Majorityrights News > Category: Political Philosophy

Replace Christianity with authentic European moral order, and you’ve got something in Visegrad Group

Posted by DanielS on Friday, 09 February 2018 01:09.

Take away the Trojan Horse that is Christianity, and replace it with a moral order that is authentic to European ethno-national interests and you’ve got an example of a sound ethno-national coalition in the Visegrad Group.

Visigrad Posy, Why so much fuss about the Visegrad Group?”

By Gabor Toth, President of the V4-China association, 8 Feb 2018:

Visegrad Group – In the recent years, the international media has helped make the profile of the V4 rise significantly. It is fair to say that the V4 have never been so important and well-known around the world as nowadays. But why is that? This formation has been around since 1335! In its modern form, it has been active since its resurrection in the 1990s. So how come we haven’t really heard about it until about 2015-16?

And why the fuss about the V4, especially in European politics?

The story goes back to 2015, when a great number of both refugees and migrants mainly from the Middle East and Africa arrived at the borders of Hungary. They wanted to pass through, so they can go to Germany, Sweden and other western European countries. The Hungarian government did not allow this, saying that entering the territory of the EU can only be done legally, based on the existing treaties. The other three V4 countries quickly joined Hungary’s position, while some western countries criticized Hungary for the move.

As the burden of the crisis became heavier, the profile of the V4’s stance grew stronger. Today, only two years later, the situation has escalated so much that many experts see the V4, being the leading formation of CEE, as the only viable and strong enough opposition to the politics of Western Europe. A very clear divide has taken shape between East and West. To the west, countries that have accepted migration and multiculturalism, to the east, countries that wish to remain as they have always been. To the west, countries that are abandoning the idea of nation states and Christianity as the foundation of Europe, to the east, countries that want to stick to this foundation. Of course, this is not that simple, but these are the basic differences between the two sides.

In other words, the V4, lead by Viktor Orban, the Hungarian prime minister, have emerged as representatives of a future Europe that keeps its traditions, historic background and spiritual foundation, while some western countries, such as France, Belgium and Holland represent a future Europe with mixed societies and a way of life based on a progressive idea that the continent can be great without clearly separated nation states and many different religions can coexist, because it has happened in other places before, such as the United States.

But what will the peoples of Europe choose? Or is it really a choice they face?

History has the answer, and it is clear.

Europe and its people cannot and will not simply erase or even compromise their Christian roots and national pride. It is foolish for anyone to think that they will. It is rooted too deep in their genes, their traditions, even in their everyday habits…

This article does not mean to judge who is right or wrong. These are facts of history and those of us that live on this continent know it, even if this is something we don’t think about on a daily basis. However, when European people feel that their way of life and long spiritual foundations are questioned or even threatened, they raise their voice. This has been going on since the end of 2015, and it’s been getting more and more vocal. All eyes on Italy and Germany now. Will they take the position of the V4 and Viktor Orban? Those that say they will not, are likely to lose their bet, because all indicators show that the “opposing” side cannot come up with a clear vision for a future Europe where all peoples can live in peace and prosperity without having to change their foundations drastically. And even if that side did have a clear alternative, chances are high that the peoples of Europe would reject it, because in their mind Europe can hardly be greater than it was in those times when it was leading the world…

In football, there’s a saying: “don’t change a winning team”. Europeans love football, but more importantly, this is the way they think about being a collection of strong, Christian nation states, too. They have absolutely no reason to change their ancient, winning formula.

Interestingly, however, some western countries call for a “United States of Europe”, which is considered by some to be the alternative to the V4’s position.

But this is not entirely true, because individually strong, Christian nation states must also find a way to unite and work out a way to organize themselves into a strong, unified block. Europe is crying for a strong leader to finally get it out of the rut it’s been stuck in for a long period now. With troubles mounting on the borders of Europe and inside as well, this becomes more and more essential. Especially, if military conflicts escalate around her borders.

We can predict, that the dispute between East and West may very easily be settled in a way that Europe will turn back to its original strength by becoming a “United States of Europe”, but not at all the way some western countries imagine it, instead, as an empire of strong nation states, coordinated by the already existing, soon-to-be drastically reformed European institutions, such as the Council and the Committee. The issue is NOT with the way the EU was born and developed. It is with the way it is organized and lead.

Weak leadership and governing without a solid ideological foundation that people agree with is what’s causing the difficulties the EU is facing. Reorganizing the institutional system and placing strong leaders in their top seats, with a Council president, given that the council goes back to being the strongest of the three main institutions, which it was always meant to be. Recognizing that Christianity will make Europe great again, and instead of fighting it, using it as a starting point to reestablish the relationship of church and state, bringing back the “winning formula”. These are the steps Europe is going to take, if it follows the clear pattern of history.

Time will tell how quickly the so-called “Hungarian model” (having found a modern way of church and state relations) will spread further, but the process has begun and is speeding up notably.

The next question is Europe’s future partners in trade, because this major resurrection of the “old” Europe means a totally new alliance system as well. As power shifts from the West to the East, China’s new silk road seems to be the clear alternative. China needs a strong Europe, and Europe needs China, and the “One belt, One Road” initiative presents itself as this new alliance system with the potential to make Europe great again.

Moreover, China’s approach toward CEE countries is also evident, with the 16+1 platform and several projects already underway.

Interestingly, the V4 are in an historic position, because they hold the key to Europe’s revival, as well as the success of the 16+1. Hungary holds the presidency of the V4 until July 2018, which gives a significant advantage to the Hungarian prime minister, Orban, who is considered to be the leader of the conservative camp in Europe, and considered to be the most friendly and pragmatic leader in Europe by the Chinese.

Ironically, the “United States of Europe” that Mr. Schulz talked about would also need a strong leader, and today, there is simply no match to the success of Mr. Orban as a politician in the EU, so even if the people voted for a European President, it would not be surprising at all, if they voted for him. Of course, this is not what Mr. Schulz or other EU leaders would be happy about. While current EU leaders struggle to find solutions to their problems, something powerful is happening in the eastern front. The V4 have started to build the new Silk Road, and China appreciates this enormously.

In the coming years, as the divide between western and eastern Europe deepens, watch for the rapidly developing sentiment, that opening to the East is what will provide the solution.


The Art of the Choke - Trump’s Immigration Plan: Two Million Amnesty ‘Bigger than Obama’s’

Posted by DanielS on Wednesday, 31 January 2018 01:06.

New Observer, “Trump’s Immigration Plan: Two Million Amnesty “Bigger than Obama’s”, 26 Jan 2018:

The Trump Administration’s newly-released “immigration outline” is a “preemptive surrender” which will mean an amnesty for up to two million illegal aliens—a number far bigger than what even was contemplated during the Obama presidency, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has warned.

   

Writing on the CIS website in an article titled “The Art of the Choke,”
CIS Executive Director Mark Krikorian said that the enforcement component of the plan “is fine, as far as it goes. There’s no E-Verify, but the White House decided months ago not to push that, thinking it would be a bridge too far for Democrats, since it impacts illegals who are already here.

“But the amnesty and chain migration components are fatally flawed. The fact that the amnesty would include a path to citizenship (i.e., the beneficiaries would eventually get green cards like regular immigrants) is fine with me–if you’re going to amnesty illegal aliens, just rip off the band-aid and get it over with.”

“Instead, the issue is the size of the amnesty, or rather the universe of people who would be amnestied. If–as the White House promised just days ago–the amnesty were confined to those who now actually have DACA work permits (or even those who had them but didn’t renew), administering the amnesty would be relatively straightforward.”

“All those people are already in the DHS database, and even if they were all re-examined as part of the amnesty process (to weed out the fraudsters that snuck past Obama’s eagle-eyed DHS), it could still be done relatively quickly and with minimal disruption of the work of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the DHS component that deals with green cards, work permits, and the like.”

“But going beyond DACA beneficiaries to those who could have applied but didn’t is a different thing.”

“It’s not just a difference in degree, but in kind. A whole new process will have to be set up for the one million additional people who would be expected to apply.”

“The other work of USCIS would grind to a halt, delaying other legal immigration applications, as happened when DACA was originally implemented (and remember that Obama’s DACA amnesty was smaller than what Trump is proposing).”

“In addition, there would be an opportunity cost, with USCIS unable to pursue many urgently needed administrative reforms.”

“What’s more, expanding the amnesty beyond DACA beneficiaries is morally dubious.”

“The reason they have a compelling case for amnesty before all enforcement measures and in place and legal immigration curbed is that not only did they arrive here as minors but they voluntarily came forward and provided their information to the government.”

“Those who chose not to do so should not be granted the same extraordinary act of mercy.”

READ MORE...


Trump sought to parlay loss into media empire, Bannon warned win would spotlight Russian laundering

Posted by DanielS on Friday, 05 January 2018 02:06.

According to Wolff book: Trump was shocked by presidential victory. He had run with anticipation of a loss to Hillary based on her “fake” media support which he could parlay into a “real” media empire by contrast; Bannon warned presidential victory would spotlight Trump’s Russian money laundering; Melania cried in stress over “botched plan gone right” which actually landed the presidency for Donald.

NewsWeek, “Trump Was Horrified When He Won the White House and Melania Cried, Book Claims”, 3 Jan 2018:

No one on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign team thought Trump would actually become president—and they didn’t really want him to either, according to excerpts from Michael Wolff’s book published Wednesday in New York magazine.

Now-President Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, Donald Trump Jr., campaign manager Kellyanne Conway and first lady Melania Trump were all reportedly left dumbfounded and afraid on the night of the election in 2016, the book claims. Shortly after 8 on election night, it became clear that Trump had a real shot of becoming president. Wolff wrote that Don Jr. said his father “looked as if he had seen a ghost. Melania was in tears—and not of joy.” Steve Bannon, who helped run the Trump campaign and helped Trump’s team through the transition, said he saw Trump morph from “a disbelieving Trump and then into a horrified Trump.”

A week before the election, Trump was sure he would lose the presidency. But still, according to Wolff’s book, he told Ailes that it was “bigger than I ever dreamed of. I don’t think about losing, because it isn’t losing. We’ve totally won.”

Then he actually won.

Wolff’s claims match various reporting on Trump’s election: He certainly wanted the fame that goes along with running a successful campaign, but critics theorized that he wasn’t quite as happy claiming the job of president. In February, The New York Times reported that Trump misses his access to “fans and supporters — an important source of feedback and validation.” The Associated Press wrote that Trump didn’t even want to live in the White House.

But Wolff’s new book claims Trump and his campaign never planned to win and never wanted to accept the job that comes along with a victory. So once he did take office, the West Wing was in disarray, with Bannon, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner all operating in a free-form environment. Bannon, especially, saw his role as creating the “soul” of the White House, according to Wolff. And Trump’s own behavior was credited as not befitting the White House.

“Nothing contributed to the chaos and dysfunction of the White House as much as Trump’s own behavior,” Wolff wrote. “The big deal of being president was just not apparent to him. Most victorious candidates, arriving in the White House from ordinary political life, could not help but be reminded of their transformed circumstances by their sudden elevation to a mansion with palacelike servants and security, a plane at constant readiness, and downstairs a retinue of courtiers and advisers. But this wasn’t that different from Trump’s former life in Trump Tower, which was actually more commodious and to his taste than the White House.”

Wolff’s book Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House is to be published by Henry Holt & Co. on January 9.

The Hill, “Bannon warned Russia probe would focus on money laundering: report”, 3 January 2018:

Former White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon warned that the special counsel investigation into whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia would focus on money laundering, according to a book to be published next week.

The revelation is included in “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House,” a new book by Michael Wolff. The Guardian, which has viewed a copy, published several stories on Wednesday about the book, which includes interviews with Bannon and President Trump.

Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort was charged with money laundering in an October indictment brought by special counsel Robert Mueller, as was his associate Richard Gates.

In Wolff’s book, Bannon identifies Weissmann, an attorney on Mueller’s team, as a “money-laundering guy.”

“You realize where this is going,” Bannon said in the book. “This is all about money laundering. Mueller chose Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr and Jared Kushner. … It’s as plain as a hair on your face.”

“They’re going to crack Don Junior like an egg on national TV,” Bannon said, referring to the president’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr.

The former White House chief strategist also spoke about the 2016 meeting between Trump Jr. and a group of Russians, describing it as “treasonous.”

And Bannon in “Fire and Fury” mentioned connections between Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and loans taken out from the German Deutsche Bank that have come under scrutiny in relation to the investigation.

In December, federal prosecutors subpoenaed Deutsche Bank for records tied to Kushner’s family’s real estate business, Kushner Companies.

“It goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner shit,” Bannon said of the probe. “The Kushner shit is greasy. They’re going to go right through that. They’re going to roll those two guys up and say play me or trade me.”


Business Insider
, “I know why Steve Bannon let Michael Wolff into the White House”, 4 Jan 2018:

- Michael Wolff’s new book, “The Fire and the Fury,” is rocking the Trump White House, and it hasn’t even been released yet.

- It has the president turning on former adviser Steve Bannon. This is in part because Bannon helped Wolff gain incredible access to the White House.

- Why? Add this to the long list of ego-driven media mistakes made by the administration - a costly one at that.

- What Bannon didn’t count on was that Wolff isn’t a soldier in his army.

I feel like I write this all the time, but the White House is in chaos.

The Trump administration is being thrown by the forthcoming publication of Michael Wolff’s book “The Fire and The Fury: Inside the Trump White House.”

The excerpts, until now jealously guarded at select media outlets like New York Magazine and NBC for weeks, tell of a shockingly incompetent president and the in-over-their-heads aides who openly disrespect him. It is chaos, and someone let Wolff take a front seat and watch it all.

That person, by all accounts, was former White House adviser Stever Bannon. While Trump may have known that the biographer of his idol, Rupert Murdoch, was on site, it was Bannon who ensured Wolff had access.

Why? Consider it one part self-aggrandizement, another part a desire for acceptance, and wholly and completely a continuation of Bannon’s desperate search for ideological allies.

READ MORE...


Angela Nagle: they think voluntary outbreeding is genocide. Cultural Marxism, Jewish porn! lol.

Posted by DanielS on Sunday, 15 October 2017 01:09.

Chapo Trap House on How Richard Spencer Plays the Liberal Media, 14 June 2017:

Matt Christman

Angela Nagle (7:53): They think (also) that women making the completely voluntary choice to have children with a non-White man is White genocide (laughs) you know, it’s just so ridiculous, I mean…

Matt Christman (8:05): interjecting sarcastically: Ah, excuse me, but, “cultural Marxism” much? Frankfurt School?

Angela Nagle (8:10): Laughs uproariously

Matt Christman (8:14): “It’s not of their own volition.”

Angela Nagle (8:14): laughing

Matt Christman (8:15): Porn! Jewish produced porn has brainwashed them into thinking that big dicks are more pleasurable to have sex with.

Angela Nagle (8:22): Continues to laugh in approval of the sarcasm.

Matt Christman (8:24): They literally believe that by the way.

It has always been theoretically uncomfortable when White advocates white knight or try to counter “the misogyny” of White advocacy on behalf of White mudsharks by suggesting that they are sheerly brainwashed by cultural Marxsim.

I have tended to lay off these arguments as I believe there is truth to cultural coercion and veritable psy-ops of cultural Marxism and demoralization through Jewish porn; and it is a help to take a step away from completely deterministic, objectivist arguments; better still, as opposed to the White genders blaming one another, to look critically at Jews, who have been egregiously critical of us and divisive of White men and women. These angles are true enough to consider along with being helpful to take the pressure off of gender antipathy and to put the social realm and culture (by which I mean rule structured practices) into play.

However, the cultural Marxism angle has always been insufficiently explanatory when dealing with “voluntary” miscegenation and White genocide. The little discourse above provides occasion for correction.

Angela Nagle might believe that outbreeding is not killing European genotypes; here White advocates haven’t done that bad in showing that it (coercion that suppresses breeding of a race) can meet with the UN definition of genocide.

Matt Christman might think that all White advocates believe miscegenation and outbreeding is only a result of brainwashing; and maybe some do. But his and Angela Nagle’s mockery exposes a puerility and weakness of their own argument, which calls for exploitation through the added sophistication of the hermeneutic circle.

White females, as any females, do have base drives that can incite genetic competition, miscegenation, incline toward strong black men with big weenies (though even I, in my distaste and disrespect for blacks on the whole, would not reduce miscegenation to only these causes) an inclination that can be activated under certain circumstances - particularly by pandering to them in atavistic circumstances such as the disorder of modernity. However, for a self proclaimed leftist, Nagle is making a surprisingly reductionist, liberal, right wing argument in saying “it’s completely voluntary.” There are definitely cultural rule structures that are encouraging and promoting it; even more significantly, there are heavy taboos against criticizing it; literal laws against taking critical and opposing stances against it. These are cultural/ political violations of even the most reasonable and natural extent for mature White men (and women) to protect their kind.

This would be a part of the pleasure pain matrix that Matt Christman invokes. As White men overcome their right wing reactionary position and adopt the reality of social construction and the hermeneutic circle, they will not have to accept the “way it is-ness” of Matt Christman’s “white knighting” on behalf of mudsharks (likely overcompensating pandering for the fact that he is ugly - about as ugly as the typical black woman - and desperate to be in the good graces of Jews, if not part Jewish himself).

But as we step into hermeneutics, we move beyond the tropism of the high contrast porn episode of the gargantuan black weenie and the White woman. But first, porn does some corrective favor in the sense that it is compelled to show that we White men can be quite well hung - so, if that’s what a woman feels she needs. Finally, porn does not tend to reveal the fact that blacks are not necessarily heavy hung; I don’t need to belabor this point here, except for the fact that their Not having a big weenie does not suddenly make them OK to intermarry with by our estimation. And as a very fundamental point, we are not discriminating against White guys with big Weenies.

Our kind was averse to blacks as children, before sexuality was even an issue, let alone weenies. After that it was the presumtuousness, arrogance, hyper-assertiveness, aggression, brutal antagonism and violence against Whites. Things that the puerile might find titillating, perhaps puerile girls, but not us. Along the way, we noticed subtleties of our female co-evolutionaries which we found compelling; and the physicality of blacks generally displeasing by contrast, let alone their behavior and the fall-out of their way of life.

We did not expect that we would be blamed for everything and told we owe them everything, including those we might hope to be our wives and daughters. We never could have imagined that we would be expected to accept this in servitude. We thought others would naturally think as we do, and though some naive adults thought it was a good idea to integrate us with blacks, when we got old enough, that we would join the rest of normal Whites who want to get away from them and be with Whites.

That didn’t happen in any articulate way. And we have to confront not only the fact of cultural Marxism, but that our enemies are playing the objectivist angle where it works against us - heavily now that they’ve hoodwinked the Alt Right and other large tracts of popular culture to argue against PC and “the left.”

We have to confront the fact of thrownness, that our group co-evolutionaries can miscegenate, but by the same token, thrownness, we are thereupon able to invoke and collaborate on cultural rule structures; it is not something that we have to accept as just the way it is, merely a voluntary choice that owes nothing to the tens of thousands of years of evolutionary struggle that went into our differentiation; along with its hundreds and thousands of years of social capital.

Even if they argue that some black guy might provide a more pleasurable moment and episode than some White guy, might be more confident (and coherent of identity, in part as a Jewish backed thug coalition) in the Jewish provoked disorder of modernity, where the rule structure of our guard and classificatory boundary is down, we can easily counter that plenty of us White guys are going to provide not only quite fine moments, but as we rebuild our full class, a far more pleasurable and satisfying way of life than the blacks manage.

With that, rather than mocking and laughing at the servitude of black interests that has been imposed upon White men, we will be having the last laugh as we send miscegenators and their half cast broods to live with blacks and the way of life that they create. They will either accept that or the recognition that they are indeed the supremacists and slave masters who need to be overturned by any means necessary. Do you know Angela and Matt, a White guy might not want to be a slave, paying for the babies of the mudsharks who destroy the genome bestowed them through tens of thousand of years of struggle, might just find a White woman’s face and skin color more appealing, a European’s way of life more pleasurable.

Angela Nagle claims to be open to talking to people who are dealing in topics forbidden by PC. We have offered to talk to her and that remains a standing invitation.


True Briton & Oswald Mosley’s Union Movement

Posted by DanielS on Tuesday, 26 September 2017 02:15.

True Briton by Oswald Mosley

Oswald Mosley’s Union Movement

Oswald Mosley died in 1980 but his ideas live on. ‘Ten Points For Action’ was published forty years ago but they are still relevant. Compare these visionary policies to the paranoid fantasies of the far-right.

1) Action to Build Houses. We want Action to solve the housing problem. It should be taken out of the hands of local authorities and entrusted to Government leadership with powers to mass produce houses and flats like an ‘operation of war’, turning out homes as munitions were mass-produced in time of war.

2) Stop the Land and Rent Rackets. Give the Government the power to acquire land at pre-boom prices and to finance housing by low-interest loans, paid for by high-interest charges on all non-essential and luxury building. Such action would bring down house prices and rents and at last provide good but cheap housing for all.

3) Stop Immigration - Start Repatriation. We want Action to ease the pressure on housing and other social problems (like the reintroduction of diseases unknown in Britain for hundreds of years) by stopping all further immigration and by repatriating all post-war immigrants to good jobs and conditions in their homelands, to which prosperity had been restored by using the surplus wealth and production of united Europe. But Britain could make a start now before the complete union of Europe is achieved.

4) Choice in Education and Health. We want Action to build good schools, colleges, universities and hospitals, just as we would mass-produce houses and flats. Parents should have a choice of schools for their children. We should not be taxed to provide those health services we will never use (maternity benefits for confirmed bachelors!) but free to pay in proportion to our requirements.

5) Free Speech - Law and Order. We want Action to ensure freedom of speech for everyone, guaranteed by the Government, which has a duty to maintain law and order in the State and to take effective action against mob violence, which today denies freedom of expression to any views of which its agitators disapprove. Let us maintain local police forces with their local knowledge and experience, but let us supplement them with a highly-trained, well-equipped, mobile national police force, to put down organised crime and to maintain public order.

We would ensure freedom of the Press for both newspapers and the public. Any man who felt himself misrepresented in the Press should be guaranteed (by law) equal space to reply in the newspaper concerned. This would free the public from the expense of seeking justice through costly libel action and free the newspapers from the legal blackmail of a threatened libel action by some unscrupulous racketeer.

6) Capital Punishment. The death penalty should be restored to the statute book, to be used sparingly in the case of premeditated murder. The Court of Appeal should have a solemn duty to reprieve if in any doubt. The sentence could be carried out not by hanging, but by a quick and painless injection or by some other humane method.

7) Action in Europe. To put these policies into practice Britain must advance beyond the concept of a so-called united Europe and Common Market to which the Conservative Party has at last been converted and which the Labour Party still opposes. We must advance quickly to “Europe a Nation”, which we have advocated since 1948. We stand for a union of all Europe, our former white Dominions and southern Africa, a great “third force” independent of both America and Russia.

This “third force” must have a central government for its defence, the economy, finance and scientific development, with power to raise wages and control prices as production increases for a guaranteed market, insulated against unfair competition from the rest of the world.

We need a European army, equipped with the most modern weapons to defend our continent against attack from any quarter. This should be financed on a European budget, instead of each small country straining its economy to finance its own defence.

8) National and Regional Governments. There should be independent national and regional governments for each European country and the main regions. This would enable England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland and other European countries and regions to have their own parliaments for internal affairs and for the preservation of their national and regional cultures.

9) The Irish Problem. The ultimate solution to the Irish problem is the union of that country within a united Europe. But the bloodshed must first be brought to an end by a free vote on a county basis in each of the Six Counties and a subsequent readjustment of the border. The bulk of the Catholic population in the North would then be ruled (as is their wish) from Dublin, with a lessening of present tensions, the IRA would lose its bases in the North and the British Army would have a much shorter border to patrol against infiltration from the South. In this improved situation agreement could more easily be reached on the eventual union of Ireland, with the rights of the Protestant minority protected and guaranteed by European government.

10) Government of National Union. We stand for a government of national union and effective action, drawn from the whole nation, from the professions and the trade unions, arts and science, the law and the armed forces. Government elected by the whole people alone should govern. It should have power to lead the economy, raising wages and controlling prices as science increased production. Then we will have cooperation instead of conflict in industry.

We want Action to halt the “brain drain” and to arouse a new spirit of national service in our British people, by relating all reward directly to skill, effort, initiative and responsibility. There should be “great reward for great service”, crowned by higher pensions drawn from the wealth of the new economic system, as the reward in old age for those who had loyally served the nation throughout their lives.

Source - Bill Baillie, European Outlook, September 2017

Long Live The Sacred Nations of Europe by Oswald Mosley


James Lawrence’s anti-mod, paleocon, neo-trad, young fogeyism - kissing traditional Jewish ass.

Posted by DanielS on Monday, 25 September 2017 04:52.

Sam Francis was creating ‘young fogies’ - Alex Linder.

It’s going to require some nuance, but it is important to explain why James Lawrence is a walking piece of dog shit masquerading as a human being, a manifestation shown in his article at (((Alternative Right))):

Alternative Right, “THE COSMOPOLITAN CLASS”, 24 Sept 2017.

In brief, James Lawrence has elevated Sam Francis young fogeyism = an aspiration to conceive of oneself as precociously wry in protection of the “traditional” already Jew infested culture against “progressivism.” This is anti modernism without being sufficiently post modern (to incorporate the best while leaving behind the worst of both modern and inherited ways), as it stops with a neo-traditionalism, read (((paleoconservatism))).

Now, Francis, and by proxy Lawrence, have some things right.

Namely, that there is a significant portion of influential White people circulating among our elite functions who do not have our ethnonational interests at heart. More, that there is a managerial elite who want to share in this self interested good fortune, who will thus also betray ethno nationals in order to gain favor of this elite, internationalist power.

It is also true that both these kinds of White people can gain international backing by importing foreigners against Whites (or exporting elitist interests, e.g., compradors, against ethnonationals) and they can and do also virtue signal by sacrificing Whites and quelling any backlash against foreign impositions on ethnonationalism.

But I more accurately and descriptively call these people right wingers, and their underpinning objectivism: which is directed by Jewry - hence, Lawrence’s commitment to end his article in (((his masters))) bidding by espousing the “true right” on behalf of (((paleoconservatism))) against “the left”...“the Cosmopolitans” and the occasional bad Jew - yes, they have bad ones too, he knows.

Here Lawrence takes a turn into disingenuous speculation, by saying these Whites who betray eithnonationalism are not “traitors” - well, objectivists are not perfectly described as “traitors”, true - they are loyal to their own subjective interests through a disingenuous pretense of objectivism or naively subject to the subjective/relative interests of others through the pretense of objectivism.

Although there are distinct patterns of the treacherous Whites among elite positions, there is not necessarily a well organized elite group to which they subscribe as Lawrence would provide for the diversion of conspiracy theorists - it is more facile than that.

Indeed, the only real reason to circumscribe it so perfectly with the designation of a “Cosmopoitain” elite which is strictly loyal to its in group, is to function as a tool for Jews to deflect attention away from what is indeed their more organized half of the elite internationalist equation. So that they can point to their (((paleocons))), who can say, “see? we are the good ones”, we have paleocons who are on your side, not like those bad Jews, we’re here with you to protect your (((Christian traditions))) against those “Cosmopolitan elites” and the occasional bad Jew, like Soros and neo cons like William Kristol.

That is to say, like the site Alternative Right, James Lawrence is disguising, perhaps even to himself, the fact that he is kissing Jewish ass in order to keep his means to power afloat.

White elites who betray our interests are indeed one giant pole of our problem, but their loyalty functions a bit more arbitrarily on the happenstance of subjective fortune and selling out; along with the mutual admiration and facile croneyism of their “objective” attainment, which is why, in their unaccountabilty, they are so easily bribed and outmaneuvered by the Jewish group, which is organized as a distinct group in its relative interests (is it good for Jews?) and which will send forth posers as representatives of (((paleoconservatism))) against the “Cosmopolitan” elite.

That is to say, objectivism functions in a much more slippery way against ethnonational interests and Jewry knows how to play it - e.g., through reactionary narratives like those of Sam Francis and James Lawrence. It is a nebulous, quasi group created de facto by the ever present temptation of facile betrayal in self interest, and that is why it requires the ever present default vigilance of accountability through left nationalism and its White variant, the White class, White Left nationalism.


Jez Turner - Honour our Heroes

Posted by DanielS on Tuesday, 19 September 2017 05:04.

      * Please feel free to forward or pass on to other nationalists *

The 2017 Annual John Tyndall Memorial Meeting


Friday 6th October, 2017

Preston - Lancashire. 1pm – 6pm


Keith Axon: Meeting Chairman: - Longstanding friend of JT, former NF and BNP organiser

Speakers include (in alphabetical order):

Benny Bullman
: - lead singer of the Blood & honour band Whitelaw, and longstanding British Movement activist

Mark Collett
: - former Young BNP organizer, twice acquitted on ‘race-hate’ charges and author of Decline of Western Man

Richard Edmonds
: - Longstanding friend of JT, National Front directorate member activist - former BNP national organiser

Stephen Frost: - National secretary of the British Movement and author of the Colin Jordan biography ‘TWAS A GOOD FIGHT’!

Julie Lake: - former BNP organiser, now National Front & South West Forum organiser

Dr. James Lewthwaite: - former Bradford City Councillor, archaeology lecturer, organiser for the British Democrats and Orangeman

Eddy Morrison: - Longstanding White nationalist, former NF, BNP and WNP organiser – now editor of the online newsletter White Voice

Peter Rushton: - Assistant editor of Heritage and Destiny magazine & Russia Today and Press TV commentator

Jez Turner: – former soldier, Arabic & Pashtun translator, & now chairman of The London Forum

READ MORE...


Bannon’s disregard of ethno-nationalism is “leaked.”

Posted by DanielS on Thursday, 17 August 2017 12:38.

        ...purposefully leaked or not, apparently kissing-up to YKW

Robert Kuttner revealed his conversation with Bannon: “To me,” Bannon said, “the economic war with China is everything.” ... “Ethno-nationalism—it’s losers. It’s a fringe element. I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it, you know, uh, help crush it more.” ...“These guys are a collection of clowns,” he added.

American Prospect, “Steve Bannon, Unrepentant”, by Robert Kuttner, 16 Aug 2017:

Trump’s embattled strategist phones me, unbidden, to opine on China, Korea, and his enemies in the administration.

You might think from recent press accounts that Steve Bannon is on the ropes and therefore behaving prudently. In the aftermath of events in Charlottesville, he is widely blamed for his boss’s continuing indulgence of white supremacists. Allies of National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster hold Bannon responsible for a campaign by Breitbart News, which Bannon once led, to vilify the security chief. Trump’s defense of Bannon, at his Tuesday press conference, was tepid.

But Bannon was in high spirits when he phoned me Tuesday afternoon to discuss the politics of taking a harder line with China, and minced no words describing his efforts to neutralize his rivals at the Departments of Defense, State, and Treasury. “They’re wetting themselves,” he said, proceeding to detail how he would oust some of his opponents at State and Defense.

Needless to say, I was a little stunned to get an email from Bannon’s assistant midday Tuesday, just as all hell was breaking loose once again about Charlottesville, saying that Bannon wished to meet with me.

Needless to say, I was a little stunned to get an email from Bannon’s assistant midday Tuesday, just as all hell was breaking loose once again about Charlottesville, saying that Bannon wished to meet with me. I’d just published a column on how China was profiting from the U.S.-North Korea nuclear brinkmanship, and it included some choice words about Bannon’s boss.

“In Kim, Trump has met his match,” I wrote. “The risk of two arrogant fools blundering into a nuclear exchange is more serious than at any time since October 1962.” Maybe Bannon wanted to scream at me?

I told the assistant that I was on vacation, but I would be happy to speak by phone. Bannon promptly called.

Far from dressing me down for comparing Trump to Kim, he began, “It’s a great honor to finally track you down. I’ve followed your writing for years and I think you and I are in the same boat when it comes to China.  You absolutely nailed it.”

“We’re at economic war with China,” he added. “It’s in all their literature. They’re not shy about saying what they’re doing. One of us is going to be a hegemon in 25 or 30 years and it’s gonna be them if we go down this path. On Korea, they’re just tapping us along. It’s just a sideshow.”

Bannon said he might consider a deal in which China got North Korea to freeze its nuclear buildup with verifiable inspections and the United States removed its troops from the peninsula, but such a deal seemed remote. Given that China is not likely to do much more on North Korea, and that the logic of mutually assured destruction was its own source of restraint, Bannon saw no reason not to proceed with tough trade sanctions against China.

Contrary to Trump’s threat of fire and fury, Bannon said: “There’s no military solution [to North Korea’s nuclear threats], forget it. Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don’t die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don’t know what you’re talking about, there’s no military solution here, they got us.” Bannon went on to describe his battle inside the administration to take a harder line on China trade, and not to fall into a trap of wishful thinking in which complaints against China’s trade practices now had to take a backseat to the hope that China, as honest broker, would help restrain Kim.

“To me,” Bannon said, “the economic war with China is everything. And we have to be maniacally focused on that. If we continue to lose it, we’re five years away, I think, ten years at the most, of hitting an inflection point from which we’ll never be able to recover.”

Bannon’s plan of attack includes: a complaint under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act against Chinese coercion of technology transfers from American corporations doing business there, and follow-up complaints against steel and aluminum dumping. “We’re going to run the tables on these guys. We’ve come to the conclusion that they’re in an economic war and they’re crushing us.”

But what about his internal adversaries, at the departments of State and Defense, who think the United States can enlist Beijing’s aid on the North Korean standoff, and at Treasury and the National Economic Council who don’t want to mess with the trading system?

“Oh, they’re wetting themselves,” he said, explaining that the Section 301 complaint, which was put on hold when the war of threats with North Korea broke out, was shelved only temporarily, and will be revived in three weeks. As for other cabinet departments, Bannon has big plans to marginalize their influence.
Advertisement

“I’m changing out people at East Asian Defense; I’m getting hawks in. I’m getting Susan Thornton [acting head of East Asian and Pacific Affairs] out at State.”

But can Bannon really win that fight internally?

“That’s a fight I fight every day here,” he said. “We’re still fighting. There’s Treasury and [National Economic Council chair] Gary Cohn and Goldman Sachs lobbying.”

“We gotta do this. The president’s default position is to do it, but the apparatus is going crazy. Don’t get me wrong. It’s like, every day.”

Bannon explained that his strategy is to battle the trade doves inside the administration while building an outside coalition of trade hawks that includes left as well as right. Hence the phone call to me.

There are a couple of things that are startling about this premise. First, to the extent that most of the opponents of Bannon’s China trade strategy are other Trump administration officials, it’s not clear how reaching out to the left helps him. If anything, it gives his adversaries ammunition to characterize Bannon as unreliable or disloyal.

More puzzling is the fact that Bannon would phone a writer and editor of a progressive publication (the cover lines on whose first two issues after Trump’s election were “Resisting Trump” and “Containing Trump”) and assume that a possible convergence of views on China trade might somehow paper over the political and moral chasm on white nationalism.

The question of whether the phone call was on or off the record never came up. This is also puzzling, since Steve Bannon is not exactly Bambi when it comes to dealing with the press. He’s probably the most media-savvy person in America.

I asked Bannon about the connection between his program of economic nationalism and the ugly white nationalism epitomized by the racist violence in Charlottesville and Trump’s reluctance to condemn it. Bannon, after all, was the architect of the strategy of using Breitbart to heat up white nationalism and then rely on the radical right as Trump’s base.

He dismissed the far right as irrelevant and sidestepped his own role in cultivating it: “Ethno-nationalism—it’s losers. It’s a fringe element. I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it, you know, uh, help crush it more.”

“These guys are a collection of clowns,” he added.

From his lips to Trump’s ear.

“The Democrats,” he said, “the longer they talk about identity politics, I got ’em. I want them to talk about racism every day. If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats.”

I had never before spoken with Bannon. I came away from the conversation with a sense both of his savvy and his recklessness. The waters around him are rising, but he is going about his business of infighting, and attempting to cultivate improbable outside allies, to promote his China strategy. His enemies will do what they do.

Either the reports of the threats to Bannon’s job are grossly exaggerated and leaked by his rivals, or he has decided not to change his routine and to go down fighting. Given Trump’s impulsivity, neither Bannon nor Trump really has any idea from day to day whether Bannon is staying or going. He has survived earlier threats. So what the hell, damn the torpedoes.

The conversation ended with Bannon inviting me to the White House after Labor Day to continue the discussion of China and trade. We’ll see if he’s still there.


Page 1 of 6 |  [ 1 ]   [ 2 ]   [ 3 ]  | Next Page | Last Page

Venus

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

The Mountain Between Us commented in entry 'WHITE WOMEN FOR SALE!' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 23:27. (View)

Kristy Boden commented in entry 'Two more London attacks' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 15:54. (View)

JF interviews Todd Lewis commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 11:26. (View)

The Rooster commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 11:06. (View)

Uncomfortable Bear commented in entry '4 things we learned from the indictment of 13 Russians in the Mueller investigation' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 09:23. (View)

Nikolas Cruz commented in entry '"What We Don't Know - Motive." Likely: revenge against societal incoherence, lack of accountability' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 02:09. (View)

Maccabees commented in entry 'The alternative right's big tent, already too inclusive - includes Jews as well' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 00:57. (View)

Max Musson article mapped commented in entry 'Dark Side of Self Actualization & Incommensurate GenderAgendas' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 00:14. (View)

8,606 fake refugees so far in 2018 commented in entry 'More Than A Thousand Illegal Immigrants Reach Europe In First Week Of 2018' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 18:52. (View)

Orson commented in entry 'Serial killer white-out' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 15:58. (View)

Toba commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 11:02. (View)

Allman, Wetton, Coryell, Holdsworth commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 10:14. (View)

Invisible men commented in entry 'Dark Side of Self Actualization & Incommensurate GenderAgendas' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 08:28. (View)

Uncomfortable Bear commented in entry '4 things we learned from the indictment of 13 Russians in the Mueller investigation' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 07:23. (View)

Twins, one black, one White commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 02:02. (View)

Distributist vs JF commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 00:22. (View)

Reactionary Expat commented in entry 'The New Religion Exclusively for Those of Indigenous European Extraction' on Fri, 16 Feb 2018 18:54. (View)

On the Obama portrait artist commented in entry 'Obama portrait artist's past work depicted black women decapitating white women' on Fri, 16 Feb 2018 17:39. (View)

KM on proprietory modules of mentation commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Fri, 16 Feb 2018 07:32. (View)

Andrew Torba at RI commented in entry 'FCC doubles down on dead-wrong definition of how internet works' on Fri, 16 Feb 2018 01:26. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 18:15. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Next-level TRS: Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich is actually Michael ‘Enoch’ ENOCKSON Peinovich-Sippel.' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 18:04. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 18:03. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 17:15. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 17:10. (View)

Captainchaos commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 16:17. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:38. (View)

Dinaroid commented in entry 'Next-level TRS: Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich is actually Michael ‘Enoch’ ENOCKSON Peinovich-Sippel.' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 14:25. (View)

Matt Parrott commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 12:54. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Next-level TRS: Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich is actually Michael ‘Enoch’ ENOCKSON Peinovich-Sippel.' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 09:12. (View)

The most danerous job in the world commented in entry 'Suidlanders Reach out to Americans to Stop South African White Genocide' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 08:47. (View)

Dinaroid commented in entry 'Next-level TRS: Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich is actually Michael ‘Enoch’ ENOCKSON Peinovich-Sippel.' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 08:42. (View)

Sandy commented in entry 'White Privilege Under a Bridge' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 00:03. (View)

White Privilege Under a Bridge commented in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on Wed, 14 Feb 2018 20:52. (View)

Captainchaos commented in entry 'You gotta laugh' on Wed, 14 Feb 2018 20:45. (View)

Majorityrights shield

Sovereignty badge