I’ve decided to vote for Mitt Romney and enthusiastically recommend that others, including die-hard Obama and Ron Paul supporters, vote for him. I do this with with a vague feeling of nausea because I know I’ll be misunderstood. Please let me explain. I’m not kidding. I’m serious as a heart attack about this endorsement.

The government’s scientific establishment has been suppressing a technology that would disintermediate virtually all centralized structures of civilization: cold fusion. The general elite attitude has been that something that can save the world dare not come out of a podunk university—let alone one in Utah. There’s also the vague unconscious sense that disintermediation on that scale would upset just about every establishment apple-cart, but that’s not the proximate reason for the suppression. It’s really just religious piety showing obescience to the Ivy League that’s the bottom line on why we don’t, today, have a completely clean, decentralized and virtually limitless energy source you can by at Home Depot for a few hundred dollars. This is so entrenched in the scientific establishment—so much of the “church of physics” claim to piety depends on maintaining this falsehood that it really would take Presidential attention to counteract it enough that even private capital, let alone public funding, would be allocated appropriate to the potential.

So what has this to do with Mitt Romney?

Mitt Romney has made a comment, about as ignorant is you can get, about cold fusion that is, despite its ignorance, a positive comment. Understand that to the government’s physics establishment this is tantamount to a candidate for Pope proclaiming Beelzebub a candidate for Sainthood. Moreover, being a Mormon, he is far from biased against a major discovery coming out of Utah. Although in this particular case the Mormon university BYU’s scientist, Steven Jones, played a significant role in helping the scientific establishment suppress cold fusion, that bit of history is obscure enough that it falls well beyond the abject level of knowledge that Mitt Romney has displayed about cold fusion.

Four years ago Barack Hussein Obama II was elected to the office of President of the United States of America.  It was something new, and while everybody in White Nationalism saw the “hope” nonsense and the “change” nonsense for what it was, by no means every White Nationalist was unhappy about Obama’s victory.  Some even voted for him.

There was, of course, another, darker, grittier hope of change, born in the belief that, inevitably, white Americans would be pushed closer to, and perhaps even beyond, what they can bear.  The hand of federal government control would grow heavy.  The economy would slump.  The taxes would increase.  The racial injustice would mount.  Everything in the white American life would become worse, and not by a little but a lot.  Anger, frustration and cynicism would take hold.  A search for alternatives beyond the GOP, beyond the prescribed news of the media, would take hold too, and WN’s long hoped-for change in the somnolence of white America would come closer.

Well, we got the Tea Party and Arizona SB 1070, I suppose.  But tomorrow the incumbent is expected by most onlookers to secure his second term.  So what do WNs expect “worse-wise” from that, and how do they assess the viability of the “worse is better” scenario?  Are we seeing any movement at all in the white American thrall to the mainstream?  What, after all, would it look like?  How long would it take to become obvious?  And what, if anything, can be expected to develop in the next four years?

Leicester is the tenth largest city in England, and the first, it is said, in which the English natives have been tipped over into minority status (though that is not officially confirmed).  It is also the burial place of “the last English king”, and of the arising of the first English Community Group.

The group was formed last year with the help and guidance of the English charity, The Steadfast Trust.  Its first significant project has been a poll of local opinion in areas like Braunstone where there is a high proportion of English people resident.  Some 5,000 questionnaires were sent out, and 112 were returned completed.  That’s a 2.24% response rate.  Now, that’s not a high rate, and probably doesn’t exceed the average vote in the city (these days) for the BNP.  But if one doesn’t pay too much heed to the number, there is some pretty startling stuff here.

The question, of course, is how far from representativeness the results are for the English of Leicester.  A YouGov study conducted in 2006 showed that 55% of respondees agreed with BNP policies when the name of the party was not attached to them, falling to 49% when it was.  So I wouldn’t write it off merely as an exercise in assorting the BNP supporters from the good folk of Leicester.

Here, anyway, are the survey results.

READ MORE...

The Atlantic’s sensational article titled “Hacking the President’s DNA” would be merely sensational (after all, we’re only talking about the DNA-targeted assassination of world “leaders”—“leaders” that are as fungible as crack cocaine) were it not for this section:

Despite a budget of $3 billion, progress did not come quickly. Even after years of hard work, many experts doubted that the time and money budgeted would be enough to complete the job.

This started to change in 1998, when the entrepreneurial biologist J. Craig Venter and his company, Celera, got into the race. Taking advantage of the exponential growth in biotechnology, Venter relied on a new generation of gene sequencers and a novel, computer-intensive approach called shotgun sequencing to deliver a draft human genome (his own) in less than two years, for $300 million.

Venter’s achievement was stunning; it was also just the beginning. By 2007, just seven years later, a human genome could be sequenced for less than $1 million. In 2008, some labs would do it for $60,000, and in 2009, $5,000. This year, the $1,000 barrier looks likely to fall. At the current rate of decline, within five years, the cost will be less than $100. In the history of the world, perhaps no other technology has dropped in price and increased in performance so dramatically….

Gathering the equipment required to do all of this isn’t trivial, and yet, as researchers have upgraded to new tools, as large companies have merged and consolidated operations, and as smaller shops have run out of money and failed, plenty of used lab equipment has been dumped onto the resale market. New, the requisite gear would cost well over $1 million. On eBay, it can be had for as little as $10,000. Strip out the analysis equipment—since those processes can now be outsourced—and a basic cell-culture rig can be cobbled together for less than $1,000. Chemicals and lab supplies have never been easier to buy; hundreds of Web resellers take credit cards and ship almost anywhere.

This is the engineering of pathogens whose virulence is targeted so specifically that it can kill only one person in the world while rendering the rest of the infected suffering from nothing more than virus-transmitting extended phenotypes such as sneezing.

An individual’s DNA is merely an extreme case of genetic correlation structure.  It is far simpler to have a less-specific genetic correlation structure be the DNA target, eg: race or ethnicity.

Moreover, there is no particular reason that the virulence of the pathogen to the target need be fatal.  For many purposes it would suffice to merely make it debilitating in some way—such as a propensity toward obesity which has a variety of effects on reproductive viability, longevity and cognition.  Or it might affect only certain areas of the brain involved in territorial defense such as the amygdala (as does HIV) without seriously impacting other aspects of the organism.

There have been rumors, for years, that Israeli scientists had been working on ethnospecific biological weapons.  There were few, if any other nation states outside of Africa in a position of sufficient ethnocentrism, moral insularity and secrecy to even consider pursuing such a program.  As the scale of the ethnospecific bioweapon laboratory decreases below that requiring the resources of a nation state, the number of such laboratories is bound to proliferate.

It is fairly clear that there may already exist several such laboratories in Asia and the Near East, and perhaps in Latin America.  In the West, the only place such laboratories plausibly exist are in the neocon-controlled bowels of the DoD, although the concentration of Dravidians, increasingly taking the CTO positions of the Fortune 1000, particularly in Silicon Valley, combined with their obvious ethnocentric designs on the United States, makes it likely they will soon have laboratories of this kind on US soil.  Similar situations obtain in Great Britain.

One thing is clear:  People with the genetic correlation structures we think of as “our” race’s DNA are not among those at the vanguard of such ethnocentric, morally insular and secretive scientists.

We can, perhaps, take some comfort in the fact that almost all of those who would target our genetic correlation structures will leave our women relatively healthy—although they might well be cognitively debilitated to make them more “tolerant” of the sexual advances of untargeted men.

An update to my series on Ocean Frontier Fertility started here at MR in 2006.

An entrepreneur dumped 100 tons of iron sulphate off the coast of Vancouver, British Columbia, causing a phytoplankton bloom, the purpose of which was to feed algae-grazing sockeye salmon and increase the harvest for Amerindian tribes economically dependent on salmon.

The globalist chattering class is in an uproar.  To listen to them, this madman is running a substantial risk of permanently damaging the fragile ecosystems being fertilized, if not the entire ocean hence biosphere.

What you won’t read in the reports of this event from venerable institutions like the National Geographic and The Smithsonian is that volcanic eruptions, nearby in the Gulf of Alaska—eruptions that dumped hundreds of tons of iron into the ocean—have historically been followed, 2 years later, by surges in sockeye salmon runs.  This isn’t even controversial.

Indeed, as described in my prior installments on “Ocean Frontier Fertility”, the prospect of iron fertilization for agriculture is so great that it is plausible that much, if not most, of the biosphere’s arable lands could be returned to their natural state—a catastrophically beneficial global environmental change.  We don’t even need to discuss whether carbon would be sequestered, let alone whether global warming is anthropogenic to see that conducting iron fertilization tests on this scale is a no-brainer “go” decision from an environmental viewpoint.

So what is really behind the globalist hysterics?  Why do they hate the environment so much that they would wish to prevent the return of the Amazon rainforest—return the Midwest US prairie and bison—return African habitats to the rare and endangered species—all while feeding the world on high quality, brain-developing protein and fish oils?  Is it that they hate African children who would benefit greatly by such nutrition?

Of course not.

They are afraid that whites might get loose again—this time to the oceans—and avoid the accelerating extinction of their unique genetic endowment of individual sovereignty bequeathed to whites by their “barbaric” culture, the way they almost did in the New World.

Its that simple.

There cannot be many of us who do not owe a debt of gratitude to Phil Rushton, both for his theoretical brilliance, allied to an unswerving devotion in most difficult professional circumstances to the cause of unpopular scientific truths, and for his steadfast, loyal European heart.  How much poorer would we all have been had Rushton not possessed these qualities ... had he merely shied away from the race question and lived an ordinary academic’s life, a quiet life, the life of an unquestioning product of his political times.

I did not discover Rushton until early in 2003.  It was at that time when I had decided to contribute something to the cause of white survival.  There was a particular question which troubled me, and which I saw as holding a key to changing the fortunes of white advocacy.  To answer it I needed a crucible, and to get that ... to construct something people would feel worthwhile writing for and reading ... I had to generate some kind of internet presence.

Cue Race, Evolution, and Behaviour.  When I came across it at Rushton’s own Darwin site, it had already been published eight years, and Rushton himself had said that he had run out of opponents to debate.  I certainly hadn’t, though.  I had found what I needed, and promptly devoured it in one sitting, reading in bed until the small hours.  For the next fourteen or fifteen months I blasted around the political blogosphere provoking every liberal, every racial egalitarian, every race-denier, every anti-racist I could into a hopeless battle about human differences and hereditarianism (hopeless courtesy of Rushton’s superb analysis), psychometrics, and gene issues generally.

A surprising number of my opponents knew of Rushton, and had a ready put-down - second- or third-hand of course.  I do not believe that a single one of them escaped the shredder.  REB’s central theory of r/K and child development was just too perfect in its internal fit.  Most of the liberal rif-raff, of course, didn’t know about this “controversial” (meaning courageous) Anglo-Canadian psychology professor, born on the Dorset-Hampshire border a couple of miles from my own birthplace and eight years distant in time.  They would, in any case, have considered their political truths inviolable to attack by one supposed racist using the theories of another.  They never had a chance.  There was metaphorical blood everywhere.

Thanks to the carnage I had something to gesture towards when the moment came, in the summer of 2004, to put together a slate of writers for a website to be titled majorityrights.com.  I never knew Rushton, and only corresponded with him very briefly.  I wish now I had had the opportunity to explain how much I extracted from his thesis and to what purpose I had put it.  He would probably have wanted to know, like most scientists, if I had correctly and faithfully represented his thought.  The answer was that REB was so beautifully and clearly written, that was an easy task.

There is not another Phil Rushton in this world.  White Nationalism has lost a true champion.  He did not live nearly long enough - gone at just 68.  But for his life and his talents and his work we equally loyal-hearted sons and daughters of old Europe can be extraordinarily grateful.  I know I am.

Something is stirring in France, and its name is Génération Identitaire:

READ MORE...