creep please find an interracial pic to post showing a Jewish woman identified as such by wearing a Star of David around her neck clearly and immediately visible, who is in the arms of her Negro lover or husband? Even, better, cradling their mulatto baby in her arms? He can fill the entire thread with those if he can find any — I’d LOVE to see some. (“Payback” and all that, you know ... warms the cockles of the heart, payback ... it really and truly does ...) 238
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 22:49 | # snax: Really? White nationals would rather kill or be killed than support any such thing. They hold to a post-Kantian universalist ethic. It is a religion, but not a Christian one, even if it appears in the church. I’ve said this many times already. If you believe your own apocalyptic story, not much can be done because of the sheer size of the demographic tide. That is not the church’s fault. Both protestant and catholics warned for centuries that if secular humanism carried on unchecked, it would destroy civilization. Instead, you want more humanism. which only gets you more problems. skeptical: There are all sorts of WN groups—and it isn’t my fault that almost all of them are either embarrassing, violent or false flags. The major difference is that this site doesn’t annoy me with WWII idolatry. Yet the cult of Dawkins is not necessarily better, just less blatantly stupid. Besides, if there is no God, you have no reason to care about the collective Western body. It is misplaced emotion. In the end, we are dead. Everything is going to cease into an impersonal nothing anyway. 239
Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 22:55 | #
Please, if you’re gonna go there, give us more than the self-styled tripe that the anecdotal triumphs over all. Is that that the Jew speaking? 240
Posted by The Monitor on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 23:01 | # Please, if you’re gonna go there, give us more than the self-styled tripe that the anecdotal triumphs over all. Speaking of anecdotes, wasn’t England’s first mosque built by Anglos? 241
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 23:09 | #
It seems to be, Desmond — the Jew with the really high IQ. (Sheeesh, I liberally sprinkle the word “dago” all through my posts lately and Desmond STILL isn’t satisfied ... If he doesn’t watch out I’m gonna send him CDs of Hillel Bernstein’s latest Klezmer favorites, including the romantic number “Somewhere Over the Bagel and Bialy Shop,” the searing heartbreak separation ballad, “Your Latkes Don’t Mean Bupkes To Me Now,” and of course Hillel Bernstein’s latest smash hit, “I Was Klezmer When Klezmer Wasn’t Cool.” See if listening to that a few times doesn’t get Desmond down off his high horse .....) 242
Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 23:18 | #
244
Posted by skeptical on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 23:28 | # The Monitor,
A gross exaggeration, there are most certainly not “all sorts of WN groups”. In fact, if it wasn’t for the web I could reasonably conclude that no such group even existed. And however fringe the nationalist scene might have been it’s hardly relevant. This is just a guilt by association rhetorical device you use from time to time in order to demonize those who disagree with you. Again, it’s a childish gimmick.
More exaggeration, Dawkins is hardly ever mentioned at MR. Just because the commentariat here overwhelmingly accepts modern evolutionary theory doesn’t mean that they’re a “cult of Dawkins”.
Maybe in your mind but not everyone works that way. Belief in God is not a prerequisite to some basic tribalistic impulses (i.e. the exclusion of foreigners, forbidding out-group marriage, etc.). The MR commentariat provides a ready contradiction to your thesis. 245
Posted by snax on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 23:38 | # Fred -
Here you’re talking about Bosniaks and Serbs. If there was any truth in your assertion that little war wouldn’t ever have happened. There are blonde Bosniaks, true enough, but they are a dark people, at least to English eyes. The import of common origins of Serbs and Bosniaks can be overstated. Groups, once distinction is made, diverge phenotypically. I think we can expect that over the centuries two groups sited between two larger populations of warring ethno-cultural civilisations will diverge more rapidly than usual as each looks toward its parent civilisation and its peoples for cultural and demographic support. I don’t say you’ll tell every Serb apart from every Bosniak. But you’ll tell the average Serb gang apart from the Bosniak gang much more often than chance. “Dark” is subjective. You say
But you’re wrong. Plenty of Bosniaks would pass for Turks, Arabs, or Pakistanis. Or even Italians. And not just to an Englishman, but to each other too. http://www.daylife.com/search/photos/all/1?q=bosniaks Relatively few would pass for Anglo-Saxons – in Australia or elsewhere.
Well, that depends on their individual inclination and ability to assimilate, plus the awareness/ lack of awareness among the majority people that that guy has different roots. Partly this comes down to looks, partly to names, also perhaps to dress and other behaviour. It’s to be expected that some Serbs will get some stick, while other become the most popular kid in school. I’m not sure why this matters to you, but clearly it does – you’re arguing against the obvious and universally known.
I suspect you’re right. I read nothing he posts. 246
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 23:46 | # Desmond, I’m on your side. I’m just saying there’s no “vismin reason” second-generation Serbs in Oz who want to assimilate can’t (who want to assimilate, Desmond; who want to, not who don’t want to: obviously you can make yourself as ethnoculturally alien as you want, if you’ve a mind to and don’t wish to assimilate or be accepted — but Silver says he ideally would love to assimilate and be accepted but it’s an impossibility because of his dark-skinned vismin looks, which clearly is a load of crap if he’s a Serb, which I doubt he is). Silver harps constantly on that dishonest thesis because he’s here to sow “North-South” discord. Don’t play into his hands. 247
Posted by snax on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 23:50 | # tm -
The only WN I’ve seen you single out for criticism is David Duke (why aren’t you trolling his site?). So even if you wilfully misunderstand what WN is, and arbitrarily draw a limit on what constitutes ethnicity contrary to the wishes of a people claiming such title, you still lie about its attitude toward the ethnic nationalisms of Europeans (and even Africans and Asians) - as his broadcast intro and support of the BNP, FN, VB, et al, attest. If he’s not enough of a proof, check out the subforums @ SF - the only WN association you’ve named. 248
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:00 | #
So it wasn’t a Moslem-Christian war (the way in Ulster it’s been a Catholic-Prod war)??? You’re right that, on a certain level, Moslem Bosnians and Christian Serbs are different races. I agree. Other examples are Englishmen and Welshmen, or Catholic and Prod Ulstermen: on a certain level, they’re different races. On that level, Moslem Bosnians and Christian Serbs are different races. But not so different that one is a dago race and the other a white race. Both are equally white.
I’m debunking Silver, a really annoyingly bold, stubborn liar, who is here to sow intra-Euro discord. 249
Posted by snax on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:01 | # Of the four Serbs in their Davis Cup team pictured here - the guys on the far left and far right might reasonably be expected to struggle to assimilate into the anglo-saxon majority in a society rejecting Lebanese and Moroccan immigration. Judged only on appearance they clearly are not Anglo-Saxon - while they may very well be north African. 250
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:12 | # All I can say is I’ve met around fifty (almost all Moslems) and I saw none, not one, who looked like those two on the ends. Bear in mind, btw, that I cite the Moslem Bosnians as (some misguided people’s idea of) the worst-case scenario. Silver claims to be a Christian Serb, not a Moslem Bosnian. 251
Posted by snax on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:15 | # Fred -
I’ve only known “dago” to mean Italian. I take “White” to mean a bio-cultural group and limit it to peoples of European origin and Christian tradition (and their ancestors). 252
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:25 | # Regarding that Serb killer of young David Hookes, by the way — I’ll throw in that he doesn’t look like anything else than a person of Slavic race. 253
Posted by Dave Johns on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:27 | # I say let silver post anything he wants. Why not? Who here isn’t hip to his mental agonies? LOL! I, for one, get a kick out of his tenacious attempts to discredit the aim of Majority Rights. He’s entertaining! Just like I get great amusement from the likes of “Tired of Idiots.’‘ 254
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:29 | #
All right, I see I don’t know the way in which it’s used. I thought I was one, for example, by some definitions. I’m nil Italian though. 255
Posted by The Monitor on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:32 | # skeptical: Like I said, I hope that a serious right will rise up that combines realism about human nature with traditionalism. So far, the closest thing to that is a certain mildly insane blogger whose name is a cure word around here. More exaggeration, Dawkins is hardly ever mentioned at MR. Oh, come on. Do I need to write long, turgid essays? You know what I’m talking about. Belief in God is not a prerequisite to some basic tribalistic impulses… Part of life means sorting out “basic tribalistic impulses.” If these “white survival” impulses were hard-coded, there would be no race problem today. In fact, were you to do whatever WNs are supposed to do, you would have to sacrifice yourself for the good of the group, with no reward for yourself. Nobody wants that. snax: If you think I’m trolling, you don’t get it. arbitrarily draw a limit on what constitutes ethnicity contrary to the wishes of a people claiming such title Common sense and observation says there is a white race that is not black or oriental. That “white race” is a massive group of ethnics. Nobody agrees who is in or out the political union that is “white,” however. (Are Serbs in?) As for the real people who carry those genes, they will typically say, under oath, that race does not exist. 256
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:36 | # (Underneath my American nationality, I and my siblings have always identified as German, if anyone wants to know.) (Where there’s a German-English split, in my gut I side with the Germans, all other things being equal. Where there’s a German-Russian split, I side with the Germans. Where there’s a German-Polish split, I side with the Germans in my gut. And so on. We, my sibs and I, always considered ourselves Germans because we were raised that way through my German father and, especially, my German grandfather’s family in D-land.) 257
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:39 | # One of my favorite expressions in the world: “The wogs begin at Calais.” Why do I like it when it makes me a wog? I like it because I like when a race, a people, stands up for itself ethnoculturally, and in this expression that’s what Englishmen are doing. I loathe race-traitors. 258
Posted by snax on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:59 | # tm -
That kind of debate was very extensive and divisive at places like Stormfront and within parties like the BNP ten years ago. Not so now, which is what I’d expect. Not one in 10,000 pople that I meet isn’t easily defined as White or non-White and I know that my judgement would match almost everybody else’s - including the people’s own. It’s a non-problem. 259
Posted by skeptical on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 01:09 | # The Monitor,
Our more tribalistic character has only been overcome recently by a massively coordinated experiment in systematic cultural brainwashing. If today’s public schools, universities, televisions, radios, and books weren’t constantly reminding our people of the fact that “the White man is evil” I’m sure they’d think differently on their own. 260
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 01:32 | # Skeptical’s comment just above is correct, except I wouldn’t call it an “experment” in systematic cultural brainwashing, I’d call it a deliberate carefully-planned-in-advance strategy aimed at genocide. 261
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 01:44 | # There are people who consciously want to get rid of the white race. We’ve got one right here, “Tired of Idiots,” though she’s merely a useful idiot spouting what she’s taught to spout, not a ringleader. In her ideal future nation races wouldn’t exist or be allowed to exist, and the death penalty would be meted out to any who bucked the strict racelessness of that system. The first thing wrong with that, of course, is there’s a far stronger system no one and no force in the universe can buck, which guarantees there will always be races: thermodynamics. Races aren’t going to disappear and there will never be one perfectly uniform coffee-colored world any more than there’ll be an atmosphere without any weather or oceans without any currents: these facts are all due to fundamental laws of reality. The only question is, “Which races will there be?” Let’s make sure the Euro ones are represented among those still standing when all the race-replacement dust has settled. 262
Posted by Dave Johns on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 01:51 | # “Tired of Idiots”, I suspect, is an East Asian. 263
Posted by skeptical on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 02:08 | # Scrooby, I agree with you, what’s happening to us is quite deliberate. My use of the term “experiment” was only meant in the broadest sense. 264
Posted by The Monitor on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 02:09 | # Not one in 10,000 pople that I meet isn’t easily defined as White or non-White… Should Polish migrants be allowed into Britain? They’re white. Our more tribalistic character has only been overcome recently by a massively coordinated experiment in systematic cultural brainwashing. If this is true, then nurture triumphs over nature, which is absurd for both of us. This is even odder, since we all have tremendous cultural freedom, especially now. Something is going on here that isn’t just brainwashing. People deliberately want certain outcomes, including feminism and multiracism. The modern PC phenomenon is too big to not carry huge popular support. When faced with racial barbarism, whites just move to another, more expensive suburb. Dave Johns: That’s my guess as well. 265
Posted by wjg on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 02:43 | # MR’ers, I didn’t post the picture at 9:20 pm. Must be another “wjg” who just happened to show up. Open forums do have limitations.
Thanks for already pointing that out. 266
Posted by skeptical on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 02:52 | # The Monitor,
Not really, those who are sufficiently introverted and/or independently minded are capable of escaping the social conditioning.
Do we really have so much cultural freedom? The problem is that our collective media is capable of deciding matters of social capital. By creating a false “anti-racist” pseudo-consensus on its television programs (and other media) it has been able to fool our people into believing that intellectual absurdities, like racial egalitarianism, and repulsive hedonistic behavior are a part of a healthy dominant social consensus. And our people act accordingly since as social beings we would rather be in good company and wrong than socially isolated and right (see the Asch conformity experiments for a reference).
People are too dumb and uninformed to know what they want. The old Western tradition hasn’t been properly passed down to our folk and as a consequence they are ready to lap up any alternative given to them. 267
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 03:19 | #
Exactly right on the money, and that is precisely the major way in which the other side pulls this stuff off (not the only way of course, but the major way): by its control of the mass media (which is no accident — that control is consciously sought, for precisely this immense power which such control confers). Skeptical has scored perfect bullseye after perfect bullseye in just this single comment. Miasma theories are dead as far as I’m concerned. The name of the game is specific groups controlling specific “nerve centers” of society, mainly the mass media, imposing for example “po-mo liberalism” the way you impose a certain color on your room walls when re-painting. They do it by controlling the mass media. There are no vague wispy ill-defined floaty undefinable miasmas about it, only specific well-defined treatable pathogens. 268
Posted by Lurker on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 03:28 | # I favour choke point as a term rather than nerve centre but Im with you on this Fred. 269
Posted by skeptical on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 03:36 | # Fred Scrooby,
I agree. Liberalism has been able to use its iron grip over our mass media and institutions of learning, never centers of our society as you would put it, in order to slowly mold the social conscience of our people. Hence, what was socially unthinkable just two decades ago mysteriously becomes mainstream today. 270
Posted by The Monitor on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 03:58 | # wjg: Hey, did you once have a blog under another screen name. Skep: ...if born after 1965, get sucked into fanboy culture (comic books, scifi, fantasy), which can be even more leftist. The elite has special programs to brainwash them. See Star Trek, the ultimate post-racial order. Do we really have so much cultural freedom? No, but nobody stops us from having this conversation. If the mass of whites sought racial consciousness, if covertly, the regime would be unable to do anything. The problem is that our collective media is capable of deciding matters of social capital. They also have, in the past promoted things like pacifism that nobody wanted. If genetic interests were as strong as we might expect, people should have been able to walk away. In the 1960s, segregations had the same media as everybody else. So while I agree that the Culture Industry wants us all fat, stupid and decadent, it isn’t powerful enough to convince us of what we inwardly know is absurd. 271
Posted by skeptical on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 04:17 | # The Monitor,
But that’s part of the brilliance of our people’s predicament. No one is preventing us from having this conversation and yet the cultural miasma which engulfs our society makes it so unlikely to happen. Think about it, how many people do you know well enough such that you could feel comfortable having this kind of conversation with them in person. Hell, I can’t even be totally frank with my wife without making her feel extremely uncomfortable for reasons that she “just can’t explain”.
Uh huh…
Once again, I invite you to read about the results of the Asch conformity experiments. I’ll even take the liberty of quoting a sample of what the wiki has to say:
272
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 10:02 | # Monitor: Part of life means sorting out “basic tribalistic impulses.” If these “white survival” impulses were hard-coded, there would be no race problem today The crisis in the “tribalistic impulse” is the crisis in the impulse to “become”. It has its deepest and oldest root in the taxation privileges of rulers and church elites in the European Middle Ages, the post-Renaissance rejection of which was also a rejection of the after-life as sufficient compensation for worldy suffering. All the political offspring of that idea have prostituted the faith gene - the propensity to give oneself over to “becoming”. That, today, “becoming” in all its forms, religious and secular, is in conflict with “being” is not surprising, given all that has gone before (plus the interests of the modern elites and those other, ethnic actors who actually desire the debility of European Man). To counter it in any effective way is a very great intellectual challenge. But it is impossible if certain categories of criticism are disallowed. For you personally, Monitor, there are two categories of criticism which cause offence - criticism of the nature and direction of the Christian faith and of Jewish ethno-aggression - and that offence needs to be overcome. Understand, I am not ridiculing the impulse to become, but putting it is the context of Man’s arising and looking at what it is really for - which, obviously, is not to war with “being”. Take less offence at that contextualisation, please, and turn your energies towards the collective goal all truly good men share. 273
Posted by snax on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:03 | # tm - Poles in Britain: I’m an English nationalist… —Great link from Skeptical to the Asch experiments. 274
Posted by the Narrator.. on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:47 | # The following is a perfect (and timely) example of what passes for traditional Christianity on a “discernment ministry” website devoted to exposing the fraud of the new “emergent” christian theology. It’s protestant and the site is called, sliceoflaodocia.com.
That is what christianity has become today. And it is suppose to be a back to the basics, “old truth” kind of site. Like the rest of today’s judeo-christianity, she’s a complete tool, pandering a theology that only mutated into existence about three decades ago, yet presented to listeners and readers as “traditional”. There is just no dealing with such people. Their Trinity is the jews, themselves and israel. Their “devil”, is truth… 275
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:18 | # Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…............................. 276
Posted by silver on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:42 | # Heh, the “NEC” Emlie Lahoud looks whiter than both of them.
What a joke. “Nordishism” + criteria for eastern and southern euros, combined with a positive out-group identity sets avoids much of the silliness inherent in strict pan-europeanism. Nordish are clearly in, and can easily be established by ethnic history. A set of criteria for assimilated southern and eastern euros, including provisions for family members of nordish members, helps to separate the most compatible of east and south. A positive out-group identiy enables southerns and easterners to opt to separate, which, psychologically, is preferable to being separated. This has the beginnings of a reasonable plan and much more should said about it; it’s certainly a much better use of time than endless tirades about negro rapes and islamic outrages, not to mention childish non-responsiveness like “Zzzzzz” (if it helps, scrooby, imagine your idol Peachtoast brought it up). 277
Posted by snax on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:26 | # silver -
On what basis do you figure I have any trouble with that position? 278
Posted by snax on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:31 | #
That’s an excellent example. 279
Posted by silver on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:50 | # On the basis that you find me so offensive you refuse to read what I write. The above represents my views of who is who; the rest of my postings are geared towards encouraging a gentler discourse on how to achieve the separation essential for the preservation of who is who. I’m implacably opposed to the fascistic leanings of the majority of WNs which so readily lends itself to hurting and offending others with its obsession with superiority and, to me, represents unimaginable moral regress; no man should be without obligation to others, but neither should any man have to apologise for existing. Take Al “human detritus” Ross; I’d as soon kill such a man as look at him. Sorry, “supermen,” whether we lean on Christ or Marx to justify it, the little man has earnt his place in this world and I’ll die before I see it surrendered for any reason. Keep that caveat in mind and you can have all the racism you want; I’ll stand right alongside you fighting for it. But abandon it, and earn not just my but the wrath of a thousand moral men. 281
Posted by wjg on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 19:50 | # Monitor, In reply to your question… “Hey, did you once have a blog under another screen name.” No, I’ve only ever used wjg so far. 282
Posted by snax on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 21:09 | # That’s not an answer, silver, but I’ve decided I’d rather not have one anyway. Thanks. 283
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Sep 2008 22:06 | # (I wonder how Silver found out about me and Melba ... I thought I was being pretty discreet about that ... Look, don’t anyone tell my wife, OK?) Melba darling, don’t listen to the gossipers, give the wallabies a pat on the head for me, and ... à la prochaine, chérie ... xxx! 284
Posted by The Monitor on Fri, 26 Sep 2008 01:46 | # Narrator: She? Real women don’t do theology. GW: Actually, if you know God, you can’t really understand yourself. That’s the problem. Truth in the natural order prepares the mind for the supernatural truth—and vice versa. It’s a sample as that. We Westerners have this so called Faustian impulse. Even as we do brilliant things, we still manage to destroy ourselves. We are all sabotaged by a superficial outlook on reality which reduces it to what appears to the senses and maybe the intuition. Man is reduced to a mere process in space and time, cut off from the invisible realities. This is enforced by a culture industry that denies immortality, denies the moral order, denies a purposive and personal Providence ruling the universe. It is killing us—and the demographic meltdown is only one symptom of a larger problem. Worse, if you share this philosophy, you have no coherent reason to want things changed. Even survival cannot be justified since we all face annihilation anyway. 285
Posted by Lurker on Fri, 26 Sep 2008 02:48 | # Narrator! On your blog, most recent entry, you have this: “Likewise, we could add, “The friend to every man is loyal to one in particular.” Shouldnt that be “loyal to no-one in particular”? 286
Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 26 Sep 2008 03:45 | # “Truth in the natural order prepares the mind for the supernatural truth—and vice versa.” - The Monitor Oneness with the natural order and its creator - God. That’s all very touching, Monitor. But, what are you actually willing to do to “secure the existence of our people and a future for White children?” (Did I just quote that knuckle-dragging barbarian David Lane? Oh, I’m sorry.) I know that kind of thinking is so materialistic, so earthy, so concrete, so practical, so, well, just so…! Here is the blunt truth: if, at the critical moment, we are not willing or able to take what we want by force (yes, kill for it, sorry if that makes you queasy) we have nothing to work with. 287
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 26 Sep 2008 04:27 | # Emlie Lahoud (pic posted several above, by our self-absorbed Paki-Serb-Greek friend) looks like a dead-ringer for Tony Blair in, say, another six or eight years — all right, maybe another ten, but no more than that ... that’s got to be Blair’s spitting image in ten years from now. 288
Posted by The Monitor on Fri, 26 Sep 2008 04:47 | # what are you actually willing to do to “secure the existence of our people and a future for White children?” (Did I just quote that knuckle-dragging barbarian David Lane?
If you think that counts as doing something, maybe the magistrate ought to keep an eye on you. Just remember that, even without anti-racism, non-whites still have liberty to return fire against a white perp using deadly force. Self defense is self defense. Phooey! 289
Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 26 Sep 2008 05:44 | # “If you think that counts as doing something, maybe the magistrate ought to keep an eye on you. Just remember that, even without anti-racism, non-whites still have liberty to return fire against a white perp using deadly force. Self defense is self defense.” - The Monitor I do not advocate taking random potshots at non-Whites. “You can’t get over your sick bloodlust, can you?. Lane was a murderer who deserved capital punishment. If anything, your inverted Zionism is showing. You think your cause is lost, so you want to die like the brave nationalists at Masada.” - The Monitor Do you use Christianity as a way to rationalize your own cowardice and disloyalty? Your right, I don’t have much hope. I am extremely skeptical that we can get enough of our people to wake up and give a damn before it is too late. I think the demographic situation in America is too far gone to solve this thing politically. So what does that leave, secession? As if the government would allow that unopposed. So, to pull secession of successfully our people would have to be able to oppose the government by force of arms. Right there you have civil war, that is a whole new ball game - the rules change. And once the threshold of outright civil war has been crossed why should we not go the extra mile for physical reconquest of our country? You have yourself said that you fear our racial enemies will exterminate our people a la Rhodesia given the opportunity. Do you actually realize what that will entail? Do you actually take it seriously? I prefer to act preemptively, if necessary, and I believe it will shortly come to that, while we still have it within our power to determine our own fate. I will NEVER apologize for that, damnit! What kind of sick, degenerated coward would bid his people to sit on their hands and do nothing except hope for universal conversion while all that our people have built, including our very physical existence, burns to ashes?!?! Count me out, I want to win. 290
Posted by The Monitor on Fri, 26 Sep 2008 05:58 | # I will NEVER apologize for that, damnit! Perhaps you’ll have a chance to apologize at your sentencing? 291
Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 26 Sep 2008 06:16 | # “Perhaps you’ll have a chance to apologize at your sentencing?” - The Monitor That’s right, if White people decided to secede, were opposed by the government and in turn opposed the government by force, were defeated, and lived they would be tried, likely for treason and may well be executed. But if we are not willing to die to save our people what is the point of any of this? Of course there is much work to be done, intellectually, politically, logistically, before a mass resistance of any kind can be mounted. Yet, ultimately, if we are not able to attain our goals by force, if necessary, we will lose. Is that not obvious? Where, in your infinite wisdom, oh great Christian guru and righter of wrongs, am I mistaken? 292
Posted by the Narrator.. on Fri, 26 Sep 2008 08:14 | #
Yes it should. Thanks!
Or he could become a christian and start apologizing right now…,
After all, they’re following Jesus’s example. Don’t struggle. Don’t resist. Don’t fight back. Just bow your head and go to your death like a neutered puppy. Christianity is a suicide cult… 293
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 26 Sep 2008 08:37 | # Monitor: We are all sabotaged by a superficial outlook on reality which reduces it to what appears to the senses and maybe the intuition. No, we are absent from ourselves. The “we” in the sense of “I me” is not. Man is reduced to a mere process in space and time, cut off from the invisible realities. Being is not invisible, not a god thing (which is entirely exoteric), not available through organised exoterica. You are an exotericist. This is enforced by a culture industry that denies immortality, denies the moral order, denies a purposive and personal Providence ruling the universe. Simple faithism that exists only to enshrine evolutionarily adaptive behaviours. No doubt the cargo cults of Papua New Guinea perform the same function for Papuans, and are held in no less esteem. But not by us, of course. We scratch our heads and wonder at Papuan childishness. So why is it, again, that you hold an ideational escapee from Jewish faith-nationalism in such awe? It is killing us—and the demographic meltdown is only one symptom of a larger problem. Excise your idea that belief is a basis for understanding, and things will fall into their proper place for you. Worse, if you share this philosophy, you have no coherent reason to want things changed. Define coherence. Let’s see if you can make it sufficiently non-logical to support your own statement. Even survival cannot be justified since we all face annihilation anyway. We owe our little lives to Nature’s single purpose of self-transmission through time. Our continuity is hers. In what way is it impossible to justify? 294
Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 26 Sep 2008 17:06 | # Give this post on the failures of conservatism and the need for a racially conscious nationalism discussed from a Christian perspective a read, Monitor. Post a comment:
Next entry: The unbearable lightness of BNP-ing
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
, then how will you convince the brownshirts at Majority Rights of the validity of your approach? 
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:14 | #
Further to The Monitor’s second comment on James’ Bayesian thread, I will reply as follows.
A few pointers to the truth, Monitor:-
1) The defence of our people is a genetic defence, not cultural. If we do not survive to live sovereign and free in our own homelands in a very few generations time, our civilisation and culture will fall with us.
2) Neither Christianity nor traditionalist conservatism possess the requisite traction on our manifold ills to effect any useful change. Christian universalism is a negative anyway. Conservatism is merely the political behaviour of a healthy and mature European polity. Clinging to it is understandable, but will not lead to anything useful - or else, the last two centuries of retreat under the liberal lash would not have occurred.
3) The highest interest in human life is genetic interest, and Jews pursue their ethnic genetic interest with particular tenacity. The advancement of Jewish EGI is achieved over the prone body of Europe’s children. This is why Jewish actors have traditionally been drawn to agitate for the subversive, the schismatic, the decadent, the destructive. It is a compulsive behaviour, not a conspiratorial one.