“What I do want to talk about is, essentially, the Anglo-Saxon identity crises, the source of Anglophobia, the sort of spiritual disorder that I believe Anglo-Saxons are suffering from. What I want to start with is the nature of the disorder, move on to talk about the deep roots of the disorder, and then conclude by discussing a possible remedy for it.

First of all, the source of the nature of this crises seems to me is in the official description called constitutional patriotism, or civic nationalism, which translates in real terms into the idolatrous worship of the state and the corporate system - in practical terms.”

So began a speech by Prof Andrew Fraser given last March at the Inverell Forum, Australia’s famously incorrect annual celebration of dissident opinion and free speech.  The Forum organisers produce DVDs of each of the speeches, and it is thanks to MR reader John Fitzgerald that the Fraser speech is now in transcribed form and I can quote from it.

In the first part of the speech, Fraser traces the roots of white racial consciousness through the period of slave-owning in the American South, the development of white skin privilege and white equality, and the emergence in the North of the fundamentals of modern human rights.

“In Australia,” he asks, “how can you run an immigration policy on the basis of discrimination between white and non-white, especially once you start to play around with the notion of white, because white is not synonymous with Anglo-Saxon.  Afterwards you get massive numbers of Italians, Greeks and Lebanese Christians.  Are they white?  Just where is the boundary of whiteness?  So then it became human-ness that really counts.  And so you have what came to be known as the non-discriminatory immigration policy.”

Now, Fraser had begun by using the term “spiritual disorder”, so it should be no surprise that from here on the speech focuses heavily on the, as he sees it, broad failure of Christianity in the crisis of Anglo-Saxon identity.  “It’s a mistake,” he tells us, “to do what a lot of people on the right would do; blame it all on the Frankfurt School, or the Jews or, as I hear here, the Illuminate.”  Fraser roots the entire process in the Papal revolution which confined the action of kings to the secular world.  “The world becomes flattened, “he says, “God is a being, we are beings, he is an infinite being, we are finite beings ...  In that kind of context God, because he’s infinite, becomes very remote and only accessible to us through his will.”

READ MORE...

Black Oak Media, based in Cherry Valley, IL, is a worthy example of cultural dissidence which has been publishing quarterly since winter 2007.  In the editors’ own words:-

Black Oak Media is the spearhead of a direct assault on innocuous, monolithic consumer culture, and represents an atavism of a primal, human-centered worldview that unapologetically embraces all ranges of emotion and experience.

We are beyond Left and Right.  We stand against Nihilism and the corruption, pollution, decadence, and fragility of the modern world.  We stand for the farmers, artisans, small businesses, artists, entertainers, entrepreneurs, and hard working men and women that once made this country great.

We believe that folk culture must replace “popular culture,” since popular culture is no longer produced by the common people but produced for us?brightly packaged and neatly trimmed?by elites who live over a thousand miles away from their constituents.

Life isn’t an airbrushed model on a glossy magazine cover.  Los Angeles and New York City do not represent our culture.  Here at Black Oak Media, we believe that the people who live in “Middle America” have something to contribute.  Our culture is not something that is marketed to the public from distant boardrooms; it is the artistic expression of our hopes, dreams, and fears. It is something meaningful that does not ride waves of trends or conform to market interests.

Black Oak Magazine is published on-line and can be downloaded for free.  The Winter 2009 edition (pdf) features a four-page interview with Tom Sunic.

1. That the off-script longeurs and foot-in-mouth bloomers we expect from president Obama waste no time in coming, and quickly sour his honeymoon with the white American voter.

2. That “change” is quickly revealed to mean blacks being “served” by white volunteerism in various forms, with whites supposedly gaining from “seeing through their own prejudice”.  And no, it doesn’t fly.  Not for an instant.

3. That white America will begin to suspect that mainstream political America as a whole has no use for it whatsoever beyond its votes and taxes, and its “contribution” to the ethnic spoils system.

4. That the economic rigours of the year ahead cause many more white Americans to question the value of the neoliberal system, of the banking system, of fiat money.

5. That Hollywood can’t make a buck out of its anti-white “entertainment”.

6. That the falling value of university endowments cuts into the best efforts of university faculty to damage and discriminate against White students.

7. That when white Americans think of Israel they remember the Gaza Strip, not “America’s best little buddy”.

8. That when White Nationalists speak of racial politics they remember they are being heard by intelligent and discerning fellow whites.

9. That more White Nationalists will reject the anti-political notion that all they need is less Jewish power and more white racial consciousness.

10. That White Nationalists will discover that freedom and justice, as much as love, are theirs, and theirs alone, to espouse.

Happy New Year to you all.

By Diamed

As a moral principle, it is fatuous to say nothing can be done if it means having to hurt someone.  This objection is ridiculous - when the benefit outweighs the cost there is no reason not to hurt someone.  That’s the way the world works right now.  However, potential racists, especially women, may find this moral hold-up simply overpowering.  They would like things to be different, they would like everything we promise, but they’d rather all lay down and die … they’d rather close their eyes and wish all their worries away, than harm a single other person.

As a thought experiment, couldn’t we at least try to soothe these people and coddle their ridiculously oversensitive moral compasses?  If we could save the whole world without harming a single person, surely then they would start helping us and join in the salvation and survival of our own people?  The people who are largely their friends, lovers, fellow-believers at church, classmates, family, and the progenitors of their culture?  Even in this soon-to-be-majority minority America, whites will mostly stick to themselves, and de facto segregation is present everywhere.  Whites want what we have to offer.  They guiltily indulge in the joys of monoracialism and monoculturalism, keeping it secret from everyone how comfortable and happy they feel in the company of their own.  Overly effeminate, or simply raised with the ridiculous squeamishness of the modern world, their objection isn’t our ends but our means.  For those of us who realize the ends justify the means, this is just nonsense.  For those who don’t, it is a brick wall they cannot cross.

Let’s take this in context.  As we speak, 40,000 Americans die each year to car accidents.  Americans as a collective have agreed that the death of 40,000 Americans, many of them children or teenagers just starting the brightness of their lives, are worth sacrificing each year to the convenience of being able to drive everywhere.

The economy would be hampered without trucks and cars carrying large loads to places quickly, and each year, therefore, we sacrifice 40,000 virgins to the dark car god in the sky.  Whether people consciously or unconsciously decide their deaths are “worth it”, their blood is on our hands.  Under a different social system not a single one of them would have to die.

READ MORE...

Secret of the Lusitania: Arms find challenges Allied claims it was solely a passenger ship

Her sinking with the loss of almost 1,200 lives caused such outrage that it propelled the U.S. into the First World War.

But now divers have revealed a dark secret about the cargo carried by the Lusitania on its final journey in May 1915.

Munitions they found in the hold suggest that the Germans had been right all along in claiming the ship was carrying war materials and was a legitimate military target.

1) Woodrow Wilson cons his way to the Democratic nomination.
2) A ‘lone nut’ sparks WW I.
3) Most of the royal houses of Europe go the way of the dodo.
4) Gears are set in motion for Zionism.
5) Trotsky starts the pattern of mass murders in the Soviet Union leading to the Holomodor in 1932.
...

I think I better stop there because truth is no defense.

By David Hamilton

If anything defeats common sense it is trying to understand how the “Establishment”, the “elites,” apprehend the world around them.  They really seem to believe that somehow out of this ghastly racial chaos a sweet multi-racial harmony will emerge.

It is a neo-Marxist view that after chaos or breakdown there will come not the workers’ paradise of previous Marxist fantasies, but a multi-racial utopia.  Margaret Hodge, then Employment Minister, made a similar point two years ago when she acknowledged problems in her Barking constituency, then added it will be alright when we become a multi racial-society … as if this would appear by magic.  In practice though, they are destroying innocent people’s lives but don’t care because it makes them feel morally superior over those who do suffer..

On BBC Radio 4’s Moral Maze in August 2007 the multi-racialist panel talked and talked about an ideal future … but never faced what is happening in the world around them.  In Alien Nation journalist and economist Peter Brimelow, described these people as “immigration enthusiasts” - like religious enthusiasts the emotion is more important than thinking rationally.  They almost have an orgasm when talking about asylum seekers or granting amnesties.

They do not take human nature into account when discussing race-relations as they do when running their personal life, and can only deal with reality by pretending that ethnics are assimilating or have given up their identities and traditional loyalties. If they do discuss events they employ a little verbal sophistry to avoid the stark reality. Con Coughlin, daily Telegraph columnist and author of books on the Middle East and terrorism wrote on 16 December 2008, of “young Britons” attacking their own country:-

Every month, thousands of young British Muslims travel to Pakistan on holiday to visit family and friends…it is an opportunity to celebrate important religious festivals, such as the Eid feast ... or simply to spend time in the country of their own or their family’s origin.

READ MORE...

By The Narrator

The following is a “meat and potatoes” type of list illustrating some basic concepts and counterpoints to arguments we commonly see.

We’ve all had experiences linguistically dueling with others, so, by all means, add your own talking points to the list.

1. Don‘t waste your time converting atheists.

It has been said that C.S. Lewis’s classic Christian Apologetic, ‘Mere Christianity’ never converted a true atheist but convinced a multitude of agnostics to finally come off of the fence into the believer’s camp. In regards to the issues surrounding race there are similar divisions of people. Those being, True Believes (us), Racial Agnostics and Racial Atheists.  And as with Lewis’s work being most effective at moving the agnostics, likewise we should concentrate our efforts and arguments towards the Racial Agnostics instead of Racial Atheists, who are likely to reject Racialism no matter how compelling the facts presented.

You can generally distinguish between the two through basic conversation.

2. Basic facts.

Most people have no idea about the demographic predicament the White race is in. So tell them that Whites today are in fact no more than around 13% of the world’s population and dropping fast. And what that means is that minorities (non-Whites) are nearly 90% of the worlds population and growing.  Who is the minority here?

Now if they reply with, “Yeah but non-Whites are a minority in The West (or specific countries therein),” you can point out that that argument is simply compartmentalizing the issue.  Two can play that game.  Blacks are a minority in the United States … yeah, and ... Whites are a minority in the Americas.  Hispanics are a minority in America …. yeah, and … Whites are a minority in Chicago, New York, etc …

And often along the same lines we hear that, “It’s an ever-changing world.”

Well, no.  New Technological toys aside, large swaths of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the middle-east (where the majority of humans live) have seen very little to no change in the last one hundred years (or more).  Only in The West is the ever-changing world, ever-changing.  Other areas have been able to integrate new technologies into theirsocieties without much alteration to their day-to-day lives.

READ MORE...

There may be in the cup
A spider steep’d, and one may drink, depart,
And yet partake no venom, for his knowledge
Is not infected: but if one present
The abhorr’d ingredient to his eye, make known
How he hath drunk, he cracks his gorge, his sides,
With violent hefts. I have drunk,
and seen the spider.

A Winter’s Tale, Act 2. Scene 1, speech of Leontes, King of Sicilia

For reasons of familiarity, where a single national model has had to be used for discussion here I have used a post-Britain England - a nation freed from the British yoke, and contemplating anew the grounds for citizenship.  But this essay is about the ethics of the preservation of all the peoples native to Western Europe.  If a white ethno-state ever solidifies in the North American continent it would be adaptable to that too. 

It is an essay of three parts.  The first explores the preservation of our ethnic being as the principle upon which citizenship qualification must rest.  The second is about the rights of the collective over those of the individual. The last is about the primacy of justice for all the wrongs done to us these last six decades over justice for all those who find themselves nationless through no fault of their own.

Jus sanguinis endogamous

Ethnic cleansing, forced removals, racial purity, the one drop rule ... these are some of the names that have been given to that spider in the cup.  Some are more vexing than others ... vexing, that is, to one steeped only in the morals and sensibilities of the liberalism that has gripped the West since the end of World War Two.  But any thinking nationalist who is seriously intent on confronting the issue of blood, soil and citizenship in a post-liberal age must arm himself with an ethical counterweight to these morals and sensibilities - one that licences the survival of his people.

The legal basis for citizenship of a modern Western nation tends to be drawn as widely as possible.  Birth to at least one citizen by blood (Jus sanguinis), birth within the borders of the nation (Jus solis), and naturalization are usually all thrown into the mix.  As a crowd-puller, it works only too well.

READ MORE...