|
|
|
Winner redux An interesting debate has sprung up on the BNP election thread, And the winner is .... I’ve moved the relavent comments here at the request of one of our esteemed commenters. The debate was/is a response to the notion that the existential threat all European peoples face in the West today is completely new in historical terms, and calls forth new restorative ideas. In an intellectually free and creative age ... an age not labouring under the weight of the 20th century ... radical thinkers would respond with towering expositions of the European life. The existential threat would be countered with a flood of vivifying ideologies tailored to the times, and the best and most inspiring of them to all times. The 20th century fascist ideologies would be properly understood as vigorous but really quite narrow responses to the threats of their time, enlivened in the case of the German model by some rough and ready social darwinism. They would not be seen as a solution for all times, or for ours. For now, the revolutionary wave which fascism resisted has washed over us, and the sickly decadence which National Socialism bled out of German society has penetrated us. Those lines have been breached, and the battle has been carried forward to the final redoubt of our very existence. A few decades from now we shall be on the Westwall and in Berlin. We shall be on Senlac Field, and in Stalingrad ... everywhere that men have known their very being is on the line. It is the clarification of that first verb “to be” which matters now. Our people must know what it means to be “us” - as a part of subsistent Nature, as men and as Europeans. They must know what is and is not true of us and in us, and they must know we have the right “to be” ... the right to live sovereign and free, and the right to live with ourselves and with no others, if that is what we choose. That is my prescription. It has, so far as I am aware, not been expounded in the past, probably because no man ever thought that we Europeans would ever find ourselves where we are today. But here we are, nonetheless, and we have no time - none at all - to waste on philosophical distractions which answer the wrong question. Below the fold are the comments from the “winner” thread. I hope I’ve not left out any substantive ones. ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by Frank on June 09, 2009, 03:37 AM | # I think he means to reject particular attachment to NS when it gets in the way of primary objectives, ie. racial survival. Economic appeals should be made as they appeal to voters. Economics often don’t even really matter at least compared with other issues. If a populace wants a free market, consider campaigning on it. Give voters what they want on expendable topics while remaining focused on the most important topics. Another example: if a populace doesn’t like the death penalty, remove it - who cares about an issue like that? That’s my interpretation - couldn’t resist posting it… ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by Guessedworker on June 09, 2009, 06:57 AM | # Yes, Frank. Intellectually, British nationalism was, to varying degrees, fascist from Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists through to Griffin’s ascession to the leadership of the BNP in 1999. He has pursued electability, which meant moving away from the prior manifestations of nationalist feeling. But what has happened since, I guess, the late 80s/early 90s has been a growing awareness that we Europeans are under an existential threat - a genetic threat - that forms quite a different motivation to the anti-Jewish, anti-democratic, anti-egalitarian impulses that fuelled earlier movements. In imperative terms, dealing with an existential threat surpasses promotion of political ideological preferences. We have to answer the question of our age, not that of another age, and people whose real interest has never shifted from the latter are only temporary friends. I suspect that the press is right that some members of the BNP leadership are indeed only temporary friends, and that, and not just the electability issue, may be a reason why the language the party employs is so often weak and unconvincing. ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 09, 2009, 12:15 PM | #
I wholly disagree with that statement and moreover have never read or heard one single word written or spoken by anyone connected with the BNP that seemed “weak and unconvincing.” Attacks on the BNP coming from this blog always puzzle me and cause me distress. I’m sure it’s because I’m not British and therefore am missing something. ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by Friedrich Braun on June 09, 2009, 01:04 PM | # Is your complaint that they’re not racialist enough, GW? How would that go down with the average Frankfurt School indoctrinated lemming? Not to mention the hostile media. They’re already going completely bonkers on rAYcism in the BNP. ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by Guessedworker on June 09, 2009, 01:14 PM | # Fred, Listen to the wriggling going on here: http://simondarby.blogspot.com/2009/06/tuesday-morning-goodies.html That’s what comes of lacking an ontologically nationalist foundation. It should be possible to answer the media on race, repatriation and membership in the most moral tones. But they can’t. The question is: is that wholly because they have to present a black-friendly face so they don’t get slaughtered for their “racism”, or is that because they are only aware of fascist nationalism - the politics that dare not speak its name? ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by BNP on June 09, 2009, 01:17 PM | # Firstly, ‘winning’ is about more than just posting on blogs. Secondly, as it pertains to Britain, GW wants the British people racially saved but doesn’t want politics spilling over into that other thing. Thirdly, some BNP-ers do. Fourthly, for this reason BNP leaders have to choose their words carefully. Fifthly, such carefully chosen words give the impression that BNP leaders might not be serious about repatriation. ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by Guessedworker on June 09, 2009, 03:09 PM | # Friedrich, Correct me if I am wrong, but fascism was not racist prior to National Socialism. It was a reaction to liberalism’s model of socialism with its egalitarian focus. Mussolini’s call for a politics capable of making “a clean sweep” was for then. Neither Mussolini nor Hitler nor, as far as I can see, any of the intellectuals of that era were even aware of, much less reactive to, any existential threat to their respective people. We are staring down an entirely new barrel, as you yourself acknowledge when you distinguish ultimate from proximate interests. Neither the Italian nor German political models made that distinction. We must. I tend to the view that the lack of moral and ideological clarity in Griffin’s words, and the consequent ease with which interviewers can put him on the back foot, is at least in part due to us having failed as a movement to develop a discourse of ontological nationalism. If I am wrong about all this, and ontology does not matter, then I will give up this obsession. But I can see no evidence of being wrong. I can see Griffin’s discomfort. I can see wide-open goals that are too often missed. I want to hear Griffin round on his persecutors with superior moral power. He knows it’s there. He talks about justice and righteousness. With a little effort he would unearth the moral principles of ethnic survival and ethnic interest - fundamental principles for life itself. Then the tables might be turned on the media aggressors, and the immorality of their principles and the authentic racism of their accusations might be exposed. BNP.
While “that other thing” lurks in the background, the media taunters and haters will always feel they have a point. And they might. ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by Dan Dare on June 10, 2009, 12:49 AM | # GW wrote:
In truth GW, I just can’t see how in 2009 doing what you propose would present a way forward for Griffin, or for the BNP, or for the cause of ethno-nationalism in Britain. Although present conditions are dire and would have seemed fantastically improbable to most observers merely a generation or two ago (Enoch Powell was derided as a fabulist when he forecast a BME population of 4 million for the year 2000), the harsh reality is that they are not yet nearly dire enough. Like the proverbial frogs in the slowly-heating cauldron the mass of the public has, through a combination of its social conditioning and institutionalised apathy, managed to accommodate itself more-or-less comfortably as each successive way-station has been reached on the path to demographic oblivion – the ‘creeping normalcy’ phenomenon. The ability to visualise the eventual denouément is given only to a few, and I believe that Griffin is among them. But I also believe that the political calculus is correct in assuming that the likely endgame is so incredible that only those few ‘renegades’ who have somehow evaded or otherwise transcended the aforementioned social conditioning can, in the short- and the medium-term, bring themselves to believe in its possibility. Those who like Enoch expect too much of their audience and present their prognostications in apocalyptic terms will be denounced as the prophet who ”… is despised in his own country, and in his own house, and among his own kindred.’ We all what happened to Enoch. My own view is that it will probably take another generation until the direness assumes such proportions that a Powellite message can be transmitted in the clear, received and understood by a critical mass of the indigenous population. There could be a minor seismic event when the results of the 2011 Census are announced since this will almost certainly confirm that the BME population had doubled in ten years. That will certainly assist the cause, but is unlikely to precipitate a significant tipping point. I’d also suggest (and I know you’ve been agitating along these lines as well) that one of the most crucial objectives for the BNP should be to attract some leading figures on the intellectual right into its circle of allies. I’d even propose that this is a more important goal in the short-term (say next five years) than dwelling on the all-too-likely outcome of the race-replacement strategy should that be permitted to run its course. I’m thinking of people like, for example, the demographer David Coleman at Oxford. He has published a very impressive paper on what he terms ‘The Third Demographic Transition’ which goes a long way towards providing an academically-defensible and intellectually-sound foundation for the argument that the policies being pursued by the managerial elite across the EU will result in our ethnic demise. Having somebody like Coleman on the team to transmit this message will be far more effective, I’d suggest, than giving the job to a politician, even one with the intellectual equipment of a Nick Griffin. I don’t think Coleman’s paper is available on free-view; I got it via my college’s Jstor subscription, if you would like a copy please email. ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by Friedrich Braun on June 10, 2009, 01:15 AM | # What do you propose, GW? Can you envisage all that you want without adopting measure of authoritarianism (let’s not call it fascism, since you have an aversion to the term)? How would you deal with the human rights commission and the entire anti-racism apparatus put in place over the last four decades? How would you repatriate migrants and their descendants? How will Britons react when their friends and neighbors are rounded it up for deportation? I can already imagine the mass hysteria, the hunger strikes, the asylum-seekers hiding inside churches, the crying children shown on t.v. 24/7, the international condemnations, the economic boycotts. Did I miss anything? How do you deport people en masse? It can be done (at it has been done countless times in recent history and in peace time, too), but not within the current liberal paradigm. What’s the alternative to the liberal paradigm? Small “c” conservatism? I can’t see Cameron (or Thatcher) doing what’s needed. All that small “c” conservatives can do is to prolong the agony. Conservative are very good at that. Historically, they only offer a degree of resistance to what’s in the process of occurring. In sum, they might, might slow down our decline but not do anything to turn the tide and reverse it. They’re too genteel and sensible. I regard them as being firmly ensconced inside the liberal paradigm. I honestly don’t see a way out without an authoritarian racialist ethno-state. Now, we can debate what shape or structure such as state would take but I don’t see an alternative. Frank Salter, and nobody can accuse him of harboring National Socialist sympathies, writes that that form of government was very effective in advancing the ethnic genetic interests of Germans. As you know, in his view there’s nothing more moral than the protection and advancement of the genetic interests of one’s Volk. In that sense, the National Socialist regime was the most moral that the world has ever known. What would you want the B.N.P. to do know? What line should they adopt? I’m really curious because these are issues I struggle with myself. ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by Captainchaos on June 10, 2009, 01:54 AM | # One of the reasons I assume GW recommends a thoroughgoing philosophically informed reeducation of the masses is that he believes that nativism and inevitablism juxtaposed with the liberal zeitgeist will not provide sufficient psychological traction to expel racial aliens. Also, he believes the uniformed, marching fetishizing of our obvious racial superiority is in opposition to the humility and civility which are indispensable ingredients of what is inherently morally excellent in us according to our Nature. So, obviously, he cannot therefore eschew teleology and idealism. It is just his teleology, his idealism, or perhaps even his correct or incorrect take on what is in fact morally excellent in us in fact. (He clearly believes these traits of moral excellence are more prevalent in the English, as opposed to say “Krauts”, because though he states that “Krauts” and the English are essentially the same people, he would not agree to a massive gene swap between the two, since he clearly believes something would be lost, e.g., English moral superiority over and above “Krauts”. So, he is implicitly an English supremacist, thought he believes the “world made England” is a much more benign, life affirming supremacism - for certainly the English firstly, as well as for all - than “Kraut” supremacism.) ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by Desmond Jones on June 10, 2009, 04:07 AM | # Herr Braun, Salter suggests that fascism was an over-investment in biological group interests at the expense of individual and foreign interests. And, that an “ethnicised constitution resulting in catastrophes such as Nazi Germany initiated, that would be sufficient reason to abandon the idea altogether.” One must realise, of course, that Salter is an Australian and no doubt loyal to his ethnic interests. The English (and their Diasporas) notion of individualism differs from the German notion. German individualism is tied to the group. English individualism is bourgeois and linked to class/capital/property. English “individual liberty is limited if the freedoms which it entails pose a threat to the prevailing capitalist system.” German individualism “limit(s) its own freedom out of respect for the freedom of the other.” ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by Wandrin on June 10, 2009, 05:46 AM | # National Socialism, class etc. The people currently most directly harmed by the ongoing attempted genocide are the working class. They’re the ones who can see what is hidden from the TV screens because they see it happen in their own streets with their own eyes. I believe any attempt at a nationalist revolution has to grow in that soil first. The centre of gravity of nationalist parties seems to be in the join between the skilled working class and the lower middle class - those people who are in between capital and labour - but to branch out they need to expand into the working class first for the purely practical reason that it’s the working class who already stare the threat in the face while currently the middle classes don’t. I don’t think that will be enough on its own, partly because those same people often have such an extreme loyalty towards their traditional party you’ll never get all of them, but every advance into democratic respectability then makes it easier for nationalist parties to expand into the middle class. So I see it as a two-step: one leg steps left to gain enough working class support to get democratic respectability followed by the other leg stepping right into middle class support ending with a solid base straddling the middle. General strategy. I see the nationalist parties as more catalyst than agent - nationalist success will have ripple effects and those ripples will cause ripples and eventually the people themselves will make a revolution and *demand* certain policies. I see the key rules being : 1) The Nationalist party must make itself unacceptable to the status quo - especially the red media. As long as a nationalist party or movement picks a strategy that fits those two rules then I think the ripple effects will crack the media imposed red culture and survival instinct will drive the strategy the rest of the way. On the other hand I could be completely wrong. ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- Posted by Dasein on June 10, 2009, 10:59 AM | #
Further to Desmond’s point: Salter speaks of ‘fitness investment portfolios’. The three main sources of investment are family, ethny, and the human species. He describes NS as a ‘fitness bubble’ in that it put too much emphasis (ultimately destructive) on ethnic fitness. Of course it depends in the end how these things work out. Could/should the Germans have foreseen that this was a bubble? It worked out very well for the Europeans in North America, but the venue for expansion in 1939 was fundamentally different. Underestimating the obstinacy of the British elites was a fatal error. ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
Comments:2
Posted by cladrastis on Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:17 | #
This doesn’t make sense. In terms of fitness, why should one’s concerns extend beyond the confines of the breeding population (as for example, to the species as a whole)? Should one have radiating spheres of fitness interest at the level of the ape lineage or the mammalian lineage and so on? 3
Posted by a Finn on Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:20 | # Frank: “Economic appeals should be made as they appeal to voters. Economics often don’t even really matter at least compared with other issues. If a populace wants a free market, consider campaigning on it.” - But Dan, these things are all tied together. I started as an immigration critic, now I have to criticize in addition to it global capitalism, leftism, liberalism, system differentiation and separation, dominating power hierarchies, excessive individualism, excessive consumption, psychological propensities, family and system social integration, homo economicus, reifications, worship of money etc etc. When you pull from a single string, the whole huge mess comes to your view demanding solutions. That is the reality we live in. There is no simple solutions. 4
Posted by Wandrin on Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:22 | # As well as not fetishizing the details of past nationalist strategies I’d also strongly suggest that different countries may have different optimal strategies in the present. Taking the two rules I mentioned above:
To fit rule 2, both the overall philosophy and the individual policy positions chosen to gain electoral success will almost certainly vary between different countries. For example, I can’t see any nationalist movement in the UK having any chance of success without some acceptance of a national health service, whereas the opposite is probably true in the states. The unchangeable core is national survival and independence but I think everything else can and should vary from country to country according to what fits the particular political culture. 5
Posted by Medicist on Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:30 | #
Guenther obviously made bad predictions. What we see before our eyes is the unraveling of God’s will: Mediterraneans of Jewish extraction dominate American politics and social trends, given their cohesion and high mean IQ. France remains a bastion of Western culture and Barcelona is attracting some of the best artists/architects in the world. In contrast, Sweden—which is said to have the highest percentage of Hallstatt Nordics in a population—is collapsing under the weight of multiculturalism and multiracialism. A Swedish model married Tiger Woods and is having babies with him. You can tell where your nation is headed by how its most attractive women are breeding, Nazi-inspired political rhetoric notwithstanding. Germany is enslaved by its own guilt, and this guilt is well-deserved. Germans of the early 20th-century thought they could bully other Europeans with impunity, and built an entire ideological edifice based on false beliefs of their own racial superiority. Germany is like a spoiled child that got a whap right across the face for its flagrant misbehavior. The tenacious Slavs of the east took care of this European cancer. Britain now has hundreds of thousands of mixed-race children, further blurring its racial lines. Race-mixing is more common and widespread in Britain than anywhere else in the world. What we are going to see in the generations to come are Greek, Italian, Spanish, and Jewish Americans working their way up and further dominating American institutions, corporate, political and media. It is the Mediterranean destiny. Just as White Cubans pushed out whimpering, deracinated Anglo elites from Miami, we can expect further Mediterranean expansion in other American cities, at the expense of soft and naive Anglo Americans who welcome Rufus and Cornelius into their broken homes to fornicate with their blonde daughters. And Israel will continue to expand at the expense of the benighted Arabs, VNN rhetoric aside. 6
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:51 | # Medicist’s comment, of course, can be flushed down the toilet, from first word to last. 7
Posted by q on Wed, 10 Jun 2009 22:03 | #
For what it’s worth, I second that. 8
Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:21 | # The point is not far-fetched. Definitely the mass migration of Catholics and Jews in the previous century replaced the founding people. http://racehist.blogspot.com/2009/01/religions-of-ceos-of-large-american.html 9
Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:29 | # And some get it really f**ked up (the Anglosphere after warring with Germany, 1939-1945). If the proper strategy is balance in your ethnic portfolio, the German over-investment may ultimately serve it very well in comparison to the Anglosphere’s negative investment which will reduce the native English population to one third of the island’s numbers in a scant sixty years if trends continue. 10
Posted by Medicist on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:35 | #
Thank you for acknowledging the truth, however inconvenient it may be. Unfortunately Mr. Scrooby was unable to address my comments in a rational manner: like a teenage girl who sees a spider, he screams in a high-pitched voice hoping it will go away. Yet the web of Mediterranean dominance is upon us, as we can see in the National Alliance’s “Who Rules America” pamphlet. Mr. Scrooby, the National Socialist sympathizer that he is—which demonstrates an inferior psychological profile (who else would bank their hope on an ideology that was pummeled to death 6 decades ago, forcing its children and grandchildren to atone in the most debased manner?)—is unable to provide any new insights, for his political ideology is a mere consequence of his herd-like instinct. His writing is punctilious yet shallow. He reeks of professional and personal failure. I suggest to Mr. Scrooby that he get used to 2 Italian-American Supreme Court justices as well as other Mediterranean expansions at the highest level, if he’s American. If he’s European, he could proudly distance himself from the dregs of American far-right ideology, for such sympathies are unbecoming of any European of good breeding. 11
Posted by Texan on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:44 | # Enough with the crap, Silver. Your rhetoric is transparently inflammatory. You don’t interest anyone. 12
Posted by cladrastis on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:51 | # To Medicist: You should read James Bowery’s writings with respect to heterosity and migration. His prediction is that Mediterraneans will ultimately be displaced by more heterozygous populations closer to the center of human origins (i.e. sS-Africans). Take a look at Detroit (or Haiti or Brazil, more appropriately). Euro-nationalists of all stripes need to quit taking jabs at each other and start working together for the common good. Creating divisiveness and mutual hatred only furthers our enemy’s agenda. 13
Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:57 | #
What? You mean Southern Europeans whose birth rates are in the cellar? You mean Northern African and Levantine Mediterraneans whose group average IQs are in the cellar? You mean Southern Europeans in America who make up a minority of American Whites and are lumped in with the rest of us as concerns affirmative action discrimination and ideologically and ethnically motivated demonization? Who you really mean, and what you are really driving at is, the alleged waxing and permanence of Jewish power, though you disingenuously conflate that with a rising “Mediterranean dominance”.
What a crude little wedge you are attempting to drive between Nordic and Med Europeans, whilst transparently deflecting attention from Jews by crowding them in with “Mediterraneans”. Shithead.
So a European of “good breeding” betrays is own people to displacement, predation and death? LOL! Have you ever had the tip of a jackboot propelled up your ass? 14
Posted by Texan on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:59 | #
Perhaps that’s the entire point. 15
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 01:28 | #
No, I merely abide by an old Russian proverb: “When a dog barks, a man doesn’t answer; still less does a man answer when a dog turd barks.” 16
Posted by Medicist on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:07 | #
It’s humorous that you proudly suggest that Meds and Nords are in it together, and write about “demonization,” when nothing in established educational and media institutions attempts to degrade the Mediterranean peoples like some of the material in this very forum—ludicrous ideas pertaining to the Nord’s alleged superior racial consciousness and bravery, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. As I pointed out, race-mixing is more prevalent and widespread in Britain than in any other European country today. British racial nationalists are but cuckolds: their tax dollars fund the rising illegitimacy rate in their nation, whose offspring are increasingly of mixed race. Any Mediterranean who contributes to or sympathizes with the general ideological thrust of this web site is an absolute fool. But no worries. On occasion a Southron firebrand like me will pop up to remind you of how marginalized you are with your own people. Wash, rinse and repeat. The effluvium emanating from this site is reflexively dismissed by most people.
I suggest you read anthropological material other than what’s on Stormfront or like-minded sites. Most anthropologists classify Jews as racially Mediterranean, or of a branch within the Mediterranean subrace.
The wedge was already established (see above). My prediction is that the virulence of websites like this will increase in intensity as their adherents finds their dreams further unrealizable. My purpose, as an emissary of the Mediterranean God, is to remind you of where you stand in the grand scheme of things. Such reminders can be painful, indeed. 17
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:43 | # This dagoe twerp must go around to all the anti-race-replacment sites and spout his dagoe bullshit. (He confuses them all with Stormfront.) It’s beyond pathetic. The most pathetic part of all is when he refers to himself as a “southron.” Southrons aren’t dagoes, asshole. And then when he flatters himself that he’s a “firebrand.” A firebrand no less! Guido here a “firebrand”! Just like Patrick Henry and Saint-Just don’t ya know! Way too weird. The guy is strictly toilet-flush material. 18
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:47 | # By the way, Italians aren’t dagoes. Only dagoes are dagoes. Like you, Guido. Now drop off. 19
Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:50 | # Medicist is Iceman. Jewish crypsis in the rise of “Mediterranean dominance” is his laughable dream. Jewish alleles are not good for the soul. His message to us: ‘No one will listen to you because no one does now therefore they never will so there.’ LOL! Could this piece of shit put the mind fuck on a cucumber? 20
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:54 | #
They’re both white. You’re a freaking dagoe. Deal with it. 21
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:56 | # You’re sure he’s Icetard? Or are you guessing? I’d say no way, it’s not the Iceman. 22
Posted by Lurker on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 03:28 | # Fred, dont worry about who it is, its a dog turd with access to a computer. 23
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 03:51 | # One could argue that the seething hatred which so-called “Meds” like this have for northern European races (and you see it also, glaringly, in Dienekes Pontikos, the same seething hatred) and their consequent wishing of harm on northerners — one could argue that all this justifies Desmondism, i.e.,retaliatory antipathy toward Meds on the part of northerners. I no longer read Dienekes blog, never go there any more — had enough of his anti-nord CRAP, the same as, although more covert than, this asshole we’re dealing with now. Call this anti-nord stance of theirs “dagoism.” If any “meds” want to set themselves up as dagoes and as implacable racial enemies of northern Euros, let them go right ahead. We’ll see where it gets them in the end, pun intended. 24
Posted by Medicist on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 04:48 | # I find it humorous that Scooby thinks calling me a “dagoe” hurts my feelings in any way. I’m literally laughing my ass off as I’m typing… I’m also amused that he thinks referring to me as “dog turd” is an effective put down. Like I said about his lack of originality… Lastly, Scooby-Doo thinks referring to me as “[not] white” is supposed to hurt my feelings. I find it laughable that he thinks he’s the arbiter of Whiteness, and acts as if Supreme Court justices of superior racial stock should be honored to have his approval. This inflated sense of self is typical of WNs (as well as radical feminists and NOI types). “dog turd dagoe” 25
Posted by Medicist on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 04:55 | #
Yo Dienekes, this is some seriously funny shit. I hope you see this thread some day. Implacable Enemy of Nords 26
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 05:01 | # I recommend GW delete all comments by this guy. Why give filth a platform to drag the site down to its level? This character is an especially egregious case — I’ve seen GW delete far less offensive stuff. 27
Posted by Medicist on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 05:28 | # I suggest the reason Scooby wants this thread deleted is because it embarrasses him. It shows what an ill-humored and overly emotional creature he is, unable to keep his cool. Humorlessness: the death of any political movement. The death of the soul. 28
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:23 | # Medicist, we got your message. That’s enough now. 29
Posted by FACTIST on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:45 | # This Medicist character seems blissfully unaware of the fact that according to genetic evidence, honest anthropologists, and many brilliant scholars of racial history such as Madison Grant (see map) and Lothrop Stoddard, there is and always has been an ancient Mediterranean component to the native population of the British Isles; to quote Stoddard on how the UK’s native Meds (actually, many British Meds have quite a bit recent Nordic admixture as evidenced by their often non-brown eyes, flaxen hair [instead of solely having very dark brown or black hair like pure Meds], and medium [as opposed to short/Med] height) have strongly re-emerged in the UK ever since the Industrial Revolution:
30
Posted by Dasein on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:53 | #
Could you please show your evidence for this claim? 31
Posted by Leon Haller on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:53 | # Have any of you people ever heard of the phrase “Divide and conquer”? You are doing your enemies’ job for them. Although I’m an American, and not very knowledgeable wrt the byways of British politics, there are some general facts and principles applicable to every particular national situation throughout the whole white world. First, the white race, composed of all the European peoples, and only them (hence there is a cultural as well as biological aspect to race; otherwise, we would have to admit the various white - brunette, redhead, even blonde - Muslims I have seen, and even met, into our fold; something which for many reasons we must not do), is going extinct, at least if we maintain our collective present course. Second, every exogenous trend is running hard against us. These include, minimally: a. the non-white global population bomb (fertility rates are thankfully mostly falling, but absolute numbers will continue to rise for most of the remainder of our lifetimes); b. the white DE-population bomb, esp amongst you hedonistic pansies over in Europe (less beer and soccer, more sex, perhaps?), is worsening, as Buchanan in DEATH OF THE WEST, and Mark Steyn (Jew? who cares?) in AMERICA ALONE, have discussed in polemical but depressing detail; even if our women suddenly start wanting lots of children, as a simple but inexorable mathematical matter, it will take quite a while for our population figures even to stabilize, let alone begin to rise even absolutely (and it would take centuries to get the global Europoid percentile of Earth’s inhabitants back up to where we were in 1900 - around 30% of the total population of the planet); c. the age differential between whites and non-whites, with non-whites everywhere but Japan substantially younger than whites, with all that that will mean for shifting demographic, and ultimately military, power (as more countries gain nukes, their value will decline, and the West’s technological advantages along with it - if Iran gets the bomb, what will declining Russia do if faced with military incursions by the far younger and soon to be more numerous Iranians?); d. intra- as well as interracial global dysgenics, by which I mean, that the biological quality of whites has massively declined in the last hundred years - and I believe that the rate of decline has been accelerating (eg, hardly any of the intelligent whites I know have kids); moreover, we all know that intelligence correlates with IQ, which correlates with income, at least in the contemporary West; unfortunately, it is a sociological fact that American women (probably not too different elsewhere) in the top income decile have the fewest kids (nearly half in that decile at age 40 have NO children), while those in the lowest income decile have the most kids (I think this holds for whites, though also for minorities); e. massive racial/territorial fragmentation due to the importation of tens of millions of immigrant invaders (ie, the walls have been pretty massively breached), every one of these diverse immigrant groups, everywhere in the white world, having higher than native-white fertility levels; f. ever increasing Jewish/leftist control over the media and academic (and financial, and legal) establishments throughout the white world; g. a constant legislative tightening of free speech wrt race, including the increasing criminalization of nationalist speech in the West; h. massive anti-(white)-racist / racial integrationist / miscegenationist propaganda having now penetrated every white mind everywhere (except possibly in parts of Eastern Europe, though I’m not qualified to say), such that the only white preservationists still existent are those of us who are sufficiently informed and independent-minded - always a minority of any large population group; i. steadily increasing rates of miscegenation, as well as interracial adoptions, everywhere (ie, white females not innately opposed to interracial coupling now have no ‘unnatural’ defenses, such as traditional lack of contact with non-whites, or legal/social prohibitions). Third, following from #2, only we can save ourselves, and we will only be able to do so through a conscious act of political will. If we take no action, our race will go extinct (or, as I believe more likely, be exterminated). 32
Posted by Leon Haller on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:24 | # So what is the proper course of action to save our race? What are our options? [Alas, work beckons, but I’ll answer this quickly, with maybe a bit more tonight.] GW is absolutely correct. We need a politics whose ultimate focus is on saving the race itself (ie, race purity, race number, defensible race-demarcated territory) - NOT engaging in endless rehashes of history, or esoteric ‘theory’, or parsings of “who is white?” (frankly, we need all the allies we can muster!), or linking of the race-preservationist agenda to extraneous objectives (eg, capitalism? socialism? who cares, at least as a primary matter?). What patriot parties like the BNP must do is focus their energies on building support for the core issue: ending immigration (then later, repatriation of non-Europeans, for Europe; for America, racial secession). EVERY OTHER POSITION IS MERELY TACTICAL, AND MUST BE ADVANCED OR WITHDRAWN BASED ON HOW IT SERVES THE MACRO-AGENDA. I am not simply a racialist, but have all sorts of mostly conservative opinions on many issues. Understanding that these other opinions pertain to secondary concerns, I am perfectly willing to sacrifice any or all of them if doing so serves the macro-agenda. So the BNP should mainly stress immigration, and then more or less follow the polls on all the other political questions of the day. As soon as the BNP becomes identified as a “worker’s party”, or any other class-based, religion-based, region-based, or ideological party, it will start hemorrhaging support. The BNP must constantly seek out venues to educate people about the evils of immigration, and why it must be curtailed. The goal should not be an expectation of an eventual BNP government, but garnering of such a huge protest vote, singly identified with rejection of immigration (and covertly identified with rejection of the whole multicultural agenda), that the Tories move to stop immigration, lest they are kept out of office by a “divided Right”. if and when immigration is finally ended, then we move on to broader and more ambitious pastures. 33
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:35 | #
They never will if they have big donors who are Jewish. Big Jewish donors will refuse to donate a cent unless the party stands for open borders and race-replacement immigration. When David Cameroon says things like “I see too many white faces in Parliament” or whatever it was he said (or was it “too many white faces among Tory Party candidates”? whatever, it was something like that) when Cameroon says things like that it’s not because British voters are demanding it or he himself thinks it up, it’s because the big donors behind the scenes want it said and want policies that correspond to it (open borders, race-replacement immigration) to be the party’s policies. If the BNP were ever to attract big Jewish donors you’d see Simon Darby, Nick Griffin, and Richard Barnbrook start saying exactly the same thing: “BNP Party Chairman Nick Griffin said today when he looked around at Parliament or at the slate of BNP candidates he saw too many white faces, and he intends to do something about it.” That’s what they’d be saying if they had big Jewish donors. Count on it. As long as there are big Jewish donors there’s not a snowball’s chance in hell the Tory Party will talk sense on immigration. 34
Posted by Gudmund on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:20 | # Imho, Leon Haller has correctly diagnosed the problem but still has a sentimental compassion for jews that prevents him from diagnosing them as a major root cause of the problems we face. 35
Posted by AD on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:41 | # Enough with the crap, Silver. Your rhetoric is transparently inflammatory. You don’t interest anyone. I only posted the Guenther comment. I don’t know who this “Medicist” is, nor does it matter. Nor does your opinion of me matter. Not even slightly. Ideas matter, not personalities. (Have you any ideas, Texan? None that I can see.) Nor does the fact of what you are privilege you when it comes to generating ideas. This is a common mistake among white advocates: they believe that their racial constitution and racial passion are sufficient to make them effective racial advocates. But those things are not sufficient. Indeed, technically, they are not even necessary. Leon Haller asks the only question that matters: “what is the proper course of action to save our race? What are our options?” That is it. There is no more important question than that. Insofar as this blog fails to provide an adequate answer to that question it is irrelevant; insofar as any poster fails provide commentary that might provide an adequate answer to that question he is irrelevant; not slightly irrelevant, completely irrelevant. Leon Haller also says: I am not simply a racialist, but have all sorts of mostly conservative opinions on many issues. Understanding that these other opinions pertain to secondary concerns, I am perfectly willing to sacrifice any or all of them if doing so serves the macro-agenda. This the most effective attitude. Fortunately, racialism is completely capable of cutting across political ideologies. No political ideology requires multiracialism (except Multiracialism itself—against which a wag could might reply with Kant’s refutation of the ontological argument for God’s existence.) All political ideologies could fare as well, if not better, under monoracialism, so no “liberal” or “conservative” or “libertarian” etc is required to oppose racialism; he may have once indulged in doing so, but to continue to serves no essential purpose. or parsings of “who is white?” (frankly, we need all the allies we can muster!) Your ally is anyone who advocates separation. Technically that means an illegal Mexican could be an ally, which is terrible for recruitment purposes, but no less true for it. And that may be a despicable reality to find yourself in but it’s no less true for that either. Realistically, however, a founding stock American’s most likely allies are, in some sort of order are: the various grades of “white”; whites mixed with Arab or Castizo (3/4 Spaniard) or similar stock, who have strong American identities, and look “white” and act “white” but will have insuperable reservations about identifying as such for purposes of separation; non-whites (most likely mixed), with a strong American identity but no hope of fulfilling racial requirements. These groups will ally for cultural, not racial, reasons. From this base, broader appeals can be made to minority groups who despise each other—they can be spared the madness of multiracialism (and each other’s crime) through separation. Of course, the question “who is white” requires an answer (best answered by McCulloch’s “Racial Compact”), but the answer should not be stated in such way as to put off potential allies—a point that may have merited little consideration thirty years ago, but will be of particular importance today and in the future (ie at the point where anything politically feasible may be put together). You are fortunate in that the theoretical justifications provided for creating the mess you are in mean its solution is simply a matter of applying its antithesis: the mess was created on the basis that diversity is a strength; diversity is not a strength, so it should be undone. A process of “de-diversification” can commence, de-diversification being a positive, not a negative process: it offers hope of a new start and renewed social cohesion for those who embrace it. Silly screamers who post on this blog like Frank McGuckin, CapChaos, Gudmund will not like this proposal, but they need to face up to demographic reality. There are nothing like the numbers of racially or familially unalloyed whites as they believe. And if they wish to reach them, shooting guns won’t win them over. Separation via de-diversification is politically feasible and provides an immeasurably more effective platform from which to reach out than taking up arms ever could. I have no expectation of changing these people’s minds, nor really, of any of the people this blog attracts (walking, talking irrelevancies, essentially), but hopefully some eyes may be opened to the only non-violent solution that has any hope of success in America (indeed, one that, properly understood, gives excellent reason for optimism). 36
Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 07:29 | #
Mussolini’s historical ontology (the state as the spiritual, eternal; the individual as the transient material) are expressed in THE DOCTRINE OF FASCISM.
37
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 25 Sep 2009 00:12 | # Medicist the Dagoe is keeping himself busy introducing Silver’s readers to Dagoism: http://accidentaldissent.wordpress.com/2009/09/08/mlk-award/#comment-663 . Post a comment:
Next entry: Violence by proxy - the preferred politics of a cowardly Establishment
|
|
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) |
Posted by Guenther on Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:41 | #
The debate was/is a response to the notion that the existential threat all European peoples face in the West today is completely new in historical terms, and calls forth new restorative ideas.
It is new in degree and in suddenness, not in kind. Hans Guenther recognized the problem in his own day and wrote off Western mainstays such as Italy, Spain, and even France as being too variegated to be able to tackle race seriously. In this sense, the suddenness of the foreign onrush works in the racialist’s favor. Dan Dare calls it a slowly cooked frog but in historic terms it is the very pace of events which gives reason for hope.