An MR reader - I guess we can call him G de B - has mailed me with a collection of counter-arguments to, for the most part, a genetically-focussed Nordic racialism.  He requests a response with an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of these various arguments.  So I reproduce the mail in full here, duly formatted.  You will see that the sources are broad to say the least, ranging from Yockey to Kritarchy!  Much of it, though, just represents differing positions among nationalists.  G de B implies that these are intellectual problems for Nordicism in particular and white preservationism in general which he has not resolved to his own satisfaction.  I trust we will not experience too much difficulty in setting that right.
GW

Dear Sir,

I would like to draw your attention to the following observation from Tatu Vanhanen in: Ethnic Conflicts Explained by Ethnic Nepotism:

“Religion, culture, and language can be sources of conflict even if they do not reflect biological differences because the family/non-family distinction has spread to many different kinds of groupings: “Our tendency to favor kin over non-kin has extended to include large linguistic, national, racial, religious, and other ethnic groups.”

Take for example Northern Ireland. It’s a place where sectarian violence is commonplace, where warring factions look alike, are of the same race, speak the same language, often have the same last names; think of Irish Catholics and Irish Protestants. Or take Korea: North and South Koreans are of the same race. But economically, politically, and culturally, what a difference! Jews and Muslims are of the same race - they are both Semites!! Hundreds of examples can be given.

The question is then: will such a state of affairs not hinder your ideal of a homogeneous monoracial existence, which is - according to you – necessary for a continued Northern life?

Generally it is assumed that nationalism – in an ‘unnaturally’ way - divides races in general and Northern kind in particular. But according to Vanhanen it is not that ‘unnaturally’! If I am not mistaken, I belief that Rienzi also emphasizes the importance of nationality and he stresses the importance of ethnic racial preservation! According to him, ethnic groups (ethnies) as well as races, are real biological entities, related by common descent and genetic similarities. In Race is a Myth? The left distorts science for political purposes by Michael Rienzi I read that transplant donors and recipients often have to be matched not just for race but for close ethnicity within race, because inter-racial transplantations often fail.

Arthur Kemp in March of the Titans, claims that “all civilizations rise and fall according to their racial homogeneity and nothing else.  Indeed, “It has been suggested that if a group of Nordics were placed almost anywhere, in complete isolation, in a few generations they would produce a thriving civilization.

READ MORE...

CHEM Trust, a charity “with a mission to protect humans and wildlife from harmful chemicals” has issued its well-trailed report on the effects of man-made endocrine-disrupting, or “gender bending”, chemicals in the environment.

These are:-

... chemicals which block the male hormone androgen, the so-called anti-androgenic chemicals, can cause un-descended testes and can feminise males. Similarly, some sex hormone disrupting chemicals can mimic oestrogen, the female hormone, and also feminise males. Many man-made chemicals can block androgen action, and these include several pesticides and some phthalates, used in consumer products to make plastics flexible. Worryingly, a study of effluents from UK sewage works has found that around three-quarters of these discharges have considerable anti-androgenic activity, and investigations are underway to identify the chemicals to blame.

The four-part report is not confined or focussed upon the known effects of pollutants upon human males.  It reviews effects upon the males of all vertebrate life.  Nonetheless, the underlying concern is for our male offspring:-

Taken together, the effects seen in wildlife should raise concerns for contaminant induced genital disruption in human male infants. Indeed a condition called testicular dysgenesis syndrome, including birth defects of the penis of baby boys, cryptorchidism (undescended testes), reduced sperm production and testicular cancer, has been suggested, because there is evidence to indicate that these effects may be interlinked in causation (Skakkebaek et al.,2001; 2007; Sharpe and Skakkebaek,2008). Moreover, in many studies these disorders or demasculinization effects have been associated with exposure to certain contaminants or sex hormone.

All of the chemicals associated with these effects are to be found in the developed world.  They are generally less evident in the developing world.  Male children born to Third World migrants in the West are as at risk as those born to settled populations here.

In two days time the British government will oppose proposed new European controls on pesticides, many of which have been found to have “gender-bending” effects.  In total, there have been over 100,000 new chemicals introduced in recent years.  Ninety-nine per cent of them are not properly regulated, and eight-five per cent are devoid of accompanying safety information.

The full report, which follows studies in Italy and America, can be downloaded in pdf form here.

The mainstream media is devoting much front-page coverage to this weekend’s violent leftist/anarchist/student riots in Greece.  At the time of writing the headline on the Guardian website main page reads, Clashes across Greece after police kill teenager.

Thousands of youths armed with stones, batons and firebombs engaged in running battles with riot police, destroying shops, banks and cars in cities across Greece toight in a second night of rioting. The violence, the country’s worst civil disturbances in years, erupted late on Saturday when it emerged that a teenage boy had been killed by police in Exarchia, a district of central Athens long associated with lawlessness and drug abuse. Within hours, the protests had spread to Greece’s northern capital, Thessaloniki, its western port city of Patras and Chania on Crete, as protesters giving vent to a disaffection exacerbated by the economic crisis went on the rampage.

By tonight, several areas, including Athens’ main commercial strip and the streets around its fabled Polytechnic, resembled a battle zone, with glass, rubble and broken mannequins on to the sidewalks. As plumes of smoke filled the capital’s skyline, and shopkeepers rushed to clear up the debris, officials reported that more than 30 people had been injured, including police officers and firefighters and a number of passersby who had got caught up in the chaos. Looting was also rife. Local television stations showed stone-throwing youths erecting barricades in Athens as police responded by firing rounds of tear gas. The rioters in turn sought sanctuary in the grounds of the Polytechnic and Athens University, which traditionally have been off-limits to security forces since the collapse of military rule in 1974.

The chaos deepened today in both Athens and Thessaloniki as thousands of demonstrators marched through the streets shouting anti-government slogans. “Down with the murderers in uniform,” they shouted at the police.

At the foot of the report, the Guardian helpfully provides its readers with a:-

Backstory
Riots are not uncommon in Greece. Self-proclaimed groups of anarchists attack banks, high-end shops and foreign car dealerships. The November 17 parade is a particular flashpoint, when thousands mark the 1974 student uprising at the Polytechnic, an event that led to the collapse of seven years of hated military rule. Few of these attacks, however, cause injuries. Some believe Greece’s anarchist movement has its roots in the resistance to the dictatorship and the left/right divide that the period spawned. A number of anti-globalisation, anti-authoritarian, leftwing groups are also believed to have emerged at that time.

But that isn’t the back story.  It’s a classic piece of burying the bad news - bad for the liberal sensibilities of the mediocracy, that is.  Here is the real back story:-

And here:-

READ MORE...

By David Hamilton

On 18 November 2008 a copy of a BNP members list was published on the internet, and thus began a train of events that is destined to be one of history’s turning points. It revealed to a trusting public what the authorities are really like. These decent people who are supposed to be looking after our interests now stand exposed as totalitarians who will do anything, however oppressive and tyrannical, to silence dissent.

Innocent members of the public will be surprised at how oppressed the British people are unless they remain quiescent and only do permitted activities like watch telly, support sports teams and go to bars. If they dare speak out or campaign against certain injustices they will be persecuted and even brutalised.

There are many in this country who sincerely believe in freedom and democracy.  They frequently gravitate towards the easily-occupied “moral high ground” of condemning racism by whites.  But they rarely comprehend that a totalitarian, undemocratic structure has been created to oppress whites. Do they ever stop to think that in the home of the Mother of Parliaments, the Rule of Law and representative democracy the police would torture a political prisoner?

There was even a thinly-veiled incitement to violence from the established media. On 20/11/2008 Mirror columnist Brian Reade wrote, under a picture of Nick Griffin, and in mock-worried tones:-

I’m worried about the 12,000 BNP members whose names and addresses have been leaked on the internet. I pray their details don’t fall into the hands of any of those black radical groups known to take a very dim view of white neo-Nazis. It would be truly awful if anything nasty happened to these nice people wouldn’t it?

In part, at least, his wish was realised.

READ MORE...

From the Daily Mail:-

An unusual take on the world, the Atlas of True Names shows how global places came to be named. The etymological take on the world traces Great Britain to Great Land of the Tattooed. The combination of the Greek word ‘prettanoi’, meaning tattoed people, and the Celtic word, ‘brit’, meaning light coloured or speckled, is behind the modern name.

London is re-named as Hillfort, as one theory behind the name of the city’s origin is that the celtic words ‘lon’ and ‘dun’ mean fort on a hill. Birmingham is Bear Guard Home, York is Wild Boar Village and Liverpool and Edinburgh are Choked Pool and Slopecastle respectively. The Orkneys has one of the most fascinating origins. Labelled Isles of the Sea Monsters in the atlas, the word ‘orc’ means whale, or sea monster in Celtic.

Places outside of the UK have equally intriguing origins. Cameroon, for example, is Land of the Shrimps, coming from the Portugese word ‘camaroes’, meaning shrimps. Chicago and Moscow have been given the less romantic monikers of Stink Onion and Bog respectively - Chicago comes from the Native American word ‘checagou’, while Moscow is derived from ‘mosk’, the Slavic word for bog. Other strange names include the Russian city of Vladivostok as ‘Dominate the East!’, and the Indian city of Madras as ‘Realm of the God of the Underworld’.

This post is a very ad hoc affair written, really, to raise a subject - one that is under-served here -  for discussion.

The reason I don’t spend a lot of time writing about the environment is because I’m not 100% sold on the notion that membership of a healthy and self-conscious organic society necessarily implies care for the land.  It never did, down all the years when the crises of our people and of our environment were nightmares of the imagination, and nothing more.

Of course, nobody has ever argued that pollution is good.  But 99.9% of us - our forefathers included - have been very keen indeed on material progress and deliverance from want.  In the words of John Gummer when he was John Major’s Environment Secretary, “We are rich because we pollute.”

It would, I suppose, be logical for environmentally negative tendencies to increase with hyper-individualism.  But received wisdom states that care for the environment strongly corresponds with times of economic growth, and capitalism, with all its individualist dynamics, is the great deliverer of growth.

So this picture is perhaps more mixed than it might at first glance appear to the romantic nationalist.  I think one has to be careful to avoid undue romanticism in thinking it through.  Irrespective of politics, everyone can agree that dirty old factories and power stations belching greenhouse gasses into the air and pumping filth into our rivers are undesirable.

That said, there is such a thing as a uniquely nationalist discussion on the environment.  It should chiefly consider issues of population size and carrying capacity ... and immigrant repatriation, I imagine.  Incidentally, in his definition of exceeded carrying capacity Frank Salter includes the lost values of privacy, access to open space,  and sustenance.  Maximising our genetic interests may, for a time, mean a focus on maximising proximate environmental interests rather than ultimate reproductive interests.

Another area for nationalist discussion should be sociobiological in character.  Which peoples can genuinely contribute to tackling global pollution?  Europeans are the most intellectually gifted and, therefore, creative of all great peoples, and these qualities are what are really needed.  We are also the most altruistic of peoples, and the most individualistic - meaning we do not live as in thrall as non-Westerners do to, in this context, regressive thought patterns such as tradition, social conformity, fatalism, and spirituality.

Alright, I’ll leave it there.  Comment is, as they say elsewhere without actually meaning it, free.

By a Finn

I wrote this text originally as a short comment on Social construction, and its structure reflects that. I was asked that this text would be lifted to main-log form. My acceptance and the text’s present position does not in itself refer to agreement or disagreement with any of the opinions or texts on this site.

This text is about a specific part of Social construction theory, that which is most relevant to pro-Europeans. I develop the theme from part to part. My intention in this post is not to claim that all Social constructionists use their theory to it’s limits (although many have done so). My intention is to define Sc’s abilities and moral “boundaries”.

The information refers to those leftist intellectuals who understand their ideology, not to the useful idiots or emotional hang arounds.

¤ Social construction theory (Sc), although it is often dressed in universal altruism, is in reality one of the most efficient method of acquiring selfish political power to those intellectuals who are skillful in it.

¤ In power games truth, scientific knowledge etc. are often unimportant. For example, an emotional, scientifically false theory about “political time” might be more efficient in a power game than scientific truth about “time”.  In it’s starting point, Sc gives equal value (partly overlapping) to objective, subjective, natural, artificial, socially-constructed (i.e formed in people’s interactions/thoughts), physical, real, unreal, and imagined information, among others.  Any of these could be in some situation useful in gaining power.  In reality though, Sc is heavily weighted away from natural, objective, common sense, scientific knowledge. This is because such knowledge is generally fairly static and immutable, and is the knowledge of normal, non-Sc people, and therefore the base of their power.  Political power is obtained most efficiently when there is great latitude in the information used, which gives larger possibilities in the political game.  It creates dialectical or multi-dimensional contradictions and distances between the existing information of the rulers and it’s Sc opponents.  These contradictions and distances can be utilized in countless of ways in obtaining power - whatever is propitious in a given situation.  Sc chips away at the rulers’ power constantly in small or bigger ways, and channels that power to itself.  If Sc would agree with the information of the rulers, it’s political possibilities would be severely limited.

¤ Sc creates contradictions mainly in the following categories: space (free, limited, taxed, large, small, publicly produced, privately produced, coded entrance, constricted, wide, polluted, clean, living space [e.g. apartment houses], commercial space, crowded, empty, natural, artificial, etc.), language (words, sentences, texts, political, meaningless, scientific, subjective, objective, economy related, language upholding the power structures, powerless, desperate, poverty related, sexual, heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual, dialects, languages of different ethnicities, advertisement and marketing, cultural, movie language, language in everyday situations, etc.) who is the actor (humans, machines, systems, natural laws, economic laws, market place, rulers, subjects, slave owners, slaves, scientists, lay people, producers, service producers, farmers, skilled workers, officials, man, woman, masculine, feminine, majority, minority, intelligent, wise, stupid, ignorant, progressive, reactionary, native, immigrant, virtuous, evil, moral, immoral, new, old, young, elderly, etc.), time.  I give a list:

* measured vs experienced ~ objective vs subjective
* continuous vs fragmentary vs intervals
* past, present and future in different combinations or contradictions
* experience space vs expectations horizon (Koselleck)
* time in a straight line, cyclical time (repeating events), spiral time (Jean-Paul Sartre’s construct), multi dimensional time (e.g. person contemplating in present time with the help of historical information the future of many people and their time lines)
* continuing, open and ended time
* constant speed, accelerating (e.g. internet and new technology) and decelerating time
* reversible vs irreversible time
* normal vs exceptional time
* natural vs time produced by humans
* life cycles’ different parts
* collision of two different times (e.g memory of similar historical events influences the present situation considerably)
* simultaneous vs happens in or experiences different times
* different multibranching times

Etc.

All these and their constituent parts can be analyzed and combined in dialectical or multipart wholes (parts can oppose, strenghten, harmonise, contradict, coordinate, synchronize, interrupt, prevent, accelerate etc. each other) in ways that produce the most efficient political results.

¤ Because according to Sc almost everything is socially constructed this gives it’s proponents a power that supersedes the power of “gods” and high priests. Two examples:

a) The function of the heart is, according to Sc, socially constructed no matter what medicine, evolutionary biology or other sciences say about it. This means that the function of the heart, in addition to pumping blood, could equally be determined to be giving rythm to drums, or to die (John R. Searle, The Construction of Social Reality).

b) Science proves that there are differences between races and ethnicities, but socially constructed political correctness (in everyday language, science, media etc.), affirmative action, redistribution of wealth, socialism, soft totalitarianism, free speech monitoring and suppression, etc. win out over science and reality. Thus is constructed the reality that Sc intellectuals want, and which gives them large political power.

¤ Sc also gives other advantages ... or “advantages”.  It is complex and counterintuitive, and this serves to strengthen the Sc intellectuals’ in-group definition, its boundaries and exclusivity, reducing the possibility of free-riding and outside infiltration (e.g. since conservatives regard Sc as non-scientific, not sensible, in fact stupid, this reduces the possibility of infiltratration by them. On the other hand Sc intellectuals infiltrate conservative groups and institutions eagerly and without compunction).

When Sc compels it’s political subjects to declare as “true” things they know to be false, stupid and detrimental to them and their group, this emasculates them psychologically, strenghtens the smothering power of Sc intellectuals and makes their subjects psychological slaves.

Studying and applying Sc includes elements of simpler repeats, so giving it rituals. These move it towards psychologically permanence, exact certain costs and thus reduce free-riding, help to memorise essential “slogans” (thereby giving practical operating instructions), define the in-group/out-group further, etc.  Constant repeating of the “racism” trope in different contexts, ways and intensity is one example. The r-word is a political invective, not a definition of something. If somebody foolishly accepts it is as a defining word for himself, he will be forced to explain it away: “I am a racist, but ...”  Real definitions don’t require that.

Sc gives a license, moral or practical, to do anything, i.e. to construct almost any reality; lie, cheat, murder, infiltrate, extort, to be immoral, make revolutions, rob, etc.  And not only that, it gives the possibility to mass murder and genocide, and regard it as an act of loving kindness towards all humanity.  For example, Finnish stalinists (taistolaiset) and many other cultural marxists, beginning in the sixties and seventies, regarded Stalin’s actions as morally good and loving towards all humanity, enlightened, progressive, etc. They said that the Soviet Union’s weapons are “Weapons of peace and progress” (this was also the official policy of their peace movement).  They said that communists’ wars (i.e. brutal and selfish wholesale murder, torture, rape and pillage to gain political power) are “Altruistic acts towards the betterment of humanity” and “Romantic and exciting, like a love affair”.  On the other hand they said that “Western weapons and wars are brutal reactionary acts of aggression and suppression” and “Selfish capitalists’ wars of exploitation”.

The Sc gives licence to use any need, aspiration, stupidity, knowledge, emotion, group, system, dependence, etc. of the people as a vehicle to power.

In short, the Sc is a secular selfish power religion.

It is necessary to pro-Europeans to study and learn from it and use it, but not, of course, the anti-human elements of it.

Today’s Sunday Mail carries a story about the leaking of details of a new MI5 operations centre by a careless council somewhere in south-east of England.  In the course of the article the website Secret Bases was mentioned.  It’s a four-part resume of mostly unacknowledged British intelligence facilities, supported by dozens of aerial photographs - many acquired through a “resident pilot”.  Part One is here.

Secret Bases is run by a guy called Alan Turnbull.  I take my hat off to him. If he has a counterpart in the US, he’s not nearly so outrée.  Does anyone know of a comparable site?