Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:27 | #

Thanks, Dan.  All this is only what one has come to expect in these times.  The very latitude employed in granting the right to remain to these completely unwanted aliens is the clearest of indications of the value which an internationalist Establishment places on our nationhood.  Should the anti-national acts of traitors be legally bounding on a future nationalist government?  Of course not.  In our eyes no legitimacy attaches to these decisions.  The guiding principle of the future must be that every act of nation-destroying committed since 23rd June 1048 is reversible in absolute.  The moral battle will be to live up to that.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:28 | #

“Should the anti-national acts of traitors be legally binding on a future nationalist government?  Of course not.  In our eyes no legitimacy attaches to these decisions.  The guiding principle of the future must be that every act of nation-destroying committed since 23rd June 1948 is reversible in absolute.”  (—GW)

Well said and amen to that.  For the States, the date is 1965 not 1948.  The principle is identical:  the 1965 Jewish Immigration Law is illegitimate.  I don’t care who or how many dupes, stooges, imbeciles and toadies voted for it, it was snuck through in stealth considering its epochal portent.  Furthermore why did the Jews spend their every waking moment from 1880 to 1965 trying to make sure this country’s borders stayed open?  In hockey if the offense shoots the puck at the net continually from 1880 to 1965 it’s going to score at least one goal no matter the state of the defense.  What in the hell are the Jews coming here for, it it’s to do shit that?  GO BACK WHERE YOU CAME FROM, JEWS, IF THAT’S HOW YOU’RE GOING TO BEHAVE!

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 10 Jul 2009 19:09 | #

Oh Das, what I would do without your eagle eye!  I know.  Spell even more badly.

Posted by Dasein on Fri, 10 Jul 2009 21:44 | #

It was just my excuse to link to your essay   As Fred said at the time, one of the very best in the racialist blogosphere.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 10 Jul 2009 23:03 | #

Yes that essay’s a classic.  When they do a compilation of our side’s landmark essays, the real stand-outs — Jim Kalb’s “Anti-racism,” and so forth — that one’ll be in it:

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/to_do_what_we_must_to_remain_who_we_are/

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 10 Jul 2009 23:14 | #

It occurs to me, this blog is coming up on five years old in October.  I dare say it’s had some influence, including influence we have no direct knowledge of (I’d say not a few important people check this blog out on a semi-regular basis, and I’d say its influence is felt by them, and through them by others whom they in turn influence, in a chain reaction).  Congratulations GW on what has to be considered a very impressive success!  If this blog folded its tent tomorrow and exited the scene, its mark would already have been stamped pretty far and wide, I expect — and indelibly.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 10 Jul 2009 23:29 | #

If FJ can write a book (consisting of a compilation of his blog posts of the past few years, I believe — though he made it available free online, I never checked it out because FJ explicitly announced, in stern tones, that people with the wrong ideas about race, fascists or what-have-you, anti-Semites, the lot, weren’t welcome to read it and, well, maybe I have a guilty conscience but I’m no gatecrasher and I was afraid that meant me), and and if Troy Southgate can write a book, then GW can, ten times better.  Material can probably be distilled from this site for a few books when you get into formal EGI and so forth.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 00:05 | #

There are a lot of people other than me to thank, Fred - some of them already gone from here.  One or two I would dearly like to return, including my good friends and comrades PF, Phil Peterson and Geoff Beck ...  Alex Zeka, who I admire but he will not associate with Constantin ... Steve Edwards, even though he went well over the top at times.  Anyhow, come 14th October there will be a celebratory post featuring some of the highlights and dramas of those five years.  It should be a gas.

Posted by Lurker on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 01:33 | #

What about Stephen Palese he has been MIA for a couple of years?

Posted by weston on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 02:38 | #

Vanished.  From googling, he had a flurry of activity in 2006.  Nothing really before or since.  Is he dead? Disillusioned? Was he someone’s sock puppet? 

It’s a shame, because he was in the top .01% of pro-white writers on the interwebs. 

Here’s a blog he (briefly) wrote at: http://turning.r8.org/ 

An article on David Duke’s site: http://www.davidduke.com/general/2167_2167.html 

His comments are worth searching for on this site as well.

Posted by Dan Dare on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 03:09 | #

Has this conversation taken a turn that it might benefit from being made the subject of a separate thread?

Posted by Bill on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 06:03 | #

Something and Nothing.

When I first saw GW’s piece On the fourth anniversary of 7/7 I scrolled down the list of contributors and was saddened by the number of quality posters who had moved on to Pastures new or dropped out, or had simply vanished.

This confirmed something that I have noticed since joining MR, looking back to older threads and posts, one cannot help but notice the list of half forgotten names that are no longer contributing.

I was going to comment on this phenomenon but felt somehow it wasn’t appropriate, but seeing that others have mentioned it too, I thought I would say my piece.

I have oft asked myself why is it that when harking back to those earlier times, (which now seem light years away) that whilst the stream of commenters continues to flow as ever, within the flow some fall by the wayside and are replaced by new faces - very much like the river of life itself, constantly being renewed.

Do these lost bloggers lose interest? Do they lose their determination to resist?  Do they give up the fight?  Do they start their own blogs?  Do they all die-off?

Perhaps they reach the point where there is nothing new left to say and wander off into the ether.

Perhaps the quietly withdraw and remain, faces cupped hard against the window looking in.

Perhaps some literally die and take their leave of this mortal website. 

Logic tells us that it is an amalgam of all these things.

It is like harking back to one’s schooldays, names once forgotten, echoing in the mind of another age.

Whatever became of them?

Posted by Dasein on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:06 | #

I was talking recently with a Belgian (Flemish) friend.  He said that the biggest problem for Flemish secession is the question of Brussels.  The idea came up of turning that into a UN(or EU)-controlled city, like what some are proposing should be done with Jerusalem.  As the demographic condition worsens, the same thing might work for other European cities (which are the main centres for non-Whites).  Hopefully it would only be temporary, until repatriation schemes could be worked out.  It would at least draw a cordon sanitaire to limit damage to the indigenous EGI.  Dan, what percentage of Britain’s non-Whites are in London?

Posted by Dasein on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 12:11 | #

GW, have you ever considered doing something like the ‘Classic Article’ theme at the Amren site?  Every so often you could bring a post that you considered top quality back to the front page.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 12:53 | #

Dan:Has this conversation taken a turn that it might benefit from being made the subject of a separate thread?

If we raise a separate thread now the October 14th post will have no function at all beyond birthday congratulations, which is rather boring and pointless.

I will answer Bill’s comment, though.

Starting a blog like this is an act of raising the flag.  People rally round constantly, and drift away constantly.  The long-term trend, reader-wise, is upward.  But still, as you say, the question that is left hanging is why able and valued contributors and commenters disappear.  Obviously, people’s health and other circumstances change.  Disillusionment and defeatism, or just plain exhaustion can also play a role.  But beyond those things, here is my take on the issue.

1. In many cases, especially among the younger ones, they see the site as having fulfilled its function, which was educational.  They believe that they have learned everything that has to be learned, and further talk is time-wasting ... just stuff about angels and pin-heads.  They are eager to go off and get something done, which is perfectly understandable.  These are the people who know least, of course, and high among their unknown unknowns is that nothing can be done until sufficient support exists - say for the creation of a white homeland on the American continent, or the establishment of a national political movement.  Whether they know it or not, internet nationalism is developing the discourse that leads to such action.  Impatience won’t make it happen any quicker.

These guys need to understand that “talk” is not an end in itself, as many of them suspect it is for us, but is part of the process - and they can contribute to that here or elsewhere.

2. People do get tired of the same old, same old.  They will find us wanting in some respect, too moderate, perhaps, or too theoretical.  They do radicalise and often head west into the Judeophobic badlands.  Geoff Beck was the classic example.

A lot of it is down to the restless and energetic human type that is drawn to nationalism.  Norman Lowell remarked in a speech at a London New Right meeting that “we are the individuals”, and this is certainly true.  Nationalism is anti-liberalism, and anti-liberals are, by definition, not herd animals.  They are likely to be difficult and demanding people, highly opinionated, very probably angry.  Instability is built into the nationalist model, and can only be tempered by a committment to kinship and comradeship.  This is not always understood by the most indefatigable “individuals”.

3. In a similar vein, people also get into a tangle over some of the contributions here.  Certain contributors can anger people a lot.  I’ve angered Northerner/AA/Anon, who certainly considers me a moral snob.  JWH was too gentlemanly to attack me by name, but he was greatly agitated by the latitude with which MR was, and is, run.  John Ray drove him and Geoff and Steve Edwards nuts, although there was no shortage of readers who were prepared to forgive John’s fondness for teasing - even Fred, who had many run-ins with him.  John tested my committment to open debate and free speech up to and beyond breaking point, and in the end, he agreed to resign.

Constantin walks a bit of a tightrope in that respect, it must be said, though his initial tendency to mistake rebelliousness for originality has moderated.  He isn’t setting out to undermine what we do, of course, which is where John finished up.  Nonetheless, for very obvious and principled reasons Finn and Alex Zeka are unable to associate themselves with someone who dallies, or has dallied, with Stalinism.  Others are equally offended by his material.  There has, though, been evidence of more sobriety and seriousness, and Con deserves - and receives - encouragement for that, at least for now.

There are doubtless hundreds of other reasons why people move on from MR - as many reasons as people.  But we do what we do, trying to develop original and radical thought within an emerging nationalist paradigm.  Everyone who is interested in that, to my mind, very necessary process is welcome to contribute here in whatever capacity they can.  The door is always open.  I hope more people continue to walk in through it than walk out and away.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 13:01 | #

Dasein,

That’s a good idea.  I hadn’t considered that possibility.  Maybe it should be tied to topicality ... something that has cropped up in the news.

Thanks a lot for the suggestion.

Posted by Don on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 16:22 | #

Guessedworker on July 11, 2009, 11:53 AM, said,  “...the question that is left hanging is why able and valued contributors and commenters disappear…”

There are two frontiers in the web-site white-activism world that are unexplored and, once noticed, render continued interest flaccid.

The first is the problem of leadership or governance for an emerging defensive white political identity.  Obviously, leadership must be carefully guarded, but how to guard against the leaders who emerge with some kind of governmental powers?  I believe that more groups designed to advance the interests of the diverse white American & European peoples have foundered on the question of leadership & governance than any other, including Judeo-smears.  But none of the white-activism web sites seem to consider it a worthy topic for discussion.  I might have missed it, but ignoring this aspect will have enormous consequences.  Discussing morality toward the other is one thing, but discussing morality toward, and power among, ourselves within groups is a very different thing.  If John Stuart Mill found a thorough discussion about power and the state worthy of thought, we certainly shouldn’t stand by and ignore this most fundamental question we will have in the years ahead.

The second is a general, but not universal, refusal by posters to relate their ideas to efforts that they have taken on the ground in awakening other diverse white people, whether successful or not.  The fastidious philosophizer, dwelling in the back reaches of the cave, struggling to read among the leaping shadows, simply cannot provide inspiration without explaining the basis for his or her thoughts in the very real, very dangerous world.  If this cannot be done here, then where do young diverse white activists go for instruction in the myriad of ways to impact the world around them?  Even John Stuart Mill (died 1873) served in Parliament (1865-8).  Here was a guy trained and educated to live in his head, but who broke free to provide inspiration for generations on political leadership & governance questions.  Are we so much smarter than Mill that we can dispense with such tangled matters?

Posted by Bill on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 17:52 | #

I only commented the other day that the term White Flight had not been readily adopted here in Britain, so I was rather surprised to see a lengthy(ish) piece over on Lee Barnes patch at
http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/  White Flight - the hidden pandemic.

Well worth a read.

Posted by Dan Dare on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 20:28 | #

… Dan, what percentage of Britain’s non-Whites are in London? – Dasein

According the latest (mid-2007) population estimates from the ONS slightly less than 6.2 million non-whites reside in the UK, representing 10.2% of the population. The non-white population of London is given as 2.34 million, thus 38% of the national total, and 31% of the population of London.

It should be noted that the official definition of ‘white’ is somewhat flexible (as it is in the US), since it includes Non-European Caucasians (NEC) originating in Asia Minor, the Middle East, North Africa, and so on. The UK population figures include close to 2 million ‘White non-British or –Irish, of whom I would imagine that at least half are NECs.

The ONS estimates can be downloaded here.

Posted by Dan Dare on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 20:58 | #

Bill - I’d intended to respond to your earlier comments about White Flight, which I agree is not a term that features very prominently in the MSM. I was going to mention Anthony Browne’s article in The Times as a notable exception, but I see that Lee Barnes has included it in his blog piece.

This was of course written during Browne’s ‘bad boy’ phase when he produced pieces in similar for Civitas, Prospect magazine, and even vdare.com amongst others. He subsequently underwent an amazing Damascene conversion when presented with the opportunity to take up a highly paid sinecure as Boris Johnson’s chief factotum. 

Browne’s grovelling recantation when summoned to the presence of Jenette Arnold, the Afro-Caribbean chairperson of the GLA, to account for his earlier thought-crime can be viewed here in all its grisly awfulness.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 22:27 | #

Not everyone thinks that White Flight is a helpful term, btw.  Don’s group (RD) is dismissive of it, seeing it as placing blame on whites for their own ethnic cleansing.  I’ve always seen it purely as a victim issue.

Dan, those two links on Anthony Browne are new to me.  How very typical but shameful to apologise to a non-white for resisting English race-replacement.  And all for public money and a foot on the political ladder.  Appalling.

Posted by Bill on Sat, 11 Jul 2009 23:20 | #

Thanks for that Dan.

The consequences of White Flight are all too plain to see and yet there is no recognition by the establishment that it is immigration and the attendant White Flight that is at the root of the housing (property) problem here in the UK.

It is my opinion that a catastrophic set of circumstances are converging within the property (housing) market, but there is no sign of awareness of this at government level.

With very little building of new homes taking place there will soon be a huge social problem in the form of housing shortages.

The BNP have been highlighting the problem for several years that British people cannot progress on the local housing lists due to preference being given to newcomers - an accusation vigorously denied by the PTB.

It is only recently that the government has, (surprise-surprise) very reluctantly and unashamedly admitted as much and have been forced to address this most unlevel of playing fields.

All of which is exacerbating the coming crisis.

The banks and mortgage providers are not releasing anywhere near the required amounts to aspiring house purchasers which has the twofold effect of slowing down the market and the further driving down prices.

There is a great government involvement in the social housing sphere as it appears that housing associations are allocating social housing via the DHSS.  IOW, the government is funding social housing in the private rental sector to a huge degree.

There is a huge backlog of applicants for non existent social housing.  Only this lunch time it was announced by the BBC that there is a waiting list in Birmingham of some 30,000 applicants.

What is going to happen when the private rental sector stock is exhausted?

There is no let up in the numbers of newcomers entering Britain, and as each day passes the housing requirements become even more acute.

I’ve just been reacquainting myself with Raspail’s Camp of the Saints, and how closely it indicates our elite’s present response that mirrors that of the liberal French in Raspail’s story.

Nick Griffin is saying we should sink their boats.  I wonder if he will tell that to Andrew Marr in tomorrow’s BBC interview.

Is Griffin going to start telling it - as it is?

If he is, it will be interesting to see how the media will respond.

Posted by Q on Sun, 12 Jul 2009 06:27 | #

Angelina Jolie made a trip to the Walter Reed Military Hospital in Washington, D.C. ...

May God bless her for that.

Posted by Bill on Sun, 12 Jul 2009 12:37 | #

Broken Britain – can we fix it?

Just another hand wringing litany about life in Britain - rolls off the liberal production line.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/5805205/Broken-Britain—-can-we-fix-it.html

For the life of me I cannot think how it has come to this. (lol)

Posted by Bill on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 07:09 | #

Council Housing = the facts

http://www.researchonline.org.uk/fskills/search/go.do?action=document&ref=B6326

Hat tip Lee Barnes.

Posted by Bill on Mon, 13 Jul 2009 07:19 | #

Council Housing = the facts

Apologies - Scrub previous above - see:- Sunday 12.07.2009

http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/

Hat tip Lee Barnes

Posted by Dasein on Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:42 | #

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/5828207/Alan-Johnson-I-dont-lose-sleep-over-prospect-of-70m-population.html

Mr Johnson ruled out imposing a cap on immigrant numbers, and insisted that he did not “lie awake at night” worrying about an increasing population due to new arrivals.

A cap on immigration would harm the economy, he said, adding that Britons should “welcome” immigrants who came to live and work here, and that he was “happy” to live in a multicultural society.

He told MPs on the Home Affairs Committee: “I do not lie awake at night worrying about a population of 70 million.

“I’m happy to live in a multicultural society. I’m happy to live in a society where we not only welcome those coming to live and work in this country, but also where we can go and live and work in other countries.”

He said the argument that immigration had made a contribution to the economy was “irrefutable”. But he added: “The argument gets more difficult when you get in to hard economic times.”

Earlier this week campaign group Migrationwatch UK warned the balance of those settling in the country would have to be reduced to 50,000 from the current level of 237,000 every year.

The Government’s points-based system is likely to cut immigrant numbers by around 8 per cent to 217,000.