Majorityrights News > Category: Immigration and Politics

‘Complete, total surrender’: Why Trump waved the white flag

Politico, 25 Jan 2019:

The sudden erosion of support from Senate Republicans ultimately forced Trump’s hand. “President Donald Trump touted GOP unity for 33 days of a partial government shutdown. But by the 34th day, it was clearly gone — and so was the shutdown by the end of the 35th.

Senate Republicans had finally had it and were struggling to continue to defend the president’s position and heap blame on the Democrats. Perhaps no one illustrated that dynamic more than Sen. Rob Portman.

The Ohio Republican, along with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), had spent more than two weeks pushing to reopen the government and then negotiate on border security, only to face repeated rejection by the president and Vice President Mike Pence. So when two votes came before the Senate this week, one on Trump’s plan, the other on a stopgap with no new guaranteed wall money, Portman nearly made a rare break with his party.

“I considered it, yes,” he said on Friday after the president finally caved on his position that the government would only reopen with a down payment on his wall.

Portman and most Republicans ultimately stuck with Trump after Pence’s pleas for unity. A sustained rebellion against Trump on Thursday, Portman argued, would mean the government “would not be open right now,“ because Trump would simply veto a Democrat-backed bill. “It would have been a real problem.” …”

Occidental Observer’s Hunter Wallace laments:

So, the partial government shutdown is finally coming to an end.

Trump has been humiliated by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. Senate Republicans caved and that forced Trump to cave. He isn’t getting any funding for his wall. The whole episode was nothing but a waste of time to look like he was fighting for the wall funding after two years of avoiding the issue.

I increasingly think it is a waste of time to sit here, day after day, following the news cycle to document the ongoing failure of Trump and American conservatism. It just discourages me from writing. I’ve been doing it for two years now and have grown tired of it. I will probably end up pivoting to history for a while.

Propertarianism is an idea for a system of government devised and promoted by Doolittle and Mark to secure the interests of peoples where the U.S. Constitution has left vagueries to be exploited by the parasitic.

From what I’ve heard so far, most of it can be consonant with an ethnonational Left, White or otherwise.

The platform claims that it will be able to gain the adherence of Whites who do not heavily identify as White, either don’t care much, or emphatically do not want to be identified as racist. They maintain that as the rules-based platform provides the only guarantee of their interests that it will follow that a large percentage of these Whites will fall into the same camp as Whites whose main interest is maintaining their genetic kind. More, that this program will facilitate a groundswell to allow for revolutionary victory for racialists as it forces the right identifying elements among the military, police and citizenry to stand down when called upon to take arms against their own kind; and rather join with them.

Here is where the parasite may be rubbing its hands together unbeknownst to their “foolproof” anti-parasitism.

1) They insist on identifying as “The Right”, just as king parasite wants them to do at this point, now that it has vacuumed up all the money and assets that it possibly can.

2) With that, encourages misdefinitions of “Left/Right” as Mark promotes - “The Left is irrational, a creature that can’t be talked to.”

Or is it that they don’t want you to talk to me? Try me.

Try me. You won’t because your Jewish masters and fellow parasites told you not to.

.. “it seeks social justice… how laughable! ... has compassion for marginals - how quaint and effeminate .. the left is trying to deny us our nature as assholes.”

Who told you the Left is womanly and irrational?

The same people who pander to White girl’s puerile predilection and incitement; who want your legacy to become Mulatto so you can be more “manly”, hyper-assertive, non-reflective and unreasonable like a black?

How is it irrational to analogize national and group boundaries to unionization? Where does this unionization and accountability (of elites, marginals, rank and file) toward the end of social justice and group homeostasis need to say that “equality” is the goal and not symbiosis and homeostasis?; or that self interest is necessarily at odds if accountability to group interests exists as well? Does not accountability address the issue of “parasitism?”

Who told you that the left represents parasitism whereas the right does not?

Most people would say that capitalism, mega-wealth, investment beyond need, interest bearing loans, rent, etc, are right wing - no?

Who told you that social constuctionism does not deal with reality?

According to its tenets, you are free to come here in comments and help to construct our platform - help us deal with “reality” - in fact, that is the radical reality of how knowledge is generated.

Who told you to stay away? To see the “Left” as such a word that would have you running like a cockroach from the light?

Who supplied you with these stereotyped characterizations of an anthropmorphized “left” that is just so irrational that it can’t understand why Jews and these sociopathic Whites (that you want to get on your side on the sly), who’ve sold-out their race for their own selfish interests, are on top.

Who prevented you from joining me in this moribund White Left ethnonational position - seeing it as an opportunity to define it for ourselves, not as your masters see fit?

Such that it can provide for private property, wealth and a great deal of individual liberty, while maintaining accountability to our interests, bounds and borders?

Who told you that social constructonism was phony baloney?

I’m going to pretend for a moment that you will do the normal thing and join me as I watch this video; we’ll see what we can use, what may be off the mark - you will help in that corrective process, won’t you? Or will you refuse joint construction because your (((masters))) told you how to define what this left ethnonational platform is about and because those Whites who’ve bought their (((definitional package for right and left))) are too committed to their deal?

You see, there are all kinds of solutions to bring about borders and systems to run once borders are instituted. I never claimed to have all details figured out and in fact, am given to the reality of social constructionism, that that is simply not how knowledge is generated and disseminated - if people think, as Bowery apparently does, that I should come up with a system of “operationalization” or be ignored, then that is not reasonable. Someone else, if not him, is welcome to propose adjustments. These libertarians say to me, “that may be what should happen, but what do people actually do?

Well, I don’t know, what did the Jews tell you about how the right deals with reality, Stoicism, Jesus and all? That it provides the promise of perfect union with god after life….

Stoicism, it shows the way (doesn’t cause us to blunt our sensible interests) whereas Epicureanism’s “materialism’... oh, you don’t want that pursuit of pleasure, you don’t want that…there’s nothing after your material life, except maybe your children and kinfolk’s genetics…

Pleasure?! Ha ha ha! Don’t you know that shit has a divine place in the universe? Makes us perfect shit eaters, while your Epicurean palate, it pretends that it will get off, find the highest pleasure in figuring out how life is best conducted….

“The Stoic acceptance was an attempt to transubstantiate even the repugnant aspects of existence, the excremental, into the essentially divine.” - Kenneth Burke

In fact, Epicureanism promotes a hierarchicization of “pleasures” (contemplation being highest).... and our inextricable involvement in empirical reality which provides for accountability, e.g., to the materiality of our forebears and genetic legacy.

Ok, so I’ll watch this in my material reality; maybe you’ll join me in reflection upon it, probably you won’t… your gawd told you not to.

Poland, Hungary and France: A Common Cause

By Antoni Trzmiel.

Visigrad Post, Jan 2019:

Poland – We publish here the translation of Antoni Trzmiel’s editorial about the partnership we started with them.

The dorzeczy.pl website, belonging to the Polish weekly Do Rzeczy, has begun cooperation with the Visegrád Post and with the French independent Web channel TV Libertés.

Let us reclaim our own story!

Journalists from these media were in Poland during the days of national celebration of our regained independence. They were preparing a TV documentary for their viewers. Their perspective is not our perspective. But while it may not be rosy, their narrative differs vastly from the infamous description of “thousands of fascists, neo-Nazis and white supremacists marching 300 km from Auschwitz”.

These were the words of a prominent European politician, Guy Verhofstadt, the leader of the Liberal group in the European Parliament. They show how much we have to do to stop such statements being made, including – as was the case here – during a debate on the rule of law in Poland. There is just one way to make this happen, and it is not by prohibiting such lies in Polish law, as such a law could not be enforced abroad anyway. Indeed it is not only Poles that should be outraged, but above all those who vote for the people making such ludicrous claims: French, Dutch, Slovakians, Czechs, Hungarians, Greeks, etc. But for this to happen, first they need to know when their representatives are telling them gross lies.

Conversations with my fellow journalists shed light on many bad things that are happening in their countries, which one would not necessarily notice when travelling there on holiday or for work. This is especially true in the field of freedom of expression. We will be writing about such matters on dorzeczy.pl.

Was it worthwhile for David to fight Goliath?

We have decided to cooperate on a permanent basis. Let’s be honest: from a business point of view, this will bring no benefit. Translations, travel and the time spent are all quite significant costs for independent media, which are low-budget non-profit entities. But we believe that if our journalists prepare more materials about the situation in Poland, there is a chance that in some of the media they know and trust, the Hungarians, Belgians and French will get a different picture than the one reflected by the liberal newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza.

For the time being, there is a huge imbalance in forces, resources, and decades of cooperation. They are tied by common interests, while we share our opposition to the current situation (even though much separates us). True, it is a struggle of David against Goliath. However, cheered by that biblical story, we believe in the victory of truth. Let us be frank: there is a long way to go. But, as the Chinese say, a journey begins with a single step.

On November 11 we took that first step

In our case it consisted of three interviews conducted for our media on the eve of November 11. They were published simultaneously on dorzeczy.pl, visegradpost.com and http://www.tvlibertes.com on the following days.

Our journalist Karol Gac spoke with deputy prime minister Jarosław Gowin. Olivier Bault, a writing editor of Do Rzeczy and correspondent of French alternative media in Poland, questioned the Deputy Speaker of the Sejm Ryszard Terlecki, as well as MEP Jacek Saryusz-Wolski.

Thus, Polish readers and viewers had the opportunity to hear what these politicians wanted to tell people from other countries. This is important. After all, it has become clear lately that they are not heard often enough abroad, given that representatives of foreign voters proved able to compel those who represent a majority of Polish voters to change the law [as was the case with the retirement age of judges sitting in the Polish Supreme Court and Higher Administrative Court].

Our journalists too will regularly prepare materials for what we are confident will be a growing number of partners. At the same time, we will publish materials prepared by our partners on dorzeczy.pl. It is indeed not a normal situation that we know more about Bollywood or Hollywood stars than about the real life of Slovaks or the French. And, as the above examples show, this has a real impact on our own lives.

Antoni Trzmiel is a journalist working for Polish public television (TVP) and is also the head of dorzeczy.pl, the website of the Polish conservative weekly news magazine Do Rzeczy.

Opinion piece originally published in Polish on the Do Rzeczy website. Translated to English by Olivier Bault.

Voice of Europe, Jan 2019:

New cases of child rape revealed in Finland – President says asylum seekers brought evil with them

A number of cases of rape and abuse of children, with foreign perpetrators, have been revealed in Oulu in the northern parts of Finland since last autumn, Fria Tider reports.

The police are investigating another four cases with girls under the age of 15, where three perpetrators of foreign background have been arrested suspected of rape and serious sexual abuse of children.

In all cases, the suspects have background as refugees or asylum seekers.

And now the police in Helsinki have arrested several migrants suspected of serious rape and serious sexual abuse of children. The crimes have been committed in the last two months.

No direct link with the cases in Oulu is currently known.

Finland’s Prime Minister Juha Sipilä wrote on Twitter: “As a result of the inhuman and reprehensible events in Oulu and Helsinki, the Government will meet next week in negotiations both on Tuesday and Friday.”

“It is unbearable that people who have asked for and even received asylum from us have brought such evil and caused unsafety here“, the country’s President Sauli Niinistö said in a statement.

Helsinki police point out the importance of parents informing their children to be cautious on social media, where the foreign rapists find their victims.

Péter Szijjártó, Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

VOICE OF EUROPE, 21 JAN 2019:

Hungary: we will prevent Brussels to implement the UN Migration Pact

Brussels is doing all it can to implement the United Nations Global Migration Pact, Peter Szijjarto, the foreign minister of Hungary, told public television. “But we will prevent this,” he said.

In Spain last year the number of illegal border crossings doubled, Szijjarto told current affairs channel M1. In Turkey, 50 percent more illegal migrants were apprehended than in 2017 and the number of arrivals in Cyprus has doubled. Further, the number of arrivals on the Greek-Turkish land border is rising steadily, he added.

The UN migration pact has put wind in the sails of global migration as it focuses on managing rather than stopping migration, he said. He noted that 40 UN members had not even voted for the compact and so, he argued, it cannot serve as a genuine international reference point. Officials in Brussels made the compact’s adoption a matter of prestige even when Hungary made clear at the outset that there was no single European position to be represented, he said.

Now they are doing everything they can in Brussels to lead the implementation of the global migration package, he said. “We will of course prevent this.” Szijjarto noted that 9 EU member states, or one-third, did not vote for the package. “So it’s not about European countries wanting to implement a global migration package as a united front,” the minister said.

Meanwhile Szijjarto, in a separate interview to Kossuth Radio, noted that the Austria-Hungary border legally can be crossed at 55 points. Fully 19 are major crossings while 36 are smaller, he noted, adding that 10 are subject to restrictions by Austria. Restrictions on crossings now have been lifted at 4 locations and 6 are still in place at the request of the Austrian mayors in question, but only one is paved.

Jerusalem Post, “U.S. SIGNS ELIE WIESEL GENOCIDE PREVENTION ACT INTO LAW”, 16 Jan 2019:

The law is intended to prevent genocide and other atrocities that threaten national and international security.

Elie Wiesel speaks at a World War II tribute. (photo credit: REUTERS)

US President Donald Trump signed a law on Monday declaring that the prevention of genocide and other atrocities is “a core national security interest” of the United States, adding that it is also “a core moral responsibility.”

The Elie Wiesel Genocide and Atrocities Prevention Act, named for the world-renown Holocaust survivor and famed author, was signed into law by Trump after it passed with an overwhelming bipartisan majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate in December.

The law is intended to prevent genocide and other atrocities “which threaten national and international security, by enhancing United States government capacities to prevent, mitigate, and respond to such crises.”

The new law obligates the US to mitigate threats to its national “security by addressing the root causes of insecurity and violent conflict to prevent the mass slaughter of civilians; conditions that prompt internal displacement and the flow of refugees across borders; and other violence that wreaks havoc on regional stability and livelihoods.”

The US will enhance its capacity to “identify, prevent, address, and respond to the drivers of atrocities and violent conflict” as part of its “humanitarian, development and strategic interests.” It also entails the establishment a Complex Crisis Fund that will deal with strengthening local civil society, such as human rights groups, and nonprofit organizations that are already on the ground, working to thwart and deal with atrocities as they occur.

According to the new law, “Appropriate officials of the US government” must consult at least twice a year with representatives of nongovernmental organizations and civil society actors in an effort to “enhance the capacity of the US” to identify the conditions that could lead to such atrocities, “including strengthening the role of international organizations and international financial institutions in conflict prevention, mitigation and response.”

It also “encourages” the National Intelligence director to give a detailed review of countries and regions at risk of genocide in annual testimony to Congress, “including most likely pathways to violence, specific risk factors, potential perpetrators, and at-risk target groups.”

The secretary of state is also expected to write an evaluation report every three years.

Speaking in December, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ben Cardin said that “America’s strength around the world is rooted in our values.”

“It is in our national interest to ensure that the United States utilizes the full arsenal of diplomatic, economic and legal tools to take meaningful action before atrocities occur,” said Cardin. “Earlier this month, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum identified Burmese military actions against the Rohingya as genocide. From Burma to Iraq, South Sudan to Syria, atrocity crimes tragically persist all around the globe.” He added that the Prevention Act will help ensure that the United States does a better job of responding earlier and more effectively to these heinous crimes. “I urge our House colleagues to pass this landmark legislation before the 115th Congress adjourns.”

Sen. Todd Young, an original co-sponsor of the law and a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, explained that the US has a moral and strategic imperative to help prevent and respond to acts of genocide and other mass atrocities, and this legislation would ensure that the US government is better prepared to fulfill this serious responsibility.

Prior to the signing, Sara Bloomfield, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum director, said that “senators Young and Cardin’s leadership on the bill honors Elie Wiesel’s vision for the museum as a living memorial that would help save victims of future genocides and in doing so honor the victims of the Holocaust.

“This legislation is an important effort toward developing a bipartisan congressional blueprint for making ‘never again’ real by taking practical steps to mitigate the systematic persecution of vulnerable groups,” she said.

BBC, “May’s government survives no confidence vote”, 17 Jan 2019.

BBC, “Brexit: Theresa May says MPs must ‘work together’ to deliver Brexit”, 17 Jan 2019.

United States Border Patrol at Algodones Sand Dunes, California, USA. The fence on the US-Mexican border is a special construction of narrow, 15 feet tall elements, that are movable vertically. This way they can be lifted on top of the ever shifting sand dunes (image Public Domain, Wikipedia).

Lest there be any misunderstanding, the position here is that the matter of a United States Southern border wall, fence, whatever, as any requirement of border control, is very important.

Border control there is particularly illustrative of a central matter, which is that border control is crucial to the management of populations in human and pervasive ecology; issues which include territorial carrying capacity - hence, at this border, the particular demographic is a secondary matter; salient there is the matter of Mexico’s massive population - Mexico City being among the most overpopulated cities in the world.

Nevertheless, the demographic and rule structure of The United States is already on a disastrous trajectory for Whites, will remain so, even with a wall on the south border.

While border control is essential at any rate, the worst case scenario of its instantiation would be that it will be used to lull complacency of propositional conservatism - “we Americans all being in the same relatively taken-care-of boat” - and further close us in and galvanize us into mulattoization; furthering the trajectory of those who left us susceptible for the Cartesian rule structure of the constitution and to the Jewry which weaponized it against our necessary discrimination both at the border and within the borders.

...galvanizing us with the demographic upshot of this manipulation unfortunately against a population that does have some warrant as native American behind them and which, for their nature, is highly ethnocentric. It is a demographic thus, which has been effective against integration with blacks, against integration with Whites, indifferent to Jewish violin playing; as such, in the most optimistic scenario, could be allied with other Asians and Whites against black power, Jewish supremacism and Islamic imposition over human ecological coordination (agreed, getting Mestizos to cooperate in ecological management is no small trick; perhaps Asians proper could help reason, coordinate and enforce such management).

Failing that is a default “alliance” by contrast in sudden, “conservative” implementation against Meztiso populations that looks suspiciously in line with Jewish interests against an Asian, Mestizo, White alliance as it would resist continued instigation of the Mulattoization of the broad mass of American Whites, while allying Jewry with increasingly rare White sell-out elites; whose precarious situation would be more and more prone to interbreeding with Jewry or the Mulatto mass.