‘White privilege’ as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Thursday, 30 July 2015 03:45.

The Star

Rather than having some kind of lengthy preamble to this article, it’s better to just say this directly, and in the clearest possible language.

Much has been said about Christendom, many nationalists of many different stripes have spoken about it, but the fact is that there is no ‘White Christian Civilisation’.

It’s just someone else’s spiritual framework and someone’s else’s jurisdiction. I think it’s time to shed some light on that fact, and so this will be the first of a multi-part series on the subject.

Here’s a premier example of this framework:

Huffington Post, ‘An Open Letter to White Men in America’, 24 Jul 2015, Rev. Dr. John C. Dorhauer wrote:

Rev. Dr. John C. Dorhauer
President of the United Church of Christ, author of two books, Doctorate in White Privilege, Shalom Award recipient for peace commitments.

Dear White Men,

You are persons of privilege.

You didn’t earn it. More than likely aren’t yet prepared to either admit to it or lose it. This letter, written by one of you, is offered to invite you on a journey of insight, honesty, hard truth and just living.

[...]

Yes, that is a reverend saying that. At the Daily Stormer, they carried this article and there they highlighted the mainstream liberal aspect of the content, but they unfortunately did not mention the root of the matter.

The narrative of your ‘white privilege’ acting as a justification for the expropriation of everything that you have in your own lands is not an aberration or a distortion of Christianity as some Christian ‘nationalists’ would propose. Rather, this is the logical and final trajectory of what Christianity is about and what Christianity does.

It is an inescapable fact that Christian churches have a tendency to preach doctrines advocating your dispossession and extinction. The fact that Dorhauer is a Shalom Award recipient is not an accident or an aberration. Most Christian authorities are openly in collaboration with Jewish lobby groups. Occasionally there are what appears to be exceptions to this rule, such as an occasional bishop or pastor criticising Jewish cultural power. But those are exceptions that only prove the rule.

Christianity is not a European religion, it originated in the Levant and its fundamental ethnic character is one that caters to its original owners. It was Saul of Tarsus, who would later be known as ‘Paul’, who projected Christianity into the Graeco-Roman world. The doctrines that ‘the meek shall inherit the earth’, and that ‘the last shall be first’ are ideas that were comforting to the lower classes in the Roman Empire and which stifled the will of the strong by stamping out diversity of belief and of thought, and stacked up their own funeral pyre for them.

Centuries later, as Rome was becoming crippled under an internal rot caused partly by Christians, the co-opted Roman state then imposed Christianity at spear-point onto all Indo-European peoples that it encountered, and spread from there.

But how precisely does it operate? Let’s tackle that now.

To understand its mechanism, you have to check with its owners:

Jewish Encyclopedia: The unedited full-text of the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia, ‘GENTILE’:

A word of Latin origin (from “gens”; “gentilis”), designating a people not Jewish, commonly applied to non-Jews. [...] In its most comprehensive sense “goi” corresponds to the other late term, “ummot ha-‘olam” (the peoples of the world). Toward idolatry and the immoralities therewith connected, the Biblical writings display passionate intolerance.

[...]


Inasmuch as the Jews had their own distinct jurisdiction, it would have been unwise to reveal their laws to the Gentiles, for such knowledge might have operated against the Jews in their opponents’ courts. Hence the Talmud prohibited the teaching to a Gentile of the Torah, “the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob” (Deut. xxxiii. 4). R. Johanan says of one so teaching: “Such a person deserves death” (an idiom used to express indignation). “It is like placing an obstacle before the blind” (Sanh. 59a; Hag. 13a).

[...]

R. Emden, in a remarkable apology for Christianity contained in his appendix to “Seder ‘Olam” (pp. 32b-34b, Hamburg, 1752), gives it as his opinion that the original intention of Jesus, and especially of Paul, was to convert only the Gentiles to the seven moral laws of Noah and to let the Jews follow the Mosaic law — which explains the apparent contradictions in the New Testament regarding the laws of Moses and the Sabbath.

With the conversion of the Gentile to Christianity or to Islam, the heathen and pagan of the civilized or semi-civilized world has become almost extinct, and the restrictions placed on the ancient Gentile are not applicable to the Gentile of the present day, except in so far as to consider him a Noachian observing all moral laws, in contradistinction to the Jew, who as one of the chosen people observes in addition the Mosaic laws.

There is a price that comes when Europeans choose to make themselves into ‘Noachians’, which is to say ‘Christians’.

A society revolves around a central pole, and the location at which that pole is placed has a significant impact on the trajectory of that society’s development. In the realm of infinite possibilities, where no frame of reference is established, and there is no orientation for society, the manifestation of the heirophany—the appearance of the sacred—reveals a fixed point, a centre around which everything will revolve. The manifestation of the heirophany is what ontologically ‘founds the world’, for a given society.

By its extension it also creates a jurisdiction under which value judgements are made.

Christianity is tied to a central pole that manifests in Israel, it is anchored in Jerusalem. By attaching itself to Israel, Christian Westerners are giving Judaism a de facto jurisdiction over their lands. When the west does so, it basically is imprisoning itself under a foreign jurisdiction controlled by Jewish owners. The Christians become the wardens of that prison, even as they are in tension against the same Judaism whose ‘employ’ they are in.

This results in one of two scenarios:

  • In the event that the Christians become ethnic nationalists, they may regard the Jews as strangers, yet they themselves are strangers as well, because they themselves are effectively Jews, alienated from their own land and deputised by the very group that they fulminate against.
  • In the event that the Christians do not become ethnic nationalists, they embrace the Judaic roots of their own religion openly and revel in their own deputisation to Judaism.

But which position they choose once adhering to Christianity is irrelevant, because their social function in any society that they come to govern will inexorably and ultimately be to persecute and destroy anyone who isn’t in the Abrahamic monotheistic club which they have become entangled with, and which has ontologically traced out their world view.

This is how they will treat anyone within their captive jurisdiction who is not part of the club:

Jewish Encyclopedia: The unedited full-text of the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia, ‘GENTILE’:
Having in view the curbing of assimilation and the protection of the Jewish state and society, the legislators, men of the Great Assembly, adopted stringent measures against these Gentiles. These laws were collected and incorporated in the Mishnah, and were interpreted in the Gemara of the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds. The restrictive regulations may be classified as having been enacted for the following reasons: (1) to exalt monotheism, and Israel as a nation; (2) to combat and outlaw barbarism; (3) to overcome the unreliability of the Gentile; and (4) to counteract Gentile laws not in harmony with the humanitarian laws of the Jews.

Pay particular attention to point number four and point number two and implications of them. The Jews believe that the laws and social norms of non-Judaised populations are ‘barbarism’, and that it is their prerogative—assisted of course by the inherently Judaised Christian deputies—to bring everyone into compliance with the ‘humanitarian’ laws of the Jews.

By what methods would they try to accomplish this? By all methods. That it would result in systematic attempts to dismantle what they call a ‘barbarian’ ethnic group’s soveriengty over its own civic space is something that inheres in the logic of such a world view:

Jewish Encyclopedia: The unedited full-text of the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia, ‘GENTILE’:
The barbarian Gentiles who could not be prevailed upon to observe law and order were not to be benefited by the Jewish civil laws, framed to regulate a stable and orderly society, and based on reciprocity. The passage in Moses’ farewell address: “The Lord came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from Mount Paran” (Deut. xxxiii. 2), indicates that the Almighty offered the Torah to the Gentile nations also, but, since they refused to accept it. He withdrew His “shining” legal protection from them, and transferred their property rights to Israel, who observed His Law. A passage of Habakkuk is quoted as confirming this claim: “God came from Teman, and the Holy One from Mount Paran. . . . He stood, and measured the earth; he beheld, and drove asunder [“let loose,” “outlawed”] the nations” (Hab. iii. 3-6); the Talmud adds that He had observed how the Gentile nations steadfastly refused to obey the seven moral Noachian precepts, and hence had decided to outlaw them (B. K. 38a).

[...]

The question arose whether a Jew might share in the spoils gained by a Gentile through robbery. One Talmudic authority reasoned that the Gentile exerted himself to obtain the ill-gotten property much less than in earning his wages, to which the Mosaic law is not applicable; hence property seized by a Gentile, if otherwise unclaimed, is public property and may be used by any person.

Yes, you read that correctly. They consider that you are outside ‘the law’ and that as long as you remain outside ‘the law’, then your property rights get transferred ‘to Israel’. At the same time, if they can establish that you obtained wealth through what they call ‘robbery’, then their system passes a similar judgement which is that your property is regarded as ‘public property’, and may be ‘used by anyone’.

The concept of ‘white privilege’ is being utilised as a rhetorical device, which posits that everything—your land, your assets, your children, your philosophical heritage, your mind, really everything—is a founded upon the basis of ‘theft’, and thus open season can be declared on it, offering it up for ransacking and looting by others.

Here’s an example:

Rollingout, ‘White privilege or White pillage?’, 05 Dec 2014, Rudwaan wrote:
Whites benefited and are benefiting from White pillage, but benefits are not privileges. The bank robber benefits from his crime as long as he gets away with it, he is not privileged, he is a taker, a raper, a pillager. The mafias and cartels who pay off the authorities sworn to oppose them are not enjoying a privilege, they, like Whites, are benefiting from there illicit trade as long as they can get away with it, through the use of violence and payoffs they effectively keep the hounds of justice at bay for as long as they can. That benefit is then passed on to their offspring and subsequent generations who from a position of abject ignorance of their past operate under the sanitized illusion of ‘privilege’ when in fact they are benefactors of rape and pillage.

Above is a further extension of the concept of ‘white privilege’, where it would follow that it would even be seen as ‘legitimate’ to rape and pillage white people.

And to revisit the words of the inherently deputised Christian that were quoted at the beginning of this article:

Huffington Post, ‘An Open Letter to White Men in America’, 24 Jul 2015, Rev. Dr. John C. Dorhauer wrote:
You didn’t earn it. More than likely aren’t yet prepared to either admit to it or lose it.

Note, Reverend Dorhauer is not talking about someone’s colonial outpost here, and he is not talking about conflicts between European Americans and Native Americans. He’s talking about getting you to consent to place yourself under his jurisdiction inside your own land so that you can be found ‘guilty’ of various ‘sins’, so that he can induce you to accept the judgements that he and his cultural masters are handing down.

This bears remarkable similarity to what the Christian-convert members of the Vietnamese elite clique did to the people of Vietnam after it was culturally infiltrated by Christian proselytisers during the rule of Emperor Gia Long after 1802. By the time of the rule of Emperor Tu Duc, Vietnam was not only internally divided and unable to rationalise its own defence, but also threatened from outside, as Christians and Christian missionaries condemned the non-Christian Vietnamese people as ‘barbarians’ for having attempted to defend their ethnic genetic interests from Christian onslaught, and essentially invited France to attack Vietnam. This was one of the factors which led to the Tonkin War in 1885.

The same kind of narratives that they used against the Vietnamese, are those that are now—in slightly different form—being used against European-Americans. They make no differentiation between peoples ultimately, they see everyone as an undifferentiated mass as GW has noted, because in the Christian, Judaic, and Islamic world view, all those who refuse to subject themselves to ‘the law’ of their monotheistic desert-god, are ‘barbarians’, or ‘goyim’, or ‘infidels’—all synonyms—whose property rights are forfeit.

Subjecting yourself to that essentially Jewish jurisdiction—through Christianity—allows them to execute that warrant for expropriation against you.

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


Comments:


1

Posted by indigoxxx1 on Thu, 30 Jul 2015 11:38 | #

Sharing the wealth is a Christian doctrine and those that follow the words of Jesus should be generous. The Beggar will not waste his time in the Yiddish ghetto but will stand close to a church building to experience Christian charity. The poor would never have gotten proper medical treatment if those loyal to the words of Jesus were not present. Hitler was an Atheist who despised Christianity, many heathens would like to witness the genocide of the poor and indignant.


2

Posted by which kind of J are they? on Thu, 30 Jul 2015 12:22 | #


3

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:44 | #

That chart more or less exactly sums up the article’s basic point. It’s like all of those religions are a series of developments stemming directly from one Judaic root, recognising and revering that same tyrannical desert-god.


4

Posted by Tonto-logic on Thu, 30 Jul 2015 17:49 | #

Dessert-god very bad, Kemosahbee. Give spiritual carbohydrate to diabetic white man. Cause death.


5

Posted by Spiritual GMO on Fri, 31 Jul 2015 01:58 | #

Jews resorting to racially based ad hominem attacks, what a surprise.

“They see our spiritual GMO and its sterile seeds for what they are, an inferior and poisoned Jewish product for Gentiles, meant to subdue them.  Oy vey, call the Knesset, call the Mossad,  call pastor Hagee! Oy gaveltafish!”

 


6

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 31 Jul 2015 02:12 | #

I think that the trolls need to step up their game, at this rate they won’t be able to even provoke some good conversation out of me.

These kinds of articles will continue, they should expect at least one every two weeks, without fail, ad infinitum.


7

Posted by Harry on Fri, 31 Jul 2015 11:59 | #

The ‘What kind of Jew are you’ image is fundamentally flawed and I’m afraid shows a lack of understanding of the Bible story. Regardless, generally speaking Jews loathe Christianity and particularly Jesus. As such I’m always extremely wary of those peddling articles such as the above. The New Testament does Judaism no favours at all. Quite the reverse actually.

Of course that’s not to say that much of the Christian world hasn’t been deceived in some way. There’s Catholicism with its pagan undertones and much of the Protestant world is in the grip of the dispensationalist view of the world. Christianity, properly understood, is the antithesis of what we face.


8

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sat, 01 Aug 2015 04:36 | #

Have you actually read into the religion that you are defending, Harry? I’ll spell it out for you:

1. The Jews do not ‘loathe’ Christianity, they find it ridiculous, and they sometimes have tensions with Christians as a result.

2. When you make the Judaic religion into your own superego, you will find yourself driven to compete against the Jews for control over who is the ‘true heir’ to Judaic thought, and to Jerusalem, because of the Jews’ apparent ‘deicide’ committed by their refusal to acknowledge the seamless continuum from Mount Sinai to Calvary. I propose that you shouldn’t be acknowledging Mount Sinai in the first place.

3. Christianity supports the idea that ‘salvation is from the Jews’ (John 4:22), and that those who are not Jews are one undifferentiated mass called ‘gentiles’. So Jews get to exist so long as they are not Christians (ie, always), but under Christianity all races are supposed to cease to exist, if you actually follow what it tells you to do. In practice this means that Jews get to exist since obviously they will not convert to Christianity, and everyone else stops existing because you will ask them to convert to Christianity. Congratulations. (Galations 3:26-28)

4. When Jesus of Nazareth criticises the Pharisees, he is taking part in an in-house family quarrel, a tradition of internal criticism which was going on at that time. The reason that it appears so harsh is because Jesus adhered to the positions of the Hillel Rabbinic school, whereas many of the ‘opponents’ he encountered seemed to be of the Shammai Rabbinic School. Thus, the rhetoric would be very heated. The volume of things which they all agreed on though, was far larger than the isolated issues that they disagreed on, as would be expected. The things which they all agreed on simply were left unspoken, because they didn’t need to say it.

5. Jesus of Nazareth believed that some of the oral laws being followed by the Pharisees were not in alignment with the written law. But he definitely supported the written law of Judaism. That’s why he said that he had come to fulfil the law of the Jewish prophets ‘so as to accomplish their purpose’ by the back door. (Matthew 5:17-18)

6. Some of the Pharisees were his friends anyway. (Luke 13:29-32, Luke 11:37, Mark 12:28-29)

7. Jesus of Nazareth consciously imitated the scathing language of the Old Testament prophets in his confrontations with Jews, because that kind of language would give him the commanding presence of one of those prophets. To argue that Jesus of Nazareth was ‘anti-Jewish’ in some way just because he used scathing language on the ones that disagreed with him in debates and in geopolitical manoeuvring inside the territory of Herod Antipas, is ridiculous. It is ridiculous for the same reason that arguing that Moses, or Isaiah, or Ezekiel, or pretty much any of them you could care to name, supposedly “did the Jews no favours”, because they engaged in very harsh constructive criticism of the Jews. Since when is Jews asking other Jews to become more consistent Jews or die, a ‘dis-favour’ to Jews? Never, that’s when.

So really, how the actual fuck can you seriously be claiming that Christianity is ‘the antithesis’ of Judaism? You Christians essentially are the Jew. Or at least pseudo-Jews.


9

Posted by neil vodavzny on Sat, 01 Aug 2015 09:27 | #

It may be splitting hairs but Christ’s bloodline was Moab originating from Ruth. Bloodlines also figure in Mary Magdaleine (the da Vinci Code).
These romantic myths seem to have blended with European paganism. Christianity replaced the Mithraic cult, another sungod from Persia, adopted by the Romans (also with a Trinity).
I feel this gave Christianity a fantasy element you find in Milton’s Paradise Lost and others. The fact that Christianity is imported then adapted made it amenable to European invention.


10

Posted by DanielS on Sat, 01 Aug 2015 10:49 | #

This essay is a ground-breaking resource.

Kumiko has uncovered a rosetta stone of Judaic “jurisdiction” which exposes the academic campaign against “White privilege” as a pseudo justification to pillage White men of EVERYTHING that is theirs.

She has exposed the connection of Judaic law which provides that if the gentiles have stolen what they have then it is valid, in turn, to take from them what they have stolen.

Hence the Jewish motivation to “build a case” that Whites have stolen all they have, through “White privilege”, so that what they have is “justifiably” stolen from them in turn - not merely material resources, but everything, ranging from their natural habitat, territory, history of ideas, mind and their very co-evoluton is conceived as stolen through “white privilege” in order to ‘justify” Jewish theft and pillage; and for the groups Jews allege and deploy as aggrieved “victims” of White privilege, to pillage all that Whites have.

Blacks, such as Rudwaan quoted in the essay, are being trained to follow this Talmudic, turned Marxist, turned cultural Marxist notion to believe that they have justification to take any resource that Whites have, even to take their co-evolutionary females, even rape White women, even murder arbitrary Whites. That is ostensibly justified by “white privilege”, which is…

“...passed on to their offspring and subsequent generations who from a position of abject ignorance of their past operate under the sanitized illusion of ‘privilege’ when in fact they are benefactors of rape and pillage”


........................

I’ve minor quibbles with the essay tracing a bit too dark a path of Christianity as it made its way through ancient Rome and in line with that enunciation, taking a Nietzschean perspective to criticize its quantitative detriment to the “strong” as opposed to its advocacy of “the weak.”* Underscoring this course and these effects unnecessarily engages groan worthy, typically right-wing, elitist arguments at the expense of nationalism on solid ground of qualitative, horizontal, ecological niche differences (differences which could be ensconced in reasonably humanitarian White left nationalism) - which I hasten to add are in no way adverse to those who are doing well and better - on the contrary, would provide for their amenable grounds.

* Witness how that right wing angle needlessly opened up a moral argument for commentor number 1 above, that would have been done away with from the onset by a White Left perspective.


11

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sat, 01 Aug 2015 12:07 | #

Well, what Indigo is asking is pretty simple to address, the concerns that he has are basically the wrong concerns:

indigoxxx1 on July 30, 2015 wrote:
Sharing the wealth is a Christian doctrine and those that follow the words of Jesus should be generous.

Redistributive welfare policies are not the sole preserve of Christianity, and in the case where Christian notions of generocity arise they are flawed in three ways:

1. Christians connect their ‘generocity’ with conditions which encourage more people to convert to Christianity, which in turn causes more harm than good because the momentary gain that is accrued from the redistribution is lost in later generations as the inherently destructive effects of orientating society around an anti-racialist and anti-nationalist ideology brings down the whole population group.

2. Christian ‘charity’ groups, when acting as third sector organisations, often have incomplete data and a proselyting agenda which causes them to target their spending in ways that are unhelpful, insufficient, or actually harmful to the society that they are trying to ‘help’. There are also cases where Christian charity unwittingly helps to prop up deplorable social systems which ought to have been overthrown in revolution if it were not for the ameliorating effects of their ‘charity’. It competes against actual revolutionary groups that share nationalist or regionalist values and goals.

3. Christian ‘charity’ groups do not discriminate and view all human life as being of equal worth. This leads to absurdities like—for example—Christians trying to save foetuses that no one wants with large sums of money, when that money might instead have been better targeted toward education of children that people actually wanted to have.

What is necessary is that priorities and goals should be drafted up by the state, and spending programmes should be used to advance those goals in a properly organised way where everything is properly costed. This would be done because when it comes to administrating a state, one would want to keep citizens healthy and with a basic guaranteed income so as to ensure that in the case of war or civil strife, the working class of a nation would be willing to stand with the government against a common outside enemy, and fit enough to actualise that solidarity.

Even the basest and most self-interested warlord-clans have historically made these kinds of pro-redistributive decisions, if only to preserve the hegemony of their own class. How much more easily would an advanced society in the modern era make that same calculation?

Christian doctrines based on mawkish, indiscriminate, and universalised sentimentality would not be required to make that happen.

indigoxxx1 on July 30, 2015 wrote:
The Beggar will not waste his time in the Yiddish ghetto

No one should ever waste time in a Yiddish ghetto.

indigoxxx1 on July 30, 2015 wrote:
but will stand close to a church building to experience Christian charity.

Yes, indeed. See North Africans in Italy, for example. How are you liking that?

indigoxxx1 on July 30, 2015 wrote:
The poor would never have gotten proper medical treatment if those loyal to the words of Jesus were not present.

The NHS exists. Its continual existence—in various permutations in countries of varying religious histories—disproves your claim entirely.

indigoxxx1 on July 30, 2015 wrote:
Hitler was an Atheist who despised Christianity,

Okay. And? What does that have to do with this?

indigoxxx1 on July 30, 2015 wrote:
many heathens would like to witness the genocide of the poor and indignant.

You use the word ‘genocide’, but it doesn’t mean what you think it means. ‘Genocide’ does not mean “refusing to spend money on people that the Christians want you to spend it on, in the way that they want you to spend it”.


12

Posted by angelo spumoni on Sat, 01 Aug 2015 14:33 | #

All my pals are heathens and we are not advocating genocide of any group. It was the Christian armies with the cross on their shields that have killed millions. Heathens have no symbols or unity, they might kill individually but never in groups. A statement anywhere that you are a heathen will get you blackballed. Once on a short stay in the hospital I answered the nurse that I was a heathen and it resulted in bad service. By the way it might be better to call myself a non-believer, or godless, than a heathen.


13

Posted by Arnold on Sat, 01 Aug 2015 23:20 | #

CHRISTIANITY IS THE CANCER OF THE WHITE RACE—IT IS TIME TO GET OUT OF IT.

Thanks for the great post, Sir.  I am so glad people are starting to realize that Christianity is the problem.  The entire death of the white race is caused by the Judaists (Jews), who have infiltrated Christianity and are using it to control the goyim.

For over 100,000 years, our white ancestors thrived and culture developed, because they worshiped God and nature.  Around 300 AD, the criminal emperor Constantine, who killed his own son and multiple relatives, imposed on Europe the manufactured religion of Christianity based on Egyptian (and therefore African) mythology which Eusebius then called the “Old Testament.”

Since then, there has been constant decay, death, and destruction of the white race, due to its belief in African myths of the Old Testament, the adulation of the adherents of the barbaric African beliefs and rituals of the Torah (OT) and the Talmud (called the “Jews”) and worship of the criminal African God Yahweh.  See:

http://www.evilbible.com/evils of the torah.htm

What is more, Jesus never even existed.  See:  jesusneverexisted.com

Therefore, it is time for Whites to leave this toxic and deadly African cult called Christianity (and Judaism) and return to the peaceful religions of our ancestors—paganism, Odonism, etc. which our ancestors followed for over 100,000 years or possibly Deism.


14

Posted by Richard Spencer's hobbies over humans on Sun, 02 Aug 2015 03:34 | #

We shall propose instead, Cuckingservative: (one who poses and presents BS that would cause others to be cucked unbeknownst) e.g., Richard Spencer - Cuckoled of the bookbag Paul Gottfried.

Paul Gottfried is Richard Spencer’s puppet master who is determinedly averse to a White Left for his Jewish reasons.

I admit to a distaste for Richard Spencer from the get-go for the faggy way that he talks, but his hubris (“intellectuals like me”), his kowtowing to right-wing money (Regnery), pandering to philo Germanic overcompensation and Jews, confirms Lurker correct to place Radix among controlled oppositon.

Witness what happens when he is interviewed by Lana of RI , who asks (of all people, for f-sake) him to define “left and right”

Lana to Richard Spencer

Lana: Now I wanted to ask you this (sigh) “left vs right”, I hear so many people in altmedia saying “I’m beyond that” but is it even truly possible because everything in our world is about opposing forces, even our brain has two hemispheres; so can we be beyond “left and right.”

Richard Spencer: laughs, “wow, uh, that’s a very good way of thinking about it. I think there are probably two levels to thith. I think there’s the superficial level..and that’s the kind of thing where you take these stupid Facebook quizzes and they’ll tell you who you are kind of thing, like uh, ‘do you support abortion, do you support environmental regulations, do you support the Iraq war? oooh, we’ve determined you’re a centrist liberal or something like that.

In terms of that, these stupid slide rules, we are definitely beyond that kind of nonsense.  And as I’ve said, we should never think of ourselves as ‘conservatives only more-so.’ You know, Mike Huckabee on steroids”...

Lana: confused giggle sound.

Richard Thpenther: that’s the last thing we want to be. I think we’re definitly beyond left and right in that sense.

..but I agree with what you’re saying that there almost needs to be a tension to us and I think that’s a very intersting idea and I can kind of go back to what I was saying about the neo-conservatives - why they are an interesting movement..

..is because they actually have a tension in there, that there’s a tension in there between American nationalism and Jewish Zionism…and a kind of global, you know, democratic universalism…and they’re kind of fighting between those energies…within their hearts

Do you believe this?

they’re kind of divided unto themselves and that’s why they’re interesting..

So Paul Gottfried told him

I think that we should have that tension too, I think that..maybe you can think of a lot of these really productive tensions like the tension between our Faustian spirit and our traditional spirit.

And I think you and I are alike in this way in that we’re caught between two drives, like we wanna be traditionalists, like we understand the value of family and home and like the little things

The left isn’t supposed to be what takes a broad view on systemic group interests. No, Jews and right wing idiots should be left alone to do that for us.

...things that are organic and homemade ..and so on and so forth.. that has a deep power for us as it does for a lot of people; and that’s a good thing.

He’s trying to sound very interested and compelling now, but his condescendingess comes through clearly.

But we’re also torn between our desire to explore the universe, I mean the fact that Americans have abandoned NASA, you know space travel…

Lana: so sad

Richard Spencer: and I know that there are some technical reasons

Reasons…. such as people beholden to the right are dragging their feet and obstructing the DNA Nation project.

Spencer: but I think those reasons are of a cowardly nature.

You said it, cowering before your Jewish and other right-wing idiot cohorts where you haven’t hid away on the ski and bike trails of Montana.

Richard Spencer: But there is something of that Faustian soul that you can see in Stanley Kuberick (Jew)‘s “2001”, that desire to transcend ourselves, and I think there is a tension to go back and forth between traditionalism on the one hand and a kind of Faustian spirit on the other.

The left is supposed to be quaint and tame White people attending to the little things while Jews lead the way in “Fuastian spirt.”

Richard Spencer: I think that’s a really productive tension, that makes us better and I think that could be the kind of “left / right” divide of the future.

This fool is now presenting himself as the master of discourse (telling us how to define the left/ right divide for his convenience) when all he is really showing is that he is mastered.

Richard Spencer: and I think that could be the great “left / right” dialectic of the future.

Lana: I like that, very good.

Richard Spencer: Whereas the “grand strategy” would be to be a “social justice warrior”...its funny, you know, I see a lot of myself in my paternal grandfather, he was a big bourbon drinker… these are little things, but in a way kind of telling things.. I like that…once 9:30 P.M. hits I like to get my glass and get a good bourbon and maybe do a little bit of work and read a bit, maybe look outside… I kind of have his mentality.

Lana: there are certain nuances in European culture that I never want to see go, like table manners or chivalry.. certain aspects that I love and it would be so sad to see that disappear.

Richard Spencer: oh yeah, absolutely, this gets back to what I was talking about, the left / right of the future, there’s gonna be this tension between our Faustian nature and our traditional nature, our idea for little things, you know, little ways of doing things that are inefficient, actually

Leave efficiency to the Jews and those they buy-off. Good idea - not.

Back to somthing that Spencer said in the earlier part of the podcast:

Spencer: we need to think about the right in American and to some extent in Europe, though I think they have more similarities than they actually do differences, its a jigsaw puzzle where the pieces don’t fit. .. so one of the things that our movement can do is to start to think what are the pieces of our soul .. I think that without question, something we should think about and I think we should do more than think about it is the importance of the natural world to us… we shouldn’t just preserve it as a natural resource or due to environmentalism, we should support it….for aesthetic grounds, for spiritual grounds, as a place for renewal..one of the fundamenal reasons why I live in Montana is that I can look out and be inspired by living in a place in the mountains, by going into the forest, swimming in the lakes (laughs), biking through the trees, these are things that are just deeply important, they are more important than humans

Get that? This right-wing elitist idiot thinks his hobbies are more important than humans.

There you have it, underscoring the inherent instability of the right. That is the kind of pefidy and hubris you can expect from these sorts, who think they are better, who think they should be our leaders.

There’s also a salient example of the right’s inherent insability that the interviewer, Lana, let slip months ago in her video “St. George and The White Whore” (quite good until the very end, at minute 1:14:27, adding spuriously):

“Hitler tried to take back German lands in Poland that were annexed by The Soviet Union and what ultimately happened? The world descended upon millions of innocent Germans with bombs.”

Do you believe that she would try to pass that shit-off?

No thanks, Lana

The right is susceptible to ask you to accept all kinds of egregious BS, including anti-human, anti social, earthy crunchy “natural” muslix mixed with Hitler’s dingleberries; or propose things like Odinism (lets pass on that one, Arnold, comment 12) with its idiotic mandate to go and kill and die for a maiden in valhalla as if that’s a lot better at serving our racial group interests than Islam and its virgins in heaven.

Now Richard and Lana try to define “the left” as table manners and the little things; we are not to be troubled with “big things” - that’s for Jews and other Neo-cons.

Yeah sure, I’ll listen to you two, let you frame the terms of discussion.

No thanks Richard

Have another bourbon made of GMO corn. Have several. You need it and deserve it.

Have a few with your cucking-servative benefactors.

There is perhaps a final note of irony in placing nature beyond humans in that the Whitefish, Montana surrounds (that he values-so) stand to be vaporized by the Yellowstone supervolcno.


15

Posted by zombii on Sun, 02 Aug 2015 14:27 | #

As usual, these articles avoid (or gloss over) the fundamental core of Christianity—at least in the way most Europeans respond to it. That core being the notion that “man” has an immortal soul and IT WILL be judged by the supreme source. These aspects play into the traditional European concepts of universal truth, accounting for ones’ deeds, justice, retribution, eternal being.

Apart from variant Egyptian/Euro-pagan thought, no other culture or religious tradition even comes close to having the same level of appealing metaphysical properties to the European soul… nor do they have the track-record (i.e. Hinduism created India) to preach to Europeans.


16

Posted by Astounding rubbish on Sun, 02 Aug 2015 16:01 | #

“But it isn’t true, it isn’t history, it’s just more astounding rubbish”

http://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/mr_interview_of_kenneth_humphreys_by_james_bowery_concerning_the_syncretic


17

Posted by Harry on Sun, 02 Aug 2015 17:27 | #

I’m not sure how you can say that Jews merely find Christianity ‘ridiculous’ and ‘sometimes have tensions’ with it. The two religions are diametrically opposed. For the majority of Jews the Talmud has superseded the Torah as the most important book. Michael Hoffman has written extensively on the subject. The Talmud is rather less than flattering about Jesus.

“The ADL knows that if their staff “experts” publicly quoted the actual Talmudic statements about Christ, they would instantly reveal the institutionalised hatred and blasphemy of Jesus Christ that is formally enshrined within the religion of Judaism. Hence, the ADL dares not actually quote the Talmudic writings about Jesus.”

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/wire1.html

The diagram showing the ‘Jews’ at the top of the tree is fundamentally flawed. Strictly speaking we should start with Abraham, Issac and Jacob, none of whom were Jews. The word or term ‘Jews’ is a fairly recent creation. This article will go some way towards explaining it.

http://israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/SamaritanWoman.htm

As does this one. *

http://anglo-saxonisrael.com/content/who-were-judaeans-new-testament

Neither was Jesus a ‘Jew’. *

http://israelect.com/reference/ArnoldKennedy/Jesus was Not ‘Jewish’.pdf

Can I also recommend the correct interpretation of the word ‘gentiles’.

http://israelect.com/reference/ArnoldKennedy/‘Gentiles’.pdf

In short, because this is a vast subject, you’re confusing ‘Jews’ with Israelites and in some cases ‘Jews’ with Judahites. Many of those in Judea at the time of Christ were those “…of the Synagogue of Satan, which call themselves Jews (Judahites), and are not, but do lie…” Herod, for example, was an Edomite.

I can’t deny that much of Christianity as it’s commonly understood has been corrupted, nor that it is at least part of the problem. Christianity is though, intrinsically opposed to modern day Judaism.

Personally what we face is much broader and deeper than Judaism alone but that’s another story. What is inescapable is that true Christianity, as opposed to ‘churchianity’ or Catholicism, is under attack and is targeted for destruction. Perhaps reading the articles above will set you on the path to understanding why.

* Whilst the two articles linked to are of value I have reservations about some of the other positions taken by the authors.


18

Posted by Pythagorean on Sun, 02 Aug 2015 20:33 | #

Dr. Christian Lindtner’s Revelation of Bodhicittam,  uncovers the Pythagorean roots of the New Testament Gospels, and finds the story of Jesus Christ to have been transmitted from earlier Buddhist writings.


19

Posted by DanielS on Mon, 03 Aug 2015 01:09 | #

Harry, I am warning you and other Christians that I will not permit you to gunk up threads indefinitely with pro-Christian arguments.

In addition to wasting time and space it is largely disinformative.

I do not believe we can disuade you and there are places and sites where you can go to hash out whatever conciliatory ideas you might find among Christians and Christianity.

When Majority Rights discusses Christianity it does so from a clear postion that Christianity is pejorative. We will not be persuaded otherwise. Questions as to its merit are not something we debate for ourselves - those debates are far in our rear view mirror. Rather, we have an an eye instead on how to diagnose and recover from the damage Christianity has done and to prescribe a better moral order.

The only reason that I leave up these Christian comments is because Kumiko wants a chance to rebut this nonsense (perhaps GW would like to comment as well, e.g. on the “core” of Christianity) and show people how they might respond to it, so that onlookers can help others with arguments to defend themselves and pursue a more moral moral order.

Thus, it will provide a meta-narrative to teach the teachers who might seek to guide people away from the bum steer of Christianity.

But this will not go on indefinitely. This is not a forum granting equal time to disinformation and blockheads. To discuss these matters should be largely unnecessary.

It is clear to anyone with reason that Christianity and its texts are too interwoven with Judaism and obsolete nonsense to be efficiently servicable as guidance of the moral order of a people in the present day, and if not merely inefficient, quite tantamount to a Jewish trick.


20

Posted by Harry on Mon, 03 Aug 2015 17:01 | #

“We will not be persuaded otherwise”

By all means criticise Christianity but at least get your facts straight. As it stands it seems both yourselves and Judaism have a common aim.


21

Posted by "If not a Christian then a Jew" on Mon, 03 Aug 2015 21:09 | #

“We will not be persuaded otherwise”

By all means criticise Christianity but at least get your facts straight. As it stands it seems both yourselves and Judaism have a common aim.

Yes, we know how that goes, if you see Christianity as counter productive and entangled with Jewish narratives and interests, then you can be charged by Christians with being a Jew, or as you say, having Jewish aims.

On the other hand, if you actually participate in its nonsense, then we maintain that you are practicing a warmed-over Judaism.

I know you disagree and would attempt to debate over matters that we see as concluded. That is a diversion that we do not want or need here.

 

 


22

Posted by Langdon on expanse of Judaic jurisdiction on Tue, 04 Aug 2015 03:23 | #

Tobias Langdon elaborates the extent of Judaic jurisdiction:

Attitudes on Immigration: Compassion for Whites; Ethnic Hardball and Crocodile Tears for Jewish Activists

Tobias Langdon

What’s the population of the United States? About 320 million, you think? No, that statistic is both woefully out-of-date and grossly unjust. The actual, ethical population of the US is seven billion and rising. Funnily enough, that’s also the ethical population of the United Kingdom – and of Canada, France, Sweden and Australia. In fact, all European-majority nations have an ethical population of seven billion. Just ask Stosh Cotler, CEO of “Bend the Arc: A Jewish Partnership for Justice”:

  Right now, at least 11 million men, women, and children are living in the United States with the real fear that they could be thrown into a detention center, deported, and torn from their families at any time. These are our neighbors, our friends, and our children’s classmates. Even if we don’t have a personal connection to any of the millions of undocumented people in America, they are people whose innate dignity deserves respect.

  “Today, upwards of 30,000 people are being held in detention centers across the country, many without any way to contact their families. Every day an average of 1,120 people are put on buses and discarded across the border. This is no way to treat people who have worked hard, paid their taxes, and contributed to the country like the rest of us — they are “different” only because they lack the right papers. (Why Immigration Reform Is A Jewish Issue, NationalJournal.com, 11th April 2014)”

The logic is clear: it is nonsensical and unjust to discriminate between people who have the “right papers” for American citizenship and people who don’t. The difference between those two groups is illusory. This leads to a simple conclusion: that all seven billion people on Earth are actually American citizens. It’s just that most of them don’t have the right papers and don’t currently live there. And the same logic applies to Britain, Canada, France, Sweden, Australia and all other Western nations. Legalistic, petty-minded demands that all potential citizens of those nations have the “right papers” are a gross violation of their innate dignity as human beings.

Read Langdon’s full article at TOO

Liars like Stosh Cotler and traitors like Peter Sutherland should be getting very worried at what may happen in future. If they aren’t, I suggest that they pay more attention. Their lies and treachery are starting to fail. More and more Whites think that what’s toxic for Israel is also toxic for their nations. Third World immigrants carry with them what they are trying to escape: criminality, tribalism and low average intelligence. That’s precisely why Israel welcomes Black strangers with a big fence and lots of barbed wire. White nations need to follow Israel’s lead. After all, the Prophet Isaiah proclaims that Israel must be a “light to the Gentiles.”

 


23

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Wed, 05 Aug 2015 06:04 | #

zombii on August 02, 2015 wrote:
As usual, these articles avoid (or gloss over) the fundamental core of Christianity—at least in the way most Europeans respond to it. That core being the notion that “man” has an immortal soul and IT WILL be judged by the supreme source. These aspects play into the traditional European concepts of universal truth, accounting for ones’ deeds, justice, retribution, eternal being.

I have no intention of avoiding or glossing over those core elements of Christianity. In future articles, those will be placed under the magnifying glass as well, it will be put up for full examination with all compromises and excuses and open doors for escape barred in advance. What I’m trying to start here is not just anti-clerical polemics, but a full series of articles that will eventually lead to a fundamental examination of the total inadequacy and poverty of the Christian vision of humanity and its relationship with the-world-we-can’t-see.

My argument against Christianity, as well as against Judaism and against Islam, is not purely a utilitarian argument, it’s also an argument about the mind and the spirit. I’m opposed to being held accountable to something that purports to be radically transcendent from this world. And speaking of accountability and ‘accounting for one’s deeds’, it is precisely that god which you defend and worship - that cosmic wanna-be bully - which has no accountability to anyone. Look at the first four entries of the Decalogue, and tell me what you think is acceptable about that?

Why should we subject ourselves to something that demands everything, but offers nothing in return other than judgement and contempt?

Everyone should reject the so-called lord of heaven (Jehovah/Allah), the being which you would falsely claim ‘created’ everything in this world, the being which you claim has some right to judge us or enact retribution on us for things we do in this life.

As ethno-nationalists—we who are happy to ‘boast of the deeds of our ancestors’ and to ‘maintain blood lines’—we are striving to overcome the spiritual and political limitations placed on us by the followers of your god, we are striving to fulfil our ethnic genetic interests, and in doing so we are inexorably compelled to transgress against your god.

We will not be judged. We will tear your god down from his universal pretender-throne, the throne of the human mind, and we will reveal him to be the mere tribal god of the Jews and Arabs. And we will be standing above him, and above them.


24

Posted by Mike on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 12:17 | #

Powerful article, connects the dots like no one else has yet.


25

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 07 Aug 2015 18:22 | #

Mike on August 07, 2015 wrote:
Powerful article, connects the dots like no one else has yet.

Thanks, Mike. I hope you keep reading and keep coming back to MR.


26

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 09 Aug 2015 04:19 | #

By way of explanation: A lengthy comment by yet another of Haller and Thorn’s ridiculous friends has been removed because it was a comment blatantly campaigning for the inclusion of Semites as ‘European’. That is not allowed.

I’m a reasonable woman and I’m okay with free speech, but there are some things that I will definitely not permit to be advocated. At some stage this kind of thing is simply trolling and clogging up these threads with deliberately contrived messages which carry pro-Israeli and pro-Jewish sentiments.


27

Posted by "Cultural citizenship" & "flexible citizenship" on Sat, 22 Aug 2015 07:41 | #

Prof. Darrel Hamamoto on globalist planners against nationalist sovereignty:

http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2015/08/RIR-150821.php

“Cultural citizenship” & “flexible citizenship”


....and the Fukashima meltdown as “conspiracy” [?]... That’s Red Ice for you…


28

Posted by Calls his business a religion on Tue, 25 Aug 2015 09:36 | #

“...there are variety of types of things that you can see, including seven channels of religion in Los Angeles..it’s a very good variety of stuff and my kids watch it all.. of course they have their favorites. I have four children and they all have different things that they like to watch…you know what I tell them not to watch? Don’t watch a television show with a phone number at the bottom of the screen. Or if you see a man in brown suit smiling too much, that’s always dangerous. ...just because a man can afford his own television station and thinks that because he calls his business a religion, he will not be taxed, the I.R.S. can’t look at his books and he can exert all this political influence, then use the money to buy more television equipment and (ultimately) become his own government. I don’t like that.”

                                                - Frank Zappa


29

Posted by 1,000 Rabbis welcome Syrian Muslims to US on Fri, 04 Dec 2015 15:11 | #

Refugee Resettlement Watch, 1,000 US Rabbis sign letter to “welcome” Syrian Muslims to US, 4 Dec. 2015:

Ann Corcoran

The Washington Post is reporting the story here.  The letter was gotten together by the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (one of nine federal contractors which benefit financially from the resettlement of refugees to your towns and cities).  We told you here and here that HIAS is pulling out all the stops to pressure Congress right now.

HIAS has said it wants 100,000 Syrians to be admitted to the US before Obama leaves office, and we know that as of a few days ago 99% of the Syrians admitted in this fiscal year are Sunni Muslims.

The greater the number of Muslim immigrants admitted to the US the greater chance that someone like this poor Messianic Jew*** murdered in San Bernardino two days ago will die. (His wife says he died a martyr for his religion.)

Get this through your heads!  Muslims are not going to love you more if you help them to migrate to the West!

Did HIAS tell the Rabbis the truth?

Before they signed, did HIAS tell the rabbis that 99% of those HIAS is resettling from Syria are Muslims?

Did HIAS tell them that the UNHCR is NOT focusing on religious minorities, but almost exclusively on Sunni Muslims for America?

Brigitte Gabriel at ACT for America is famous for saying that “moderate Muslims are irrelevant” because they don’t stand up to the extremists.  This is going to sound harsh, but if you are a Jew who disagrees with HIAS and yet don’t stand up to them (or your rabbi who might be on this list), you are irrelevant too!

And to make it fair! As we pointed out here on Sunday, if your church is on this list and you don’t say anything, you aren’t only irrelevant, but complicit!

             
One of the 1,000 Rabbis signing the letter seeking more Syrian Muslim refugees for the US is Rabbi David L. Abramson. I was looking for someone from Maryland (Bethesda) and he was near the top of the list and that is the only reason I chose him to illustrate my post. Photo and bio here: http://shoreshhebrewhigh.org/faculty.html


30

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 04 Dec 2015 21:49 | #

Absolutely typical. They are trying to do what they did last time in the Iberian peninsula. First they open then gates to let in an Islamic invasion to subjugate or confuse the indigenous population groups. Afterwards, the Muslims reward the Jews for their co-operation by giving them privileged positions in the Islamic occupation government, safeguarding the financial assets of that occupation government.


31

Posted by Abrahamic Albino Laments Deal w Jewish Jurisdictio on Mon, 07 Dec 2015 11:50 | #

LOL: What did you expect?!?!

        Abrahamic Albino Laments Deal With Jewish Jurisdiction

Abrahamic Albino, “Christ-Killing Parasites Light Giant Menorah at White House”, 7 Dec 2015:

While nativity scenes are banned across the country because they offend Jews and other subhuman filth, the Jews themselves are blessed by the government in being allowed to light a gigantic menorah in front of the White House, symbolizing their total dominance of our once-proud nation.

Not to miss a beat, the satanic ritual demonstrating total Jew dominance of America was taken as an opportunity to call for ISIS in America.

Washington Examiner:

White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough used the lighting of the National Hanukkah Menorah to push President Obama’s efforts to allow refugees fleeing conflict in the Middle East into the U.S.

“So this is a joyous occasion, and yet as we heard earlier we are mindful that even as we gather here tonight, that while the light of freedom burns brightly for us and for our generation, it flickers for others,” McDonough said as he stood before a 30-foot menorah on the Ellipse in front of the White House.

“Refugees fleeing religious intolerance and oppression. People targeted for their faith, people whose faith is perverted by others,” McDonough continued. “We are Americans, and as Americans we do not turn our backs on those who seek sanctuary. Nor do we stay quiet in the face of bigotry or intolerance. We stand up for those persecuted around the world.”


32

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Mon, 07 Dec 2015 12:43 | #

It’s interesting how the Abrahamic Albino Anglin acts like there is any difference between the three Abrahamic religions when it comes to the issue of ‘the one god’. It’s cute. Rather than him acknowledging that the god of the Jews—the god which Anglin himself worships—is Jehovah, he instead tries a typical switch-game.

By consistently pretending that the Jews are somehow ‘Satanic’, he is creating confusion on purpose, because he doesn’t want people to start questioning Christianity. He wants to keep them in the veal pen that is Christianity, in hoc to the very same Jews. Making Lucifer into the ‘fall guy’ whenever things become inconvenient is a classic tactic of these disgusting people.

Never ever trust Christians, or Jews, or Muslims, to give out political analysis.


33

Posted by Truth Will Live's latest gambit on Wed, 23 Dec 2015 04:09 | #

You want Catholicism, don’t you? The only reason why you don’t want it is because it got away from all that wonderful classical music and art - and if that is not the inevitable result of Protestantism’s dissolution, it is the work of the devil. That is The Truth Will Live’s latest gambit..

Now she is proposing that the reason Catholicism is no longer popular is because it has left behind its fine classical music and art.

She is “certain” that if Catholicism would re-connect with these fine art traditions it would once again appeal to both popular audiences and those of better taste, regain its social force, as it “should”, according to her - of course - because it would bring Gentiles back into the web of Judaic jurisdiction.

She concludes that the reason that this barren Protestant aesthetic, or lack thereof, has been imposed upon Catholicism is “the work of the ‘devil.”

Hence, even worse than trying to appeal to people of taste, she is trying to scare ignorant people back into Jewish jurisdiction.


34

Posted by The Cruz's Christianity OK w Goldman Sachs on Thu, 17 Mar 2016 21:01 | #

Ted Cruz’s wife is sanctioned as an executive for Goldman-Sachs to campaign for Cruz, demonstrating that hers and Ted’s Christianity is under Abrahamic Jurisdiction and does not conflict with Goldman-Sachs agenda.


35

Posted by Building the Abrahamic coalition on Tue, 15 Nov 2016 00:58 | #

JTA:

On Monday, the American Jewish Committee and the Islamic Society of North America launched the Muslim-Jewish Advisory Council, a group of religious and business leaders from both communities who will help draft domestic policy legislation and advocate on issues of shared concern.

The ADL is planning to increase its efforts to provide support for legal and legislative efforts in the fight against anti-Muslim bigotry.

 


36

Posted by WHITES ONLY GROUP APPROVED AT MIT on Sat, 11 Mar 2017 04:48 | #

        Provided that you are an obsequious, self flagellating traitor in addition to being “huWhite”

       

DAILYKENN.com—MIT has approved a group that is exclusively white. The purpose of the group is to focus on its white privilege and report to people of color.

        - Post by DanielS



Post a comment:


Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

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

Remember me


Next entry: English genetic heritage is not German.
Previous entry: Big Mulatto Bro is watching: foil HER Mulatto Supremacist dream

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Establishment Problem

Categories

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Immigration

Islamist Threat

Anti-white Media Networks

Audio/Video

Crime

Economics

Education

General

Historical Re-Evaluation

Controlled Opposition

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Europeans in Africa

Of Note

Comments

Miss Turismo Carabobo commented in entry 'See Caracas Then Die' on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 02:30. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'The coming battle over the meaning of Brexit.' on Tue, 25 Apr 2017 22:26. (View)

SERG commented in entry 'The coming battle over the meaning of Brexit.' on Tue, 25 Apr 2017 18:00. (View)

Kumiko Oumae commented in entry 'Minister: Russia hacked Danish defence for two years' on Tue, 25 Apr 2017 13:02. (View)

Russian"Pawn Storm" phises Macron campaign commented in entry 'Minister: Russia hacked Danish defence for two years' on Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:29. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Mon, 24 Apr 2017 22:55. (View)

Captainchaos commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Mon, 24 Apr 2017 18:32. (View)

Dugin: Bannon an "ideologicl ally" commented in entry 'The Paleocon agenda behind the Alt-Right & Trump becomes explicit with Trump's attack on Syria' on Mon, 24 Apr 2017 13:33. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Mon, 24 Apr 2017 03:15. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 23:54. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 18:53. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 18:23. (View)

Kumiko Oumae commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 15:31. (View)

Kumiko Oumae commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 15:13. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 14:48. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 14:35. (View)

Kumiko Oumae commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 14:03. (View)

Dr_Eigenvector commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 13:39. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 12:07. (View)

Captainchaos commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 11:58. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 11:02. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 10:34. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 10:06. (View)

anon commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 08:48. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 07:37. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 06:30. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 06:27. (View)

Dr_Eigenvector commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 06:16. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 05:14. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 05:12. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 04:40. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 04:33. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'GW's Best Friend, Arthur Scargill (well, not really his best friend at all).' on Sun, 23 Apr 2017 03:50. (View)

Kumiko Oumae commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Sat, 22 Apr 2017 17:27. (View)

Captainchaos commented in entry 'Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn't Mean' on Sat, 22 Apr 2017 12:26. (View)

affection-tone