From Bill Clinton’s moved-to-tears introduction to the Supreme Court of his kosher approved candidate, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, to her parroting the weaponized Constitutional line, that “nobody should be discriminated against on the basis of immutable characteristics”, she was a nightmare. About the only good thing about her was that she was pro-choice, which would at least stem the black and brown populations some. No endorsement of Styxhexenhammer is implied (haven’t searched much, so if I find a better discussion of the implications of Ginsburg’s death, I’ll post it) but Styx is not so disillusioned with the civnat race mix blender that is American politics, therefore he has concern enough to unfurl some of the logistical problems and opportunities of trying to replace Ginsburg with a Supreme Court Justice perhaps not so bad.

Updated for clarity’s sake: Sept 21, 9:13 CET

As I have been preoccupied with the drudgery of having to shovel out the Augean stables of GW’s endless piles of horseshit, I haven’t gotten around to detailing dubious activity coming from Joel Davis and Neo-Asshole acolyte, Keith Woods.

However, in this discussion, there are a few things that should pique the attention of the conscientious in concern of White/European interests…

Firstly, note Davis unabashedly follows the advice of a philosophy professor named Katz.

Second, look for what Davis is doing when he claims that subjectivism is the distinguishing characterisitic of the European world view… while there is some utility to looking at European difficulties through the artifact of that framing, there is also potential for diversion from the important underlying truth in that subjectivism by itself is Cartesian; subjectivism is certainly limited in the case of “I think therefore I am”, and placed in the service of objectivity; furthermore, the kind of self assertion that would correspond with sustained subjectivism, as opposed to self transcendent strives of objectivism, does not ring true as charactaristically and distinctly European as opposed to characteristic of other peoples. Whether or not he turns to our relative, group interests by contrast to Modernity’s Objective/Subjective Cartesianism, that is where we need to be focused in the interests of European peoples.

As Davis has called for Israel to be looked upon as our friend and called upon Paul Gottfried for advice as to where to turn for funding, we may suspect that he is not adverse to putting WN off center; perhaps playing some of its right wing reaction to bolster his own elitism. Note his pandering to Keith Woods’ turd postionism, talking about how appealing that he found Riefenstahl’s “Triumph of The Will’ (whereas, being normal, I find the Hitler rallies repugnant, aesthetically and otherwise, no matter who might film them).

Joel Davis has also explicitly denounced the racial focus and priority of White Nationalism.

A high i.q. and a committed student of philosophy, one can profit from listening to Davis’ as he covers ground (we may have oversighted) for us to convert into the interest of Europeans as opposed to Jewish misdirection - for example, I gleaned from Davis the important but what should have been obvious idea that there is group genetic emergence as well - however, one would be well advised to be on guard and view with suspicion his motives and prescriptions as one with a dubious kosher seal of approval.

There is a big, modernist focus on “creativity” by Joel Davis in this talk, “the sine qua non”....rather, we want creativity to be a feature… otherwise it is just an expressed and impelled obligation of sick modernity, “be different so you can fit in.” ... and something like a kosher diversion of our White Post Modern project to reconstruct the homeostasis of our ethnonational praxis.

Post-Liberalism w. Joel Davis (Continuum Ep. 20)

Related at Majorityrights:

Do Joel Davis and Richard Spencer Want to Suck Jewish Cock?

Now On Bitchute: Daughter of Albion: Let’s Call it Genocide.

Why Is ‘Group Selection’ Taboo? Indisputable Proof of the Reality of Group Selection

Another Good one from Prof. Edward Dutton: The Jolly Heretic, 15 Sept 2020.

 


“Whose Streets? Our Streets!”

(CNN 14 Sept 2020) Eight people were arrested during protests in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, on Monday, a day after a Lancaster police officer shot and killed a 27-year-old man while responding to a call.

Protesters in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, gather at the scene where a police officer shot and killed a 27-year-old man wielding a knife.

The Lancaster County District Attorney’s Office, which is investigating the police shooting, said that officers responded on Sunday to a “reported domestic disturbance involving a person with a knife.”

Lancaster Police said in a news release that a 911 caller had reported that her brother was becoming aggressive with his mother and attempting to break into her house.

Body camera footage shows a family member at the door when the first officer arrives at the scene. The woman soon steps outside and a man, identified by authorities as Ricardo Munoz, runs out of the home toward the officer. The footage shows Munoz wielding a knife above his head, “in clear view, in a threatening manner,” the district attorney’s office said in a release.
The police officer fired several shots, ultimately killing Munoz. No one else was hit by gunfire, according to the district attorney’s office.

CNN has reached out to the Lancaster County District Attorney’s Office for comment.

The investigation by the district attorney’s office is ongoing. The police department also said it was looking into whether officers followed all training guidelines and policies properly, according to their news release.

“This has been a heartbreaking day for our city,” Lancaster Mayor Danene Sorace said in a statement on Sunday. “I grieve for the loss of life and know that there are more questions to be answered as the investigation continues.”
Protesters gather at the police station

Demonstrators in Lancaster took to the streets following the shooting, which comes amid months of widespread protests across the nation over police brutality and systemic racism.

READ MORE...

Visegrád Group – “Poland still remembers the decisive events of 1989 and always supports its neighbours. I have called for an extraordinary meeting of the European Council and strong reaction from the EU to what is happening in Belarus. We must support Belarusians together”, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki tweeted on August 11. Poland has clearly taken the lead in the Visegrád Group’s response, and also, with the support of its V4 partners and of the Baltic States, in the EU’s response. After some early hesitations, Hungary’s leaders have been most outspoken in their support for Poland’s efforts.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó said on August 17 that he had held talks with his counterparts from Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, and also with Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who had just spoken to Polish PM Morawiecki: “The power and importance of the Visegrád cooperation is evident again. We support the Polish position, especially regarding the large Polish community in Belarus”, Szijjártó wrote. Such support comes in spite of Hungary’s having better relations with Russia than Poland does, and at a time when Morawiecki has called on Russia not to intervene in Belarus and has presented a plan to support those who are protesting in that country. Morawiecki’s plan contains a pledge to make it possible for Belarusian university teachers and students to find places at Polish universities if they are expelled in Belarus due to their political activity, a promise to make it easier for Belarusians to get visas and work permits, a new mechanism to finance independent Belarusian media outlets, and new sources of financing for Polish NGOs which bring support to civil society in Belarus.

READ MORE...