by Dr Tom Sunic

No verbal construct is so powerful and disarms so fully its critics as the expression “human rights.” Ever since the adoption of the UN Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, not a single government on Earth and not a single freedom loving academic has ever shunned this expression when raving about world improvement, or when wishing to improve his own lot.  And yet, since the adoption of this human rights clause there has been a blatant increase in the violation of human rights.

The answer to that is simple and does not represent a contradiction in terms. The lexical construct “human rights” is the most expedient tool for covering up abuses against specific rights of people. Today it has become a badge of honor for liberal plutocracy and its left-leaning scribes in search of a moral alibi for their military adventures or for their media mendacity. Upon closer grammatical scrutiny the lexical acrobatics of the “human rights” expression denote an abstract legal field that lends itself to a myriad of different definitions. Its generic nature precludes concrete rights of a given people, a nation, a race, a tribe, or a social group. The expression “human rights” is custom-designed for an uprooted and nameless individual or a dumbed-down consumer with no historical memory, and oblivious of his race and culture. It is a self-serving expression with different meanings in different social and historical contexts. For a Palestinian fellah living in a refugee camp on the West Bank, human rights have a different meaning from that of a neighboring Jewish-American settler whose long-distant cousins disappeared in Europe during World War II. For a Serb peasant human rights have one meaning; for a neighboring Albanian farmer yet another. For a DC pundit or a politician, human rights have a different resonance than for a poor white Oklahoma farmer who has been downsized, outsourced, or who has lost his job to illegal immigrants.

READ MORE...

The BNP is tearing itself apart somewhat tonight.

While 2007 has seen a variety of political advances for the BNP, the party has to an extent been held back and troubled by a string of leaks and misinformation briefings to political opponents, and by internal rumour-mongering designed to damage morale and confidence in the workings of various party departments, and in the leadership generally. Had this continued the result, whether by accident or design, would have been to disrupt, perhaps fatally, our all-important drive to break through with victory in the London Assembly Elections next year.

Some months ago, a BNP Intelligence Department was set up, with one of its key initial targets being to track down the source of these problems and provide the evidence needed to expose those responsible and put an end to their subversion.

Working closely with several other BNP Departments and following discussions with the BNP’s independent auditor, our Intelligence team – headed by Lance Stewart, a long-standing British nationalist and a former high-ranking officer in the South African Police - have now completed the first stage of their investigations.

As a result, two junior level national officials, Administration Officer Kenny Smith and Group Development Officer Sadie Graham, have today been removed from their posts with immediate effect on the grounds of gross misconduct and now face disciplinary charges over alleged offences against the BNP Constitution and Code of Conduct.

The degree of damage is difficult to assess, but it will go a lot deeper than the two who have been named here, and already expelled.

These two, it is claimed, established a blog titled Enough is Enough Nick with the object of forcing Griffin to fire three others whom they accuse of gross incompetence and bringing the party into disrepute.  One of these is Mark Collett, the party’s Director of Publicity, who twice stood trial alongside Griffin and, of course, twice won.

A few moments reading this blog will apprise you of some fairly colourful histories and rumours of histories.  American nationalists will recognise the moral template.

I suppose that rumours of MI5 black ops will also now play on everyone’s mind.  A second nationalist party may well emerge.  There is, of course, room for a second one in England, but not predicated principally on fighting Labour in the Islamic North.  Its orientation towards the BNP, therefore, and towards the electorate will tell us whether those black op rumours have any substance.  Let us hope not.

The LA Times carries an OpEd by Steve Fraser titled “Symptoms of an economic depression:

More significantly, for at least the last quarter of a century the whole U.S. economic system has lived off the speculations generated by the financial sector—sometimes given the acronym FIRE (for finance, insurance and real estate). It has grown exponentially while, in the country’s industrial heartland in particular, much of the rest of the economy has withered away.

This sounds similar to an article published in 1920 containing the sentences:

And now the two forces, Industry and Finance, are in a struggle to see whether Finance is again to become the master, or creative Industry.

This article was not, of course, predicting an economic depression nearly 90 years later…

Look for demonstrations in Europe on December 16 in sympathy with the Ron Paul “Tea Party” money bomb held in the US on that day:

I’m shooting the wind a bit here on the subject of financial muscle and political influence, so let me know if any of my assumptions are obviously wrong.

Here we go ...

One lesson that comes through loud and clear from the Ron Paul Presidential Campaign is that small-scale individual funding can compete in the political market.  In excess of ninety-nine per cent of Paul’s funds has come from individuals.  Forty-seven per cent has been raised from contributions of $200 or less.

Now, as these things go, the appeal of a Presidential Campaign is high-voltage, short-term, eyes-on-the-prize stuff.  “The Ron Paul Revolution” has to motivate donors only as long as it motivates enough voters to keep Paul in the game.  However, while the race for the Republican Nomination obtains, both supporter categories have an inbuilt - though quite generous - limit in terms of numbers.  They are drawn from that fraction of the American voting public that can identify institutional politics, and deduce that it serves not them but the institutional interests who fund it.  That’s the nature of the Revolution.

My guess is that the IQ gateway for that deductive capacity lies somewhere between 105 and 110.  Given that voting is itself an IQ filter, maybe two-thirds of the white voting public could, theoretically, be expected to know why they supported Paul in the booth - should they do so.  (This is not to say that the votes of others who simply “like Ron Paul” or “agree with him on the war” aren’t just as welcome, but a Revolution has to be a bit more revolutionary than that.)

Paul may or may not travel far down the presidential road in 2008.  But in shining a light for his brand of strict Constitutionalism he has shone a light for anti-institutionalism.  And that, clearly, has some carry-over into the much weightier and vexing question of the future of white America.

Now let’s look at the scale of the challenge confronting race-conscious white intellectuals as they contemplate Ron Paul’s already surprising achievement.

READ MORE...

More evidence, blind poll canvassing would be better for the Ron Paul campaign than normal canvassing.  A video describing MSNBC’s equivalent of an online “blind poll” showing how candidates match up with respondent positions:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21116732

Bloomberg reports that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a landmark case on the Second Amendment (right of “the people” to keep and bear arms with military intent).  The last time the Court heard a Second Amendment case was 1939—yielding an ambiguous decision.  So why the long wait to rule on such an important issue as the right of the people to overthrow a despotic government with their own militia?  It appears the Supreme Court was waiting for the perfectly bad opportunity:

1. The people increasingly see the government as despotic: e.g. the Ron Paul movement.
2. Following the old maxim that “Hard Cases Make Bad Law” the Court needed to wait until the would-be despots had the most pathological case imaginable:  Washington D.C.

Washington D.C. is among the most extreme outliers imaginable for testing law—and particularly with the high population of blacks and crime rate through the roof, it represents the nearly perfect opportunity for the Supreme Court to grab the weapons from all of “the people”.

Here are some of the would be despots solemnly presenting yet another case of gun crime in the nation’s pathological capitol:

And here are the rank orderings of Washington D.C., compared to the 50 states, in various attributes showing just how pathologically perfect it is for a despotic ruling:

READ MORE...

The Japanese are an ageing people with the low-birthrate typical today of a prosperous first-world economy.  The Japanese are also fiercely ethnocentric, and really, really don’t intend to import millions of black and brown gaijin.  The Japanese are also crazy about horizon technology, especially electronic gadgetry.

The result?

It’s on display at the 2007 International Robot Exhibition in Tokyo, a 1,000-booth show that ends tomorrow.  The greater part of the floor area is devoted to manufacturing robots, since that’s where the money is today.  But the buzz is coming from the non-manufacturing robot sector, which is still in its initial research phase.  The vision shared in the big Japanese corporations, universities and public research institutes involved in this effort is of a future in which, if robots don’t do everything (human contact work, for example), they will certainly share in the execution of the more utilitarian tasks.

The main categories where development is proceeding now are: maintenance (inspection, repair); home automation (cleaning, security); life assistance (for medical and welfare use); entertainment; hobbies.

The Guardian ran a piece on the exhibition today:-

In Japan, robots can already be found working as home helps, office receptionists and security guards, as well as on the factory floor. There were more than 370,000 industrial robots in use in Japan in 2005, according to a report by Macquarie bank, 40% of the world total, with 32 robots for every 1,000 manufacturing workers. The economy ministry calculates that the Japanese robot market will be worth more than £26bn by 2025.

There are compelling economic reasons for Japan’s obsession with robots. The population recently went into long-term decline and a reduced workforce is expected to struggle to fill jobs in the health and welfare sectors. As long as Japanese leaders remain cautious about relaxing immigration laws, robots will be seen as at least part of the solution.

Here are a very few of the Tokyo machines I’ve been able to identify:-

Hitachi’s EMIEW2 is an office worker.  Of course.  What else?

READ MORE...