Gene Wars

It should be clear to anyone who has read the thread to Matt Nuenke’s recent post that GNXP really has a problem with white people organizing on the basis of racial identity. The same principles that are taken for granted as normal when practiced by any other group somehow don’t apply to us. Going through the GNXP archives one can find, for example, godless capitalist (GC) taking pot-shots against pro-white activism or “white nationalism” (WN) on an irregular basis.

He also did the same on the old Dienekes blog (the redesigned one is here). He produced a somewhat breathless indictment of WN … a fantasy ideology … no chance of success, etc. Nonetheless, he spent considerable time attempting to delegitimize this seeming impractical fantasy. He asserted that white racial consciousness would destroy America and cause massive bloodshed through civil war and the use of nuclear weapons on American soil (!!!). He suggested that white Americans give up all hope of racial homogeneity and instead opt for the “surgical solution” of immigration reform in which the flood of unskilled immigrants would be replaced by skilled immigrants.

To put that in terms that we might better understand, essentially white Americans should let their ethnic genetic interests be ruined by one set of alien immigrants rather than another. They should elect to be displaced by Asians rather than by Mexicans.

GC ended his anti-WN screed with the following rather remarkable outburst:-

So I say: no. You will not do this in my country. You’re free to try moving to Iceland, or enacting immigration restriction in one of the mostly white countries in Eastern Europe. But America is my home. You will not forcibly expropriate my property, nor deport me from the land of my birth. I speak English with greater fluency than 99% of the semi-literates who post on Stormfront. I have more technical expertise than ten of them put together. What right have they to tell me I am not an American? None whatsoever. In the end, land has always been the property of those willing to fight for it, and America is no different. If you ever did fight ... you would lose. I am confident that it will not come to that, however. I’ve spent quite some time lurking on the SF boards. Every post is monitored by the United States government. Every IP is tracked. White nationalism will never become a viable political movement.

What can one say? GC puts up a strawman characterization of pro-white activism as being solely (or predominantly) about setting up a racially pure homeland through violent means. This is the “fantasy” that GC dwells on, though if it is such an obviously bogus “fantasy” why spend so much time arguing against it?

In any case, GC’s narrow focus on violent separatism ignores the possibility that separatism may be achieved through non-violent methods, or that racial violence may be started by non-whites (e.g., Mexican revanchists in the South-west). Of greater importance is the single-minded emphasis on the long-term final goal of racial separation, and the obfuscation of other, more immediate goals of pro-white nationalism.

In general terms, all pro-white nationalism can be characterized as an attempt to promote the totality of white interests. Certainly, separation is important and is surely one long-term goal. But no one knows when or even if that can be achieved, so there are more immediate interests that need to be addressed. These include the formation of the group-centered ideologies, social and economic structures, and political movements necessary to advance white interests in an (unfortunately) increasingly multi-cultural “western” (sic) world.

GC doesn’t like this, and wants to focus attention away from this agenda and toward his vision of racial separatist warfare and various nuclear catastrophes. Of course, from a white perspective the results of not promoting pro-white activism are considered more dire than any of GC’s extreme Armageddon-mongering. But since he is derived from an ethnic group that is in no danger whatsoever he can afford to be cavalier with other people’s interests. Indeed, he thinks that a thin veneer of immigration reform will be sufficient to put all the stupid whites to sleep.

If pro-white activism is so hopeless and dumb, then why is GC so obsessed with it? The answer is that there are more moderate strains of pro-white activism that, if followed through in an intelligent and sustainable manner, would produce results not to GC’s comfort or liking. GC is intelligent enough to realize what the establishment knows: that the multicultural regime in America (and Europe, Australia etc.) absolutely depends upon the socio-political passivity of the atomized White majority, contrasted with the aggressive group mobilization of minority groups. If significant numbers of whites became organized in defence of their interests then the game would be up for multiculturalism, and the multiracial regime would begin to collapse.

Majority (white) racial mobilization would inevitably lead to racial balkanization - a good thing for white America. As Salter states, the only thing worse for the majority group than a multiculturalism that does not work is a multiculturalism that does work. The best thing to happen to a people being displaced is for the regime doing that displacement to run into difficulties in the process. Of course, this would be a bad thing for GC. His comfortable life as a privileged minority in majority-passive multicultural America would come to an end.

Indeed, his ill-tempered rant quoted above clearly demonstrates that much of the politically-oriented content found on GNXP - particularly that by GC and Razib - has at its core what Guessedworker calls “migrant interests”. Well, GC was born in America - perhaps we should just simply rename the term “minority interests”. Of course, usually GC and fellows control themselves better than the above outburst, and couch their arguments in such a way as to obfuscate the self-interest and ethnic interest behind their assertions. Thus, their vision of a deracinated white America accepting the presence of skilled Asians (like themselves) is obviously in the “best interest” of America. But, the proponents of mass unskilled immigration, or of the Iraq war, or of many other maladaptive (for whites) scenarios say the same thing. Particularism can always be disguised as universalism, self-interest can be obfuscated, and it is always convenient for ethnically-interested minorities to suggest that national identity in a country where someone else is the majority be based on something other than ethnicity. But if, as GC himself has suggested, homogeneity is a good thing for China then perhaps it is a good thing for white Americans as well.

If a nation is more than just an abstract concept or a piece of land, but instead represents the home territory of a people, then that people may decide that they cannot always eschew majority rights in favor of minority rights.

Posted by JW Holliday on Wednesday, April 6, 2005 at 10:45 AM in Blogs & Blogging
Comments (187) | Tell a friend

Comments:

Posted by Kubilai on April 06, 2005, 12:46 PM | #

Excellent post and synopsis of the situation over there. The “armageddon” diatribe by him was thanks to yours truly. I remember posting about how ethnic interests always eventually lead to confict and the conflict is not necessarily initiated by the majority. Well, he went nuts, deleted posts, made statements of how WNs were not wanted on his site, and was going to take a tougher stance on this.

I believe you and GW hit the nail on the head with the “minority interest” take on the situation. As I mentioned in Matt’s post, GC and Razib strike me as your typical, intelligent, pompous South Asians. Completely full of themselves though they try to downplay it. Regardless of what they “want” for their board, their inaccuracies about Whites need to be corrected.

BTW, someone should tell GC he is as much of an American as those two young deported Turks were Danish.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 06, 2005, 04:19 PM | #

I couldn’t have put it better myself.

Posted by seelow heights on April 06, 2005, 04:25 PM | #

What this gang of Asians should realize is that it is very un-American to go around boasting about your (alleged) high IQ and membership in a cognitive elite. This is an attitude very alien to the traditions of Anglo-America.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 06, 2005, 04:51 PM | #

One thing that has always struck me as a bit odd is how the Asian cognitive elite is supposedly capable of working mircales in white majority nations but somehow helpless in their own nations. Quite bizarre I must say.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 06, 2005, 04:58 PM | #

I’ve never been to the GNXP site. From these posts it appears to be a enclave for south Asians to brag about their ‘exceptional’ cognitive abilities?

Perhaps if they know recent history the word ‘Gujarat’ ought to mean something?

If they are so smart why is their homeland a toilet? Are they still blaming their failures on the British?

Posted by Guessedworker on April 06, 2005, 05:19 PM | #

It is an excellent blog, Geoff, produced and frequented by a sample of the human race very much wider than South Asians. JW is merely explaining that a substantial quantity of salt is required for you or I to digest some of the output.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 06, 2005, 05:25 PM | #

GW: is the Razib character the head magooloo?

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 06, 2005, 05:25 PM | #

Geoff,

Have a look at this post and thread:

http://www.webmonkey.ws/flillip.php?url=http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/003859.html

What intellectual gymnastics must one perform to justify one’s existence in a country!

I am somewhat sympathic to these chaps I must say. That their families chose to move to the West was a decision they had no control over - for they were either not born yet or too young.

However, what would happen tomorrow if the status quo changed dramatically? It may seem unlikely to us but what if there was a chemical or nuclear attack (carried out by brown Muslims) on a large american city killing (say for the sake of argument) 2 million people followed by a massive change in public opinion wanting all non-native populations out (i.e. all those apart from whites, blacks and native americans)?

They would indeed be caught in quite a quagmire. America would be home no more and their nations of origin would be quite alien to them as well. Not a happy choice to make.

Everytime I read GNXP it is a reminder that there is something deeply troubling about any mention of the tragedy of their situation. Their greatest tragedy is not the tragedy of material deprivations but a tragedy of the soul. The idea that their very existence in a country was the result not of a natural progression of Nationhood in which they fit automatically but because of an act of treachery by the political class. And that must be deeply troubling.

These are questions that are not easily resolved. Which is why for all their shrieking about political correctness, they really love the status quo. Heaven help them if that beloved status quo changed dramatically.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 06, 2005, 05:34 PM | #

I agree. It is a good blog on issues of science, genetics, racial differences etc.

The fact is though that political questions are inevitably driven by conscious and sub-conscious human bias. As I am white, English and (even now) one of an overwhelming majority in an affluent and orderly society with a long and beautiful tradition rooted in this the history of this nation’s ethny. That certainly informs my perspective on politics, culture and history. It is bias. Nationalism is a prejudice but it is a healthy prejudice.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 06, 2005, 06:07 PM | #

Phil,

Rather, Nationalism is a somewhat harshly politicised reflection of ethnic genetic interest. I accept the necessity for Nationalism as things stand but fret over it somewhat as a single or leading political principle. Such a Nationalism shares with all forms of liberalism the pursuit of freedom as the ultimate good. Invariably, freedom has to be brought at the expense of those beyond the ethny, and obviously there is a long and inglorious history of never minding too much about the consequences of that.

Now, in a truly Conservative polity such in-group/out-group analyses do not arise, because Conservatism would naturally serve to protect and bind the ethny. Within it is a latent Nationalism that has no need of display. It is quiet. Just as Conservatism does not encompass the deracination and dispossesion we see in every homeland of European Man today, so it also has no use for a mad Nationalist dash to freedom.

Of course, it is liberalism which creates such Nationalism. I would prefer to be free of them both.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 06, 2005, 06:29 PM | #

True and this can be demonstrated empirically:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/lif_ver_pro_of_the_nat

You will note that the US which is practically filled up to the brim with immigrants shows a “patriotic rating” of 78 percent whereas Japan shows a rating of 27 percent.

Knowing the Nationalism of the Japanese, it is easy to see why they such a graph may be misleading. But, perhaps it is not. When one’s nation is not under constant attack, when one’s traditions are not being destroyed from within and when one is not surrounded by a sea of aliens, there is little need for chest thumping and flag waving.

I note that chest thumping and flag waving was far less pronounced in America one hundred and fifty years ago (compared to the America of today) even though Americans were more deeply nationalistic than they are now.

Posted by JW Holliday on April 06, 2005, 07:01 PM | #

I myself am quite favorably disposed towards nationalism, but one must understand what is meant. I think that the current extreme jingoism of today’s American nationalism is pathetic, and misguided. Essentially it is “constitutional patriotism” (perhaps a subject for another day?) cooked up by the establishment to distract red state white Americans from their ongoing dispossession and to reconcile them to those signs of displacement that are so obvious that no amount of distraction can suffice. Wave the flag and hoorah! - while ignoring the endless stream of Mexicans crossing the borders, the fact that specifically white interests are totally ignored by the leaders of both (sic?) political parties, the outsourcing now of even professional jobs, and the mounting national debt, much of which is now in the hands of the Chinese.

I abhor that kind of nationalism, bereft as it is from any connection to the interests of the majority, and disconnected as it is from harsh realities.

I also reject the offensive, disjunctive hyper-nationalism of the German National Socialists, who ignored, for example, the rights and interests of their Slavic neighbors to the East. What I do endorse is the defensive, rational nationalism described by Salter, which is universal in that it respects the rights and national aspirations of other peoples, and restricts competition to the spheres of economics, technology, etc - not physical dispossesion, warfare etc.

Nothing wrong with reasonable nationalism. A Japan which attempted to conquer Asia, and massacred large numbers of Chinese is a nation exhibiting pathological nationalism. A Japan that eschews immigration - even one that forcibly repatriates all non-Japanese (except diplomats, etc.) within its borders - is a sane, rational nationalistic Japan, as long as their nationalism stops at their national borders and goes no further.

Posted by Ronald A. Fonda on April 06, 2005, 07:50 PM | #

I believe you will find this website of interest: rafonda.com

It is focused on the evolution of H sapiens sapiens and both mitochondrial and nuclear genetic research is analyzed. I particularly invite your attention to the paper titled PLURAL LINEAGES IN THE HUMAN mtDNA GENOME which REFUTES the afrocentric assertion that all modern human mtDNA is derived from a single, African source. This paper’s conclusion has just been validated by research revealing that macrohaplogroup M is of Asian origin. This absolutely falsifies the absurd contention that all archaic Eurasians were ‘replaced’ by Africans.

RAF

Posted by John S Bolton on April 06, 2005, 08:33 PM | #

It would be good to have an allmerit immigration policy with numbers in the tens, rather than hundreds, of thousands. With a high enough threshold of English language ability on a test of conceptual ability, the majority would be European, and the total would be more than adequate for the needs of science and technology. It is most likely that any racial conflict of the magnitude mentioned above would be started by the minorities, under the instigation of maniacal power seeking officials, just like every race riot of the last few decades in the US. The difference would be that officials must act to sustain and increase widespread rioting into the full scale civil war conditions, and only officials with a passion to establish dictatorship can do that. The majority would be in defensive position the whole time, but the net result is partition, and this would be on terms most unfavorable to the minorities. They depend on net public subsidy, as a group, and are not an asset to an officialdom which had already secured the national emergency and justification for dictatorship that they crave. Thus, the partitions which arose by such a process, could be expected to yield a de minimis territory for the net public subsidy populations, which civil war had caused to separate for defensive reasons. The whole process would be orchestrated by the government, and the evidence for the trend in this direction is the policies which have the society on autopilot towards increasing intercommunal conflict, such as the combination of racial quotas and mass immigration of eligibles. The voting rights act is another such policy, which generates continual increases in interracial suspicion and hostility automatically. If these policies continue a little longer, it will be more correct to say that this is a race war pretending to be a nation, than a republic with community of values.

Posted by Mark Richardson on April 06, 2005, 08:44 PM | #

“Conservatism would naturally serve to protect and bind the ethny. Within it is a latent Nationalism that has no need of display. It is quiet.”

Brilliant! This is exactly true of the Australian nationalism I grew up with. Such nationalism was simply an everyday part of culture and identity, and didn’t need to be aggressively reinforced at all.

In fact, it’s only in recent years that the political class seems to be getting more nervous about promoting nationalistic unity in a multicultural society, and so we get these anthems played constantly on TV (“We are one, but we are many”) and constant fretting about defining and maintaining a national identity.

PS Excellent posts Mr Peterson and Mr Holliday.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 06, 2005, 09:50 PM | #

Regarding Ronald Fonda’s comment: 1) I wonder to what extent it’s accurate to characterize the out-of-Africa view as influenced by political correctness except possibly in some peripheral way; 2) readers (non-scientific ones) of the linked paper need to understand that what it questions isn’t whether people came from Africa but whether they were primitive or modern when they came (either way, they came); 3) the paper’s mention of a bottleneck (74K years ago) leads one to reflect that white Euros are now going through a bottleneck, in the form of coerced mixture with other races: the unmixed remnant which will emerge after the coercion will have been overthrown will have passed through (a milder but real) genetic bottleneck; 4) knowing chromosomal molecular biology and so forth isn’t necessary before one can utterly reject one’s own group’s forced replacement by another race or sub-race. The non-scientific among readers of this paper and others like it must understand that, if they don’t already. They don’t have to understand any of this technical stuff at all before getting mad as hell at what’s going on. They only have to understand that they have a race and they damn-well want to keep it. The fact that races and sub-races (ethnic groups) have genealogies (which all races and sub-races have, of course, and which is discussed in papers like this) no more means it’s OK to extinguish them than the fact that a man has a genealogy (which every man has, of course) means it’s OK to extinguish him. Neither the man nor the race need learn the molecular biology of the gene before protesting.

Posted by Arcane on April 06, 2005, 09:52 PM | #

The answer is that there are more moderate strains of pro-white activism that, if followed through in an intelligent and sustainable manner, would produce results not to GC’s comfort or liking.

Like what kind of results?

Majority (white) racial mobilization would inevitably lead to racial balkanization - a good thing for white America.

Balkanization? If the “moderates” want balkanization, then what the heck is considered “extreme,” or is there no extremes on the WN right?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 06, 2005, 10:05 PM | #

“Like what kind of results?” (—Arcane)

Like restoring the national-origins criteria for legal immigration which were in place from 1924 to 1965 and which worked perfectly, and were only tampered-with for purely political ends. Jewish pressure groups played a huge roll in that—which is why

this

is so interesting and welcome.

On Arcane’s balkanization question: I don’t know what WNs want exactly, but balkanization is better than extinction. Whites will either balkanize or disappear because race-replacers like GC offer them no third alternative.

Posted by albion on April 06, 2005, 10:22 PM | #

I noticed a comment in the previous thread about TopCoder. I did some web searching and came up with results that are very relevant to the present discussion.

Here is a list of MIT Eelectrical Engineering and Computer Science students with webpages:

http://www.eecs.mit.edu/students.html

American white gentile males are less than 20%. This is the same at other top universities and other math heavy departments. See:

http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/GradAffairs/gradhomepages.shtml
http://physics.harvard.edu/s/directory/grads

You can go down the list: at the ultra elite universities white American gentile males are thin on the ground. I have seen reports that more than 50% of science and engineering PhDs are from foreign countries. And those who are American are drawn from the Ashkenazim and Asian populations to a lopsided disproportion.

These are real facts. The very real arrogance of the people at GNXP is only a symptom. The cause is that technological innovation in the United States is increasingly dominated by non-whites. When they are white, they are often European immigrants or Jewish (and occasionally female). The faculty is a lagging indicator of this trend but the trend is real and can be seen at the student level.

Posted by albion on April 06, 2005, 10:37 PM | #

“surgical solution” of immigration reform in which the flood of unskilled immigrants would be replaced by skilled immigrants.

I don’t know about you, but for me and mine immigration is issue #1. I’m pretty comfortable with my family and life at present but I can foresee the river of blood that will come if the current immigration regime continues. Aside from immigration I can deal with the status quo.

The question is, do you think there will be broad based support for “further measures” if immigration policy changes? What “further measures” would you take? My feeling is that the gas in the tank of white nationalism, which is a sort of immune reaction, is immigration. Without immigration there is no galvanizing force. Is that not so?

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 06, 2005, 10:39 PM | #

Albion:

I started college in ‘85 and finished in ‘92. In that time I saw the transformation of both universities I attended into training centers for an alien class to rule my country.

Honestly, I despise them: I despise the greedy and de-nationalized elites that allow this to happen. I despise the arrogant foreigners that wrest a future from my countrymen; the countrymen whose ancestors built the nation. (I include both Whites and blacks descendent from slaves in this picture).

I’m not shy from saying I’ll fight to defend my country (not the gov’t) from this invasion. But I can’t do it alone.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 06, 2005, 10:52 PM | #

Albion:

> Without immigration there is no galvanizing force. Is that not so?

Yes of course. America has a very harsh history of abusive labor practices. The Mexicans now have replaced the blacks as the new slave class.

What White Americans need to ask their politicians and themselves is the question:

How will we be treated as a minority group?

How will we be treated by groups that have been taught to hate us, and blame us for their problems. How will they treat us when they blame us for all the evil and failures of their homelands?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 12:09 AM | #

“Without immigration there is no galvanizing force. Is that not so?” (—Albion)

Well, OBVIOUSLY! Why else do you think any questioning whatsoever, no matter how polite, no matter how timid, of Bush’s plan to replace whites in this country with Mexican peons, African Somalis, and other Third-World non-whites is repressed so harshly by the feds with lightning-like speed? (Is people telling the government, “We don’t want our country’s traditionally predominant race replaced with some other race” so terrible? Of course it isn’t. There’s nothing whatsoever wrong with it. It’s absolutely normal.) Any questioning of it whatsoever is instantly, brutally repressed because they’re afraid of whites’ anger over what’s happening going to bolster the WNs, and want therefore to nip in the bud that anger’s every least little manifestation of potentially drawing breath and coming to life. They know EXACTLY what they’re doing—they know EXACTLY that they’re in the process of replacing the white race against the wishes of the people—they know how momentous a change that is, they know how whites feel about it, and they’re scared of white reaction—so they’re extremely jumpy, trigger-happy. This is fundamentally why the order was given to kill the Branch Davidians. No, David “Koresh” hadn’t made any noises about race or immigration, but any show of strength by armed whites who aren’t self-professed liberals cannot be tolerated, because exactly what might happen is whites might extricate themselves from forced race-replacement—among other things being forced down their throats.

Posted by Geoff M. Beck on April 07, 2005, 12:24 AM | #

How to ruin your country

. Puke.

Posted by also on April 07, 2005, 01:02 AM | #

she’s pregnant too!

Posted by seelow heights on April 07, 2005, 01:21 AM | #

If these policies continue a little longer, it will be more correct to say that this is a race war pretending to be a nation, than a republic with community of values. John S Bolton
A one-sided race war with the government and minorities making war against Whites. A “republic with community of values”? That really sounds archaic.
Why else do you think any questioning whatsoever, no matter how polite, no matter
how timid, of Bush’s plan to replace whites
in this country with Mexican peons, African
Somalis, and other Third-World non-whites is
repressed so harshly by the feds with
lightning-like speed? Fred Scooby
The most effective form of repression is,of course, the govt-media brainwashing machine
that associates any form of pro-White sentiment with toothless Klansman or goose-stepping Nazis. The brainwashing activates the internal censor in the vast majority of Whites and prevents them from speaking out in their own interest. Since anything resembling WN is seen to be at once both sinister and comic the reluctance is understandable. The Minutemen were the latest to be put through the drill and had to repeatedly deny any racialism or affiliation with “white supremacists”. I’m sure they would have turned away Jared Taylor had he shown up. Once you have the public so well-trained not much coercion is necessary.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 01:30 AM | #

In response to Geoff’s and “also’s” posts above, I’ll just add—without passing judgment one way or another on the posts—that I agree with Steve Sailer: everyone should marry the one he loves, all differences of race, religion, nationality, etc., notwithstanding. Period. Full stop. End of story. Whom anyone falls in love with is STRICTLY NONE OF MY BUSINESS beyond in principle wishing the couple every happiness and success in their future life together.

Neither German nor Negro racial/national self-preservation depends one way or another on the formation of individual couples such as this one.

Respective German and African-Negro racial/national self-preservation DOES depend on the respecting by élite interests of the wish all communities have not to be forced to accommodate alien races sent to dwell amongst them in such inappropriately large numbers that they actually displace and finally replace the original people. The nexus between Geoff’s and also’s posts on the one hand, and on the other the natural wish of all community majorities to live among their own kind first and foremost is simply that when this wish of community majorities is respected, as it certainly ought to be in all cases, large-scale demography-threatening miscegenation does not take place. In a sense, people not wanting excessive incompatible immigration into their communities amounts to their not wanting large-scale miscegenation either, because one is the consequence of the other.

I view Negro-white, yellow-white, brown-white, and every other type of miscegenation on an individual level strictly none of my business. (How could any thinking person possibly view it otherwise?) What I oppose is the iron-fisted imposition of alien races on whole communities in unwanted volumes, especially when the result is the gradual enfeeblement and replacement of the original community through the step-by-step evolution simultaneously along several pathways which we all know only too well.

I aim at preserving the races of communities and nations, not at passing judgment on whom someone falls in love with and decides to marry. Someone will say, “Well, just multiply this particular mixed couple by tens of millions and the race vanishes.” But when communities’ wishes are respected as regards incompatible immigration this sort of thing doesn’t get multiplied by tens of millions. There are natural forces at work that preserve races and nation-states intact—provided they are not brutally contravened by government pushed by self-regarding, self-interested, uncaring, detached, hostile, devious, and destructive élites.

Posted by Andrew L on April 07, 2005, 03:03 AM | #

The top part of the report is true, with Whites and Nuclear weapons, I for the life of me can not Imagine a nuclear war head traveling far on the end of a spear, or an arrow for that matter, did I miss something , ha .And if we did not have Buildings would they blow up caves?, in Afganistan, we did, yep IQ in there some where, Leftoids still deny it, but what would they know about IQ, you have to have one to understand.Watch out for those spears.

Posted by seelow heights on April 07, 2005, 03:07 AM | #

A one-sided race war with the government and minorities making war against Whites
I should have said unresisting whites.
Also, I agree with Fred; don’t this blog into something resembling Stormfront. The focus should be on the lies and coercive power of the Multicult Regime.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 07, 2005, 03:34 AM | #

Fred, Seelow,

I take your point. I do not entirely consider Heidi and her beau, however, to be magnificently conscious, mature and independent beings, sans all suggestibility and self-freed of the deadly embrace of Western culture and life in general. Nope, they are weak actors, mostly slaves - like the rest of us. Their choices and actions feed from and into our culture, taking from and adding to the miscegenative currents.

I have in my computer a part-written post titled “The life of a beautiful woman” on exactly this subject. So I do agree with Geoff that it has quite profound relevance to our subject matter and can most certainly be addressed at some depth and without recourse to the type of prejudice you rightly counsel against.

Maybe I shall have to dust the draft off and post it.

Posted by Andrew L on April 07, 2005, 03:44 AM | #

Geoff is right, If the Commander and Chief controls the Defence forces, and the paradox is , he also is General of the new Invasion forces, so who will order the defence forces to defend against foerign invasion, Sanctioned by the Commander in Chief, Thats a mind bending conundrum,I suppose he can combine forces and totaly destroy America, But he is meant to defend agains foerign invasion, someone has got it wrong.and defend the rights and constitution of Americans, did some one explain that to President Bush, or not.

Posted by J. Richards on April 07, 2005, 04:55 AM | #

albion: I presented ranked statistics among the top-notch programmers at TopCoder, whereas you simply cite the racial composition of grad students at top science/engineering schools, without providing any indication of how these students rank with respect to raw ability. You try to distinguish between White Gentiles and Jews, even though my post simply compared Whites vs. non-whites…you should know that several Jews are a type of White people and that the Jews that are overrepresented in the top science and technology schools are usually White.

As to your statement that “I have seen reports that more than 50% of science and engineering PhDs are from foreign countries” and your statement that “…technological innovation in the United States is increasingly dominated by non-whites” are concerned, consider the facts. American Schools pay TAs and RAs miserably; you could earn more packing groceries, and many White students would rather earn a decent living via a regular job. Hence the reason – in part – why you see so many grad science students from Second- and Third-World nations, and this is observed most extensively among the lower-ranked schools within the top 50 or top 100 schools. Additionally, several grad European science students from well-off nations are here because research, usually free of much red-tapism, is far better funded here (even though they will earn a pittance as a TA or RA), and some of them may want to exploit the economic opportunities available here.

A lot of invention and innovation occurs in industry, not in school, and you need to look at the racial composition in industry, where you will see White domination, something that you cannot blame on racism because the bottom line in industry is profit and profit trumps any racial concerns, i.e., industry would not be foolish enough to keep away brighter minorities from top-notch R&D work to maintain the domination of White males. Schools are better known for basic science research, which is often funded by industry. Surely, Asians are overrepresented in science and technology departments of Universities, but they are not prominent among the innovators. In molecular biology, the typical seminal paper and the typical groundbreaking research is the brainchild of a White male, even though Asians publish several papers and are found aplenty in molecular biology labs. I will post more on this topic at a later date.

Posted by JW Holliday on April 07, 2005, 05:49 AM | #

Arcane wants to know what kind of results would not be to GC’s liking. I think this is obvious: a rising white racial consciousness is going to be uncomfortable for a non-white minority member who supports deracination for the white majority.

It is already galling, right now, for GC when intelligent, professional whites reject his aracial cognitive elitism in favor of a putative racial solidarity. That’s why he has a problem with Jared Taylor. Taylor is exactly the sort of intelligent, articulate white guy that GC wishes would embrace high-IQ Asian immigrants. But a look at AR confirms that, for Taylor, South Asians like GC are “them” and not “us”.

How many other whites, given the chance, would segregate themselves from GC and Razib as soon as possible? GC’s “I’m an American and how dare you think otherwise” would suffer a blow if a significant portion of American whites expressed themselves differently. Practical separatism would diminish GC’s personal field of action to whatever territory is set aside for Asian-Americans. Right now, he’s got it made. That wouldn’t last long in a balkanized America.

As regards the snide remark about balkanization and moderation vs. extremism, I am unconcerned by what Arcane thinks about my views on that subject. Racial balkanization is the best thing that can happen. Chemotherapy is harsh, but it is better than dying of cancer- and the current regime is cancer for white Americans.

As regards Albion …

In an age of instantaneous electronic communication where even American MRIs are read by doctors in India, it is not necessary for Americans to “live with” Asians in order to reap the benefits of their genius. After all, the fact that the Chinese are extreme xenophobes who expelled white British workers after the take-over of Hong Kong did not prevent them from using things invented by those of British (and overall European) ancestry. I believe that the rising salaries, increased prestige and, most of all, cultural coherence that would occur in a balkanized academia would attract more white Americans to such careers.

Posted by Stuka on April 07, 2005, 08:30 AM | #

Honestly, I despise them: I despise the greedy and de-nationalized elites that allow this to happen. I despise the arrogant foreigners that wrest a future from my countrymen; the countrymen whose ancestors built the nation…I’m not shy from saying I’ll fight to defend my country (not the gov’t) from this invasion. But I can’t do it alone.

Very well said. We’re not alone.

Fascinating discussion on this thread. Although, I’m not sure why any of you pay attention to Razib and his crew.

Posted by - on April 07, 2005, 08:35 AM | #

When children are involved, love cannot be the only consideration. Regardless of the race-destroying effects of miscegenation, we should at least be concerned for the well-being of the hybrid children who will be reared by parents psychologically dissimilar to themselves; denying them a spiritually nourishing upbringing, even assuming their parents stay together, which is less likely than if they were of the same race. To not be wary of the consequences, and not take race into account, is selfish of potential parents. To the race-mixer, the hybrid is a disposable stepping stone on the road to panmixia but it’s an entire life tragically blighted from the outset.

Posted by Kubilai on April 07, 2005, 08:57 AM | #

A comment on the Seal/Heidi relationship that was discussed above. In particular to Fred Scrooby’s comments. While I do agree that love truly is blind and I had no problem seeing a relationship of this nature a short 5 to 10 years ago walking the streets. Things have changed dramatically for us that I no longer view it as an “individual” decision any longer. As Fred alludes to in a roundabout way, these “love is blinders” or LIBs (LOL) are happening at an alarming rate and the only reason is due to the close proximity different races are forced to habitate. That along with the constant droning of not being a “hater” in the media has made it a “cool” thing to find someone of another race because after all, we are the same right except for skin color, right?

Again, WITHOUT the concerted effort towards miscegenation from all sorts of different avenues, I did not have a problem with it. However, the situation is quite different now and I cannot condone the idiocy of a Seal/Heidi relationship and the message it relays to impressionable young minds because it translates as simply another nail in our collective coffins.

For God’s sake, if people are willing to view a German and “British” marriage as acceptable, then they’ll pretty much accept anything….

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 07, 2005, 09:22 AM | #

Fred:

Miscegeny was illegal in most parts of the United States, until the late 1960s. I support those laws, I support a community protecting itself from such predation. Marrying a black is the greatest tragedy that can befall any race. Its simply a crime.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 07, 2005, 09:37 AM | #

Again Fred:

Those miscegenation laws were passed by representatitves of the people of the US. I know that Jackson Co, MO. had their miscegenation law on the books until 1967.

I think my views on racial separation and laws written to uphold that standard are not the exclusive domain of stormfronters.

Furthermore I accept Steve Sailer’s concept of race as a sort of extended family. As a family member I don’t want Klum to ruin our home.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 09:43 AM | #

I received an e-mail questioning my post of 4/7, 1:50 AM, in which the correspondent showed he’d misunderstood points 1 and 2 which I’d tried to make. It’s my fault for expressing myself clumsily in that post. In point one I was saying I didn’t think acceptance of the out-of-Africa theory was based mostly on political correctness, and in point two I was saying (for the benefit of non-scientific types who might read papers like the one linked in Fonda’s post) that scientists who dispute the out-of-Africa theory aren’t disputing that the ancestors of all people alive today originally came from Africa, but only whether, when those ancestors of ours came out of that continent, they were modern humans or humans at a more primitive stage of human evolution. Either way, no scientist disputes that all people alive today descend from ancestors who came out of Africa to populate the rest of the world.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 09:46 AM | #

Geoff, thanks very much for those responses. You and I view things a bit differently.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 07, 2005, 09:51 AM | #

To hell with the scientists, priests, quacks, the simpsons, or anybody else that says to marry a negro. Don’t be stupid!

Posted by Stuka on April 07, 2005, 10:00 AM | #

Well, my opposition to the completely grotesque Klum/Seal match is entirely selfish, as it means I no longer have a chance with her. Oh well.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 07, 2005, 10:00 AM | #

Fred:

It really doens’t matter if we disagree or not. The culture, via TV, Radio, Movies, Churches, and universities is encouraging black predation on white females.

Whether I oppose this, or not, it matters little.

Whatever my views I do not countenance violence against the transgressors, unless sanctioned by law.

Though I will implement stigma, as should all concerned Whites.

Posted by NatVan on April 07, 2005, 10:16 AM | #

you should know that several Jews are a type of White people and that the Jews that are overrepresented in the top science and technology schools are usually White.

Speak for yourself, Richardberg.

I also reject the offensive, disjunctive hyper-nationalism of the German National Socialists who ignored, for example, the rights and interests of their Slavic neighbors to the East.

Yeah. I’m SURE it’s the Slavs who you were concerned about. Speak for yourself, Hollowitz.

That’s why he has a problem with Jared Taylor. Taylor is exactly the sort of intelligent, articulate white guy that GC wishes would embrace high-IQ Asian immigrants. But a look at AR confirms that, for Taylor, South Asians like GC are “them” and not “us”.

Yeah, but Jews are considered white by Taylor, right? Which is why you’re A-OK with him, right Hollowitz? This would be hilarious if it weren’t so brazen. Two more operators or shabbos goys making moves straight from the Horowitzim playbook. Mike Levin would be proud!

Listen up people: Jews are the reason for white dispossession. J-E-W-S. Asians are a sidelight. Blacks and Mexicans are an annoyance. They are all symptoms, and the Ashkenazim are the disease. The borders would never have been opened without the Jews. The Civil Rights act would never have been passed without the Jews. White women would not have been turned against white men without the Jews. Europe and its kindred would never have been brought to their knees by guilt-tripping over the Holoco$t without the Jews. Russia would never have been subject to murder and destruction without the Jews.

No Jews = No NAACP, no lies about hate crimes, no Jacoby/Kristol/Chomsky/Zinn/Lewontin/Gould/Friedan/Steinem/Sontag/Schwartz/Goldberg/Marx/Freud to pathologize whites, manliness, America, self defense, etcetera etcetera. No Nuthin.

Cue Hollowitz and Richardberg insisting that Jews are white, and that Hitler was all bad, and German nationalism was “offensive”, and no matter WHAT we do, racial balkanization shouldn’t be RELIGIOUS balkanization, oh no sirree. It wasn’t like Hitler was reacting to Jewish communists in his country promising to do the same thing they did to Russia! Nah…couldn’t be…they’re white you know. Jared Taylor and Hollowitz and Richardberg told me so.

All hat and no cattle, these folk…or should I say all yarmulke and no cattle. Hollow out nationalism before it even starts. Oh sure, at first it’s just subtle remarks about the “offensive” German nationalism and the “well spoken” judeophilic Jared Taylor. But just wait till the hammer drops and the purge starts. Like National Review this will become yet another Israeli outpost. Get fitted for tefillin boys!

Posted by Guessedworker on April 07, 2005, 10:34 AM | #

Natvan,

Goodbye.

Posted by dlg on April 07, 2005, 11:22 AM | #

You banned Natvanstein? How rude! LOL

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 11:38 AM | #

Well said. It is unlikely that such a union would occur in the absence of (1) relentless propaganda emanating from the hostile meme machine and (2) the breakdown of the ties of community. One can have sympathy for “weak actors” and “slaves”, but the behavior cannot be condoned; it has consequences for us. To the extent we can, given our limited apparatus for dissemination of memes, we must condemn such behavior.

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 11:54 AM | #

It really doens’t matter if we disagree or not. The culture, via TV, Radio, Movies, Churches, and universities is encouraging black predation on white females.

This will get your hackles up, Geoff:

Joss Stone

In the context of a junior high school in particular, the articulation of a notion of predation on “white females” has particular resonance. As we know, blacks are more physically mature for their age (and are often older than their classmates because they have failed a grade). At that age, as well, status is disproportionately accorded to those displaying athletic prowess. There is a very real danger of exploitation, impregnation, and abandonment. However, in a broader sense, the predation is not against individual women but against our community. This is the point that Fred overlooks.

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 12:17 PM | #

This is fundamentally why the order was given to kill the Branch Davidians. No, David “Koresh” hadn’t made any noises about race or immigration, but any show of strength by armed whites who aren’t self-professed liberals cannot be tolerated….

I must point out that Koresh’s group was multi-racial: many blacks, mestizo Hispanics, and Jews included.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 07, 2005, 12:28 PM | #

That Joss Stone link is dead. Any chance of a repair.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 12:34 PM | #

Ben Tillman, thanks for pointing that out. I hadn’t thought of that when I posted my comment but thinking back now, I do recall there were some Negroes among the folk who perished at Waco (all killed on orders from behind the scenes that came directly from Hillary, orders which were carried out immediately by Janet Reno).

The point I was making in my comment stands.

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 01:14 PM | #

[URL=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=343511&in_page_id=1773]Will Joss’s love affair cost her the Gap millions?[/URL]

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 01:21 PM | #

That doesn’t seem to work, either. Perhaps if you copy & paste:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=343511&in_page_id=1773

Posted by Guessedworker on April 07, 2005, 01:29 PM | #

OK, it’s a software problem of some sort. Copy & paste, like the man says.

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 01:40 PM | #

J. Richards:

…you should know that several Jews are a type of White people and that the Jews that are overrepresented in the top science and technology schools are usually White.

The very essence of being Jewish is membership in an organization that has set itself up in opposition to the communities it lives within, an organization that seeks simultaneously to manipulate, dissolve, and digest that community. As members of such an organization, Jews canot be considered “white” in the relevant—i.e., the biopolitical—sense.

The fact that Jews are not that genetically distant from us and are even closer phenotypically is the crux of the problem. The function of the immune system is to distinguish “self” from “non-self” and to protect the body against the dangers posed by “non-self”. What is derided as xenophobia is simply the same principle applied to human social organisms. As is reflected in the words of J. Richards, Jews continually confound our societal immune system.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 01:43 PM | #

In regard to the poster signing as NatVan earlier: does anyone know what people like him, who dwell on the role of Jews and Jewish organizations to the exclusion of every other factor, think of articles such as this one

for example, which documents the role of the Catholics? What do people who dwell exclusively on the role of the Jews think of the fact that no one has ever heard any establishment Christian speak out in opposition to forced race-replacement? When was the last time anyone heard John Spong, Rowan Williams, Gene Robinson, Billy Graham, Robert Schuller, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, or the late Pope speak out against race-replacement immigration?

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 02:30 PM | #

“Conservatism would naturally serve to protect and bind the ethny. Within it is a latent Nationalism that has no need of display. It is quiet.”

I don’t see it as quite so brilliant. I’m skeptical of a return to “golden age” thinking on this matter because it’s what allowed the present situation to come about. In my opinion, explicit racial awareness is necessary to prevent a repeat. In the case of reality-deprived nations like Japan, I think education programs designed to illuminate the alternatives would be in order. Of course in practice this isn’t necessary because the Japanese elite have made up their minds on the subject and probably don’t plan to sell their people down the river any time soon. Still, I have no doubt the Japanese would be better off for it.

The objections to this explicit awareness sound like the aspects of gentlemanliness that we can do without (I’m all in favor of gentlemanly behavior - in it’s context - in most regards). Gentlemanly behavior arose in Europe among select European populations. It’s application outside its normal sphere is usually maladaptive. Aesthetics take a back seat to my race’s well-being I’m afraid.

The fact is that a racially unaware population is one that depends on circumstance for its own preservation. “Polite” silent agreements to pretend the subject doesn’t exist is a step toward that grave.

I mean none of this to say that race should be a constantly reinforced subject, or that a heavy-handed approach is required. I just mean to say that the old “safeguards” weren’t so safe and demand revision.

{on second thought, maybe that is what I mean. Unless a deliberate effort is made to make racial awareness an issue, a population is a few decades of manipulation away from racial abdication)

Fred Scrooby:
everyone should marry the one he loves, all differences of race, religion, nationality, etc., notwithstanding. Period. Full stop. End of story. Whom anyone falls in love with is STRICTLY NONE OF MY BUSINESS beyond in principle wishing the couple every happiness and success in their future life together.

Social norms influence behavior. I view race-mixing as a force destructive of my race, something I want preserved. Therefore, I feel social norms that discourage race-mixing and encourage inmarriage are a positive. I see no practical reason behind your pronouncements, only a universalist ideology that serves no useful purpose. The individual has a right to marry whomever he wishes, and the group has the right to heap opprobrium on whomever it wishes.

Neither German nor Negro racial/national self-preservation depends one way or another on the formation of individual couples such as this one.

I don’t see how you can support such an argument. In fact, I think it internally inconsistent if not self-contradictory.

Respective German and African-Negro racial/national self-preservation DOES depend on the respecting by élite interests of the wish all communities have not to be forced to accommodate alien races sent to dwell amongst them in such inappropriately large numbers that they actually displace and finally replace the original people.

I disagree. The respect you mention is of great import to racial preservation, but it is not an absolute requirement. A properly racially aware people needs no government to support that awareness.

The nexus between Geoff’s and also’s posts on the one hand, and on the other the natural wish of all community majorities to live among their own kind first and foremost is simply that when this wish of community majorities is respected, as it certainly ought to be in all cases, large-scale demography-threatening miscegenation does not take place.

I don’t see racial preservation as something with so simple a cutoff point. There are things which help and things which hinder it. Racemixing hinders it.

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 02:31 PM | #

I view Negro-white, yellow-white, brown-white, and every other type of miscegenation on an individual level strictly none of my business.

Unlike most WNs, I don’t see race-mixers as race-traitors (how can anyone betray something they know absolutely nothing about? how does one break an agreement one has not made?)

That does not mean that I view race-mixing as “none of my business.” One of the central points of racial preservation is precisely that my entire race is my business. Yes, my fellow whites may marry who they wish, and I may shun and heap scorn upon whom I wish as well. Really, this whole “it’s all good” attitude isn’t the self-evident affair that you seem to think it is. There are a great many “personal choices” that are prohibited by law, social convention, religious practice and the like. In a WN state, whites might very well marry whomever they wish, and their fellow whites might very well decide whether or not said spouse would be allowed to immigrate.

But when communities’ wishes are respected as regards incompatible immigration this sort of thing doesn’t get multiplied by tens of millions.

It’s all very well to say that natural forces will take over in the absence of countervailing unnatural forces, and it’s probably true. It’s also true that communities have the right to decide their own makeup, just as individuals have the right to choose their own partners. Heidi might indeed love her token of altruism, and her hypothetical white community might indeed decide that they she should love him somewhere else.

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 02:45 PM | #

Scroob, I’m all for a more rational WN meme concerning Jewry. I’m constantly battling Stormfronters to challenge their received beliefs concerning Jewry, to keep them honest. I find much of WN ideology on Jewry immensely counterproductive.

That said, let’s not equate Catholics and Jews in this context. Catholics don’t form the vast majority of the so-called whites who shill for destruction of the white race and the pathologization of whiteness. Catholics didn’t form the vast majority of the authors of Boasian anti-anthropology, Freudian quackery, Marxist Critical Theory, the Bolshevik revolution, the Communist agitation of Weimar Germany, the 1965 immigration “reform,” etc.; Jews did.

That Catholics didn’t put a stop to Jewry at all points is a shame, but it’s not even in the same ballpark as what Jewry’s been up to.

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 03:48 PM | #

Fred:

The Jewish community led, and the Catholic Church followed. The Jewish community set the fashion, and the Catholic Church adopted it.

Aside from the more general sort of cultural transmission (see Boyd & Richerson), the Jewish community directly lobbied the Protestant and Catholic leadership in the 1950’s and 1960’s. This need not be inferred from changes in Christian secular political positions; it is a matter of historical record. See, e.g., John Murray Cuddihy’s 1978 book, No Offense: Civil Religion and Protestant Taste, for the influence of Reinhold Niebuhr’s Jewish milieu on his thinking, and the January 25, 1966, article in LOOK magazine:

[URL=http://www.deicidedeniers.com/how_jews_changed_catholic_thinking.htm]How the Jews Changed Catholic Thinking[/URL]

Also see Kevin MacDonald’s discussion of Niebuhr in his response to a Paul Gottfried review:

[URL=http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/review-gottfried.html]MacDonald[/URL]

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 04:20 PM | #

Race Mixing:

Quite a few posts here expressing various opinions but none really get to the bottom if it.

Race-mixing of the kind we see today is possible only with a degradation in the character of the white female. This ultimately goes to the sexual revolution, the liberation of women and the corruption of female virtue (not many among us are old enough to even remember such a thing as female “virtue”). But it did exist once upon a time:

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/ch3_09.htm

Sex before marriage was not commonplace until the 1960s. In a society where women maintain their virtue, race-mixing reduces dramatically. It wasn’t anti-Miscegenation laws that kept race-mixing to a minimum in the United States, it was public opinion and the scorn that attended women who broke the “mould” and befriended black men. The concept itself was too alien for any black men or white women to ever entertain. This applied not only to the South (where an inter-racial couple could face violence) but it was just as strong in the North which had no legal segregation.

Race-mixing is most commonly found in the British underclass and working-class these days where the sexual revolution has really worked its “magic”.

While the simplest solution (at least in Europe) is repatriation of all aliens, our society has been wrecked and sexual licentiousness has now run amok. Anyone who cannot see that is missing the wood for the trees.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 04:37 PM | #

I should also add here:

The morality of race-mixing and the elevation of the Negro are now concepts that the western media exports with a certain vehemence across the entire world. It is no longer restricted to the western viewer or listener.

The corruption of mores is now a global phenomenon. The driving force (or the engine room) of this pheomenon is the phenomenally powerful western media that determines (most of all) the tastes of the young. Once you have corrupted a generation of young, centuries of rigid rules and traditions can disappear in an instant in a cloud of dust.

See here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/06/movies/06bomb.html?oref=login&pagewanted=print&position=

Posted by Guessedworker on April 07, 2005, 05:00 PM | #

Cue WM.

Yes, Phil, I agree with all you say, save that there are two sides to this sad story: brazen media and entertainment industry intentions on the one hand, yes, but the pathos of human suggestibility on the other. I find a certain compassion for the mislead. It is not a crime to be weak, for sure.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 05:20 PM | #

I stand corrected. I note that Svigor touched on this subject earlier:

I would add to what Svigor has said:

Mass Democracy is a slave of public opinion. Public opinion is the God that 99 men out of 100 bow down to - like an invisible hand that drives people to condemn one thing and approve of another thing.

To pretend that it is irrelevant is to live in a fantasy world.

Posted by Arcane on April 07, 2005, 05:48 PM | #

seelow, You said:
The most effective form of repression is,of course, the govt-media brainwashing machine that associates any form of pro-White sentiment with toothless Klansman or goose-stepping Nazis.

Tell me, with the exception of American Renaissance / New Century Foundation, VDare.com / Center for National Unity, the European American Issues Forum, and some chapters of the Council of Conservative Citizens, what WN grouping in the US does NOT have associations with Nazis?

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 05:52 PM | #

Tell me, with the exception of American Renaissance / New Century Foundation, VDare.com / Center for National Unity, the European American Issues Forum, and some chapters of the Council of Conservative Citizens, what WN grouping in the US does NOT have associations with Nazis?

Tell me, with the exception of Gene Expression, La Griffe, Steve Sailer, VDare, American Renaissance and a handful of other sites who except Nazis talks about racial differences in intelligence? And does the US Government not preach (with plenty of support from the US media) that people who speak of racial differences in intelligence are “would-be Hitlers”?

Posted by Arcane on April 07, 2005, 05:53 PM | #

Wow, maybe I was wrong… the National Alliance dude from National Vanguard is totally nuts! You guys are moderates by comparison… although I will say that what he says about Jews isn’t much different than what some of you have said about them, just in much cruder terms.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 06:11 PM | #

“The Jewish community led, and the Catholic Church followed. The Jewish community set the fashion, and the Catholic Church adopted it.” (—Ben Tillman, 7:48 PM)

The Catholics couldn’t think for themselves? They still can’t, on this issue? The Protestants couldn’t? And still can’t?

Certain Jews and Jewish groups have a lot to answer for. So do certain Catholics and Protestants—even more so.

On a different topic: Arcane, I wouldn’t talk about Nazis if I were you—the non-white whose site you blog for is an advocate of genocide against the white race.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 06:12 PM | #

although I will say that what he says about Jews isn’t much different than what some of you have said about them

Such as?

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 06:13 PM | #

Arcane,

I found another Nazi. Check this out:

http://galeb.etf.bg.ac.yu/~fd030490d/nazi.jpg

Posted by ben tillman on April 07, 2005, 06:17 PM | #

The corruption of mores is now a global phenomenon. The driving force (or the engine room) of this pheomenon is the phenomenally powerful western media….

Did you see this, Phil?

Fast forward into trouble

Four years ago, Bhutan, the fabled Himalayan Shangri-la, became the last nation on earth to introduce television. Suddenly a culture, barely changed in centuries, was bombarded by 46 cable channels. And all too soon came Bhutan’s first crime wave - murder, fraud, drug offences. Cathy Scott-Clark and Adrian Levy report from a country crash-landing in the 21st century

Post hoc ergo propter hoc? You be the judge.

Posted by Arcane on April 07, 2005, 06:20 PM | #

Wow, way to ignore my question!

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 06:25 PM | #

Ben,

I have friends who have visited much of South East Asia. They tell me that you can get almost any major American TV channel (Cable that is) anywhere in Asia these days. Kids the age of 13 (Thai or Malay kids) walk around in shopping malls dressed like “gangsta rappers”.

The chest-thumping, flag waving American “patriots” will rejoice in this. I am less sure. Fred Reed had an outstanding article on this:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/reed/reed41.html

There are several angles to Globalization. One, which I don’t disapprove of, is nations trying to build better socieites with Western capital and technology. But another aspect is that western TV values (race-mixing, gangsta-rapping, licentiousness, female sluttiness, homosexuality) becomes the value system of the generation that grows up on this stuff. And all one needs to destroy one’s heritage (whatever it is worth) is just turn on the TV.

As an organ of destruction, nothing better has ever been invented in the history of mankind.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 06:31 PM | #

What does Hollyork promote? Toleration of foul language and a concomitant coarsening of society; hostility between men and women; truculent illiteracy and the values of the black ghetto; the elevation of homosexuality and promiscuity; disdain for religion; use of drugs, interracial sex, destructive feminism, eradication of the remnants of Anglo-European Christian civilization. It is not accidental.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 07, 2005, 06:33 PM | #

Television is infinitely scaleable. With satellites, Hollywood bathes the world in the same mire. In Mexico, where I live, television and cine are heavily American. A month ago I was in Chile for a couple of weeks. Television was heavily, heavily American – CNN in Spanish, for example. Crossing into Argentina at Bariloche, I found the same. In Thailand, things are little better.

In the living rooms of the whole world, Hollywood has a little window open to the minds of the people. Nobody can escape. In remote towns in the Bolivian altiplano, the values of Hollyork dance on screens. Children in India, in Iran and Uruguay, day after day gradually become what Barbra Streisand and Sylvester Stallone think they should be. Such people know and care nothing for civilizations that have existed for thousands of years.

How perfectly incredible that a group of – what? A hundred producers, studio heads, and network CEOs? A thousand to be conservative? – can bypass governments, subvert ancient cultures, and make the world as unhappy and divided as they have made the United States.

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 06:40 PM | #

Arcane, what’s so special about “associations with Nazis?” The Democrat party has “associations with Communists, Marxists, and socialists.” So what?

You seem to think that WNs who wish to seem reasonable must avoid any contact with any National Socialist. Why should a WN or a racially aware non-WN observe this “rule?” Further, just what is it about National Socialists and others that has crawled up your ass?

Yes, I understand that an infinitesmal number of WNs advocate genocide against non-whites, but that isn’t a requirement of either WNism or National Socialism. Why not stick to the point and condemn genocidalists and genocidalism?

I just don’t get all creepy-crawly over the word “Nazi” the way you do. I find your use of the word as an epithet laughable. I oppose genocide and the provocation of “hot” race war, but I don’t mind someone adapting National Socialism to the current times (I do think those outside of Germany who profess unreconstructed National Socialism rather idiotic, but that should go without saying).

The “Nazis” seelow was referring to wasn’t the actual National Socialists extant, but rather the caricature of the Nazis of the Third Reich propagated endlessly and at enormous expense of capital and effort by the Jews in the entertainment industry.

Posted by dlg on April 07, 2005, 06:46 PM | #

Actually, Phil makes a good point about not many people aside from Nazis being willing to discuss racial differences, IQ and “the Jewish question”. This is why I often find myself on sites (including this one) where views are expressed which I find abhorrent - because at least they’re talking about these things.

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 07:03 PM | #

That’s true dlg, and has some interesting consequences. For example, the fact that WNs represent the lion’s share of those willing to discuss HBD is likely to have two consequences: WNs will have a hugely disproportionate chance to bend the ear of the average Joe in search of information on HBD, and the mainstream media will have to broach the subject of HBD in order to rope Joe back onto the reservation.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 07, 2005, 07:06 PM | #

Wow, maybe I was wrong… the National Alliance dude from National Vanguard is totally nuts! You guys are moderates by comparison… although I will say that what he says about Jews isn’t much different than what some of you have said about them, just in much cruder terms.

Shucks, now I’ll have to ban everybody. You, too, dlg. Don’t do a good enough job of defending your own people.

Nope, it’s just gonna be Arcane from here on. And GC. And Randy. Let’s hear it for Randy.

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 07:10 PM | #

Oh, and if you find abhorrent views frequently-expressed here, you’d better keep clear of any Leftists sites. The advocation of buggery, nihilism, debauchery, race-suicide & race-destruction, collective ethic theft and dispossesion, and across-the-board eradication of posterity might give you the vapors LOL.

Posted by dlg on April 07, 2005, 07:37 PM | #

Actually, I do stay clear of leftist sites. When it comes to blog surfing, I stick to a neocon/libertarian/HBD orbit.

Posted by Effra on April 07, 2005, 08:01 PM | #

Phil Peterson: “Race-mixing is most commonly found in the British underclass and working-class these days where the sexual revolution has really worked its “magic”.”

However, this miscegenation (said to be the most intensive in the world) can be interpreted as the black-minority male incomer conceding defeat and breeding his bloodline out by dilution. Given the large disparity between numbers of white and black low-IQ people of reproductive age, the grandchildren of b/w mischlings are likely to mate with whites and further reduce the Negroid quantum. Provided we maintain rigid barriers against further black influxes—and public opinion is heavily restrictionist—we may wash most of the negritude out of the British bloodstream by c. 2080, given the speed at which the underclass reproduces.

Assortation—the tendency of culturally and intellectually similar folk to flock together—ensures that not too many blacks will score high-class white British girlfriends, while the unfeminine looks and chippy characteristics of black sistahs limit most of them to casual relationships with other blacks. Admittedly this sex skew limits the pace of assimilation via race-mixing, but we have not yet discussed assisted repatriation… And the more black delinquents are locked down, the fewer opportunities they will have to be ‘babyfathers’ with black women.

Possibly the greater threat to Britain’s homogeneity comes from equally intelligent Asiatics marrying whites; but so far the phenotypes of Anglicised Hindus, Chinese and Buddhists (though not Muslims) have seemed more compatible with ours. Moreover, most Islamist Muslims of the suicide bomber type are low-caste Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Arabs and Negroid converts, who are unlikely to make much of a splash in the White/Oriental/Jewish marriage market. They may plant literal time bombs, but not demographic ones.

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 07, 2005, 08:18 PM | #

Effra, I’ve noticed your observation in the USA. Especially the preponderance of White Male / E. Asian female(Chinese & Japansese) intermarriage.

The low class (perhaps cognitively depressed) whites are mating with the blacks, and the middle/upper class whites are mating with the orientals.

I’m not sure what this means for the future. Yes, I think you’ve hit on something.

Again, I see few marriage between the S. Asian Muslim types you detail, except the occasional white degenerate woman, doing it for money so the Paki can get citizenship.

Posted by Svigor on April 07, 2005, 08:37 PM | #

The damage that race-mixers do is hardly limited to themselves. I think the example they provide is more damaging. Mixed-race children mingle with their white relatives, and these white children are raised to think of them as their own. I’m close friends with such a family, and it’s frustrating to see this at work.

Blacks presumably have little problem with expressing their disapproval of these “mischlings,” (in the example above, the black family of course is the one openly mortified at the miscegenation) but whites? Most whites would be sooner drawn and quartered than “teach a child to hate.” (really, in my experience, it has far more to do with preventing children from repeating potentially embarassing/problematic ideas at school than it does with preventing children from “hate,” but the effect remains the same).

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 07, 2005, 08:51 PM | #

This business of viewing the white underclass of a white country as dispensable is wrong. Each nation-state’s race is an organic whole, none of whose parts can be replaced with an incompatible race without some sort of negative consequence to the whole. The races of nation-states shouldn’t be tampered with in any of their parts, upper, lower, or middle.

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 07:19 AM | #

Well, Svigor almost answered my question… almost… I give him credit for at least giving something of an answer.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 08, 2005, 07:39 AM | #

Jeez, Arcane, your question is NOT a question. It is an implicit accusation to which no “answer” can be given. How often do you beat your wife, by the way?

Posted by J. Richards on April 08, 2005, 09:09 AM | #

Guessedworker,
I am glad that unlike razib of GNXP, you did not simply erase the rant by NatVan, thus showing your stronger commitment to freedom of speech. I would recommend that you not ban NatVan but flag such absurd posts in the future with the disclaimer that the outrageous comments expressed do not reflect the views of any on the bloggers at majorityrights, but are left there by the moderators in the spirit of freedom of speech. I don’t think that you need be much concerned about NatVan spamming the comments section frequently because NatVan will post at most a few more rants and will go back to posting at Stormfront or equivalent.

NatVan,
Whereas Kevin MacDonald has convincingly argued that some Jews have played a prominent role in working against Western interests in the 20th century, it is hardly appropriate to hold all Jews responsible. I have known several Jews for whom their Jewishness is no more a part of their identity than, say, the fact that they have brown hair or drive a Honda Accord or equivalent. Several Jews look White and are interested in preserving the West as much as many White gentiles, i.e., these individuals are appropriately referred to as White. On the other hand, there are several leftist White gentiles that would destroy the West with glee. Learn who your allies are in preserving the West and don’t spurn someone as a potential ally if he/she simply happens to be Jewish. By the way, I am not Jewish.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 08, 2005, 11:05 AM | #

J Richards,

I did IP-ban him. The reason was two-fold.

First, when a commenter has exhibited, let us say, untoward emotion I have til now reckoned on being able to appeal to some understanding of the way one behaves in another’s house. There’s nothing special about this. It’s just how ordinary, decent people behave. In Natvan this decency was not immediately apparent, nor any redemptive qualities for that matter. I could foresee only a long, pointless and unedifying argument if I attempted to engage him.

Second, it’s not as if his subject matter is never aired here. The MR threads are enlivened by a small number of broadly nationalist commenters who are intelligent and articulate but also decent people. They seek to persuade on the basis of factual debate, not abusiveness. This is a better way for newcomers to the JQ to encounter the nationalist side of the argument. It is a tender plant, however, and needs to be protected against the ruder elements.

Posted by HonestAbe on April 08, 2005, 12:35 PM | #

Was anything NatVan said substantially wrong? Is it not true that Jews ARE mostly responsible for the trends he identified? One does not exactly see Chinamen agitating, agitating, agitating against “racism”. Chinese imported at the turn of the century kept their heads down and worked on railroads; Jews undermined gentile society progressively, starting with Franz Boas and culminating in Noel Ignatiev. The distinction could not be sharper, and speaks to the question of why we are focusing on two Asiatics rather than the real threat to Western Civilization.

Is it not important to ask why Richards and Holliday think Jews are white, or why they say Jews should be treated on an individual basis but nonwhite right-wingers should not, or why they seem to like Jared Taylor so much?

Banning NatVan for his crude and confrontational tone is understandable. Banning him for his content is not. Tillman, Wintermute, and others would agree with 99.999% of what he said.

I would much prefer an honest ethnic like Razib to an infiltrator. Forgive me for my paranoia, but given that erstwhile conservative institutes like National Review are now printing screeds in favor of Trotsky by Stephen Schwartz et alia, my caution on this matter should be understandable.

Are Richards and Holliday gentiles? Perhaps they are “not Jews” in the same way the converso Larry Auster is “not a Jew”? Perhaps they have significant others or dear friends who are Jewish? Such a relationship would strain their balance to the same extent an interracial match would.

These are important things to know - as important as knowing that the authors at GNXP are Asiatics. Knowing that, I can take their genetical arguments and discard their political ones. Knowing whether Richards and Holliday are Jews - or married to Jews, or have Jewish in-laws, or are Jewish converts, or have any such compromising ancestry - would be of utmost relevance to the readers of Majority Rights.

Posted by Guessedworker on April 08, 2005, 01:09 PM | #

Abe,

JW is known to me personally to be an American of European extraction. I am perfectly confident that JR is English in the fullest sense.

Concerning “content”, it is not a matter of whether Natvan is substantially right or wrong. I have not banned an opinion. Indeed, if I wanted to kill off all mention of the JQ on this blog I would let Natvan run and run until we were all heartily sick of it. No, it is for the opposite reason - I believe the JQ must be debated on its merits - that I have banned harmful advocacy.

I believe JW will answer your other points in the next day or so.

Posted by Salopian on April 08, 2005, 02:27 PM | #

Back on thread, and a warning to Joss Stone.

This is the real, *human* cost of the promotion of miscegination to the young, dim and impressionable.

This story was in the local papers when I went home to see the folks at Easter. In Shropshire of all places!

Note Mr Denniss has fathered 15 (fifteen!) other children!

http://www.shropshirestar.com/search/results.php

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 02:46 PM | #

J. Richards:
I have known several Jews for whom their Jewishness is no more a part of their identity than, say, the fact that they have brown hair or drive a Honda Accord or equivalent. Several Jews look White and are interested in preserving the West as much as many White gentiles, i.e., these individuals are appropriately referred to as White. On the other hand, there are several leftist White gentiles that would destroy the West with glee. Learn who your allies are in preserving the West and don’t spurn someone as a potential ally if he/she simply happens to be Jewish.

I have given this issue much thought and I agree with you that all Jews are of course not bad* or even enemy and that Jewishness is certainly not ipso facto evidence of malfeasance or racial enmity. I disagree that it is as simple as identifying who is who and keeping the bad apples out. Crypto-Judaism, widespread Jewish self-deception, the Jewish propensity for activism, and Jewish intelligence mandate a longer look at the issue. I personally think it is safer to err on the side of caution. There are only 14 million Jews in the whole world. Subtract those that in some way, shape, or form oppose white racial interests and you haven’t enough of them to populate a small city. That reward isn’t worth the risk (Jewry has a history of infiltrating and subverting opposing movements). Remember, Jews have been practicing ethnic warfare for thousands of years. They’re much better equipped for it than we. If they want to form explicitly Jewish groups working for the preservation of the white race then I say all power to them. I draw the line at welcoming them into the ranks of non-Jewish groups.

Also, I think self-identifying as Jewish makes a particular statement. If I was a Jew who felt I was white and that the white race must be preserved, and I knew what I know now, I would quite simply cease being a Jew altogether. I would disclose that I had been born a Jew and that I no longer was. I think a requirement of this sort should be considered by all those who think Jews eligible as allies; I also think it would turn away the vast majority of potentials as surely as Jesus turned the rich man away in Mark 10:21.

Again, I argue all of this in the context of Jewish history and in erring on the side of caution.

*I think even most “bad” Jews are motivated by a varying mix of “good” intentions and self-deceptive justifications.

Posted by dlg on April 08, 2005, 03:09 PM | #

Svigor, if being a Jew is in fact an ethnic category, then one can’t cease being a Jew any more than one can cease being white, no?

Fyi, I am a Jew who considers himself white (I’ve never met one that didn’t). I’m more concerned about the disappearance of Jewry than I am about the disappearance of the white race, for simple statistical reasons. As you note, there are about 14 million Jews in the world. How many white people are there in the world? How many countries are majority white? For Jews, there is always the issue of self-prerservation. For white people and nations, it is more a matter of getting collective houses in order (e.g. through restrictive immigration). There is no danger of extinction.

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 03:15 PM | #

Svigor,
OK, for hypothetical reasons, let us suppose that, yes, Jews are indeed the main antagonist to the survival of the “White” race. What would you say should be done about the “Jewish problem?”

1. Who would qualify as a Jew? How much Jewish “blood” would a person have to have in order to not qualify as a Jew?

2. Would you simply eliminate the rights of Jews, or would you deport them?

3. To where would you deport Jews? To Israel?

4. Once deported, would that mean that the “Jewish Question” had been solved?

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 03:31 PM | #

As you note, there are about 14 million Jews in the world. How many white people are there in the world? How many countries are majority white? For Jews, there is always the issue of self-prerservation. For white people and nations, it is more a matter of getting collective houses in order (e.g. through restrictive immigration). There is no danger of extinction.

Its true that because of lower numbers Jews are in greater danger of extinction, on the face of it.

However, as many commenters here have noted, Jews have aggressively promoted open borders in the United States, the most philo-semitic nation on earth. It is now an established fact that organized Jewry in the US has given complete and unflinching support for open borders. The only reason whites are threatened in the US today is because of open borders (which Jews by a massive majority continue to support). Now before our dearest friend Arcane yells “Nazi!” (on a side note, I have seen men obsessed with women and/or money neither of which is particularly healthy but not unnatural. But to be obssessed with Nazis every waking minute of your life…..anyway), what I have said has been noted in an excellent and thought provoking article by Lawrence Auster (I hope Arcane doesnt turn around and yell Nazi at him next).

The question is why do Jews support this? The majority of American Jews must believe that reducing American whites to a minority is essential for the survival of Jews or perhaps beneficial for Jews in the long run. Ergo, there is a clear conflict of interest here. You agree? Jews cannot have open borders and Gentiles cannot have closed borders. You can’t have both.

As for the idea that Jews care less about whites and more about themselves - this is clearly established and requires little corroboration. My only point then is that if it is legitimate for Jews to pursue their own interests as a group (even when they are not citizens of Israel but America) even when their interests are in direct conflict with the interests of Gentiles, it cannot be illegitimate for Gentiles to pursue their own interests. If anything, American whites have nowhere to go. Jews have Israel to go to if America sinks. And traditionally Jews desert a sinking ship before almost anyone else. Jews left South Africa in large numbers long before the end of Apartheid (even though the anti-Apartheid movement was heavily populated by Jews).

As a white Gentile (even though I am not American) it is impossible for me to have unquestioningly philo-semitic views on the Jewish question. To do so, I would have to block all knowledge of this issue, which isn’t possible.

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 03:41 PM | #

what I have said has been noted in an excellent and thought provoking article by Lawrence Auster (I hope Arcane doesnt turn around and yell Nazi at him next).

Auster is one of my favorite writers and, based on my last long correspondence with him, a pretty good guy. He’s also a Catholic-convert from Judaism, which means that people like Svigor would frown upon him.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 03:47 PM | #

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/000637.html

Auster doesn’t hold to the “poposition nation” ideology that our dear friend Arcane adores so much.

Auster has in fact admitted repeatedly on his site that the 1965 Act was a disaster for American whites. He does not see America as a nation only defined in “ideals” but sees it as a majority white nation, a nation historically populated and built by Europeans.

I wonder what our friend Arcane makes of all that. I suppose his reads Auster’s views on the West Bank and that suffices for his purposes. But there is more Auster than that.

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 03:50 PM | #

What is European America?

Our friend Arcane on the other hand has white in Quotes.

100

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 03:52 PM | #

Phil, You said:
Auster doesn’t hold to the “poposition nation” ideology that our dear friend Arcane adores so much.

I have never subscribed to the “proposition nation” idea. I don’t know where you got the idea that I did… just because I disagree with your ideas as to what makes up a nation doesn’t mean that I subscribe to that.

101

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 03:54 PM | #

Phil, You said:
Our friend Arcane on the other hand has white in Quotes.

No, I have “White” with a capital “W,” since in one of the other comment threads here I had a disagreement with a certain individual who stated that there is a difference between “White” people and “white” people, because the capitalization of the W in “White” meant that the person is of “White” European, non-Jewish origin.

102

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 03:58 PM | #

I don’t know where you got the idea that I did…

In that event perhaps our friend must grace us with his wisdom and share his conceptions of American nationhood with us?

103

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 04:01 PM | #

I’m still waiting for an answer to my previous questions.

104

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 04:07 PM | #

I also note that on another occasion our dear friend Arcane accused us of being “Un-Christian” for suggesting that there be such pesky things as borders between nations.

Here is Auster on the issue:

Is immigration restriction immoral or un-Christian?

I know that what I’ve said up to this point will offend many conservatives, particularly Christians. For one thing, the Christian church consists of people of every culture and race, so why can’t a nation? The answer is that the church is a heavenly organization, it is not responsible, as a nation is, for the defense and preservation of a particular earthly society. Mexico and Nigeria, for example, are largely Christian, but in cultural terms are radically different from the United States.

To believe that all peoples on earth should join our country is the very idea that God rejected at the tower of Babel. God said he did not want all men to be united in one society, because that would glorify human power. If I may presume to say so, God had a more modest idea of human life on earth. He wanted men to live in distinct societies, each speaking its own tongue, developing its own culture, and expressing God in its own way. This is the true diversity of cultures that constitutes mankind, not the false diversity that results from eliminating borders and coercively mixing everyone together, which destroys each country’s distinctive character. Consider how today’s multicultural London has lost much of its Englishness, and increasingly resembles multicultural New York.

So I would respectfully suggest that when Christians translate the spiritual idea of the unity of people under God into the political ideology that people from all cultures should be allowed to come en masse to America and other Western countries, that is not the traditional teaching of the Christian church, that is a modern liberal idea, that is the Religion of Man, which has been infused into the Christian church over the past 50 years.

But if this is the case, how can we reconcile our potential spiritual unity as human beings under God with our actual cultural differences? The answer is that in individual and private relationships, people of different backgrounds can relate to each other as individuals, without discrimination of culture and ethnicity. But on the group level, on the level of entire peoples and nations and mass migrations, cultural differences do matter very much and cannot be safely ignored.

Perhaps our dear friend will now accuse Auster of being Unchristian, unless our friend thinks that Auster is Christian but we are unchristian for supporting the same thing?

105

Posted by Guessedworker on April 08, 2005, 04:07 PM | #

What would you say should be done about the “Jewish problem?”

By implication you are reverting to Swastika-time. It’s a strawman of stunning proportions. Why do you think re-establishing control over the field of ideas requires considerations of blood. It requires consideration of ideas, obviously.

106

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 04:09 PM | #

Guessedworker,
By implication you are reverting to Swastika-time. It’s a strawman of stunning proportions. Why do you think re-establishing control over the field of ideas requires considerations of blood. It requires consideration of ideas, obviously.

If you complain about a problem, but never offer any solutions for the problem, then you are nothing but a complaining idiot. Obviously, you think something should be done… what’s funny is that you’re too cowardly to say what you think should be done.

107

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 04:10 PM | #

Phil,
I already addressed Auster… now you’re just copying and pasting crap that has little relevance to what I said about him. You still have not addressed the fact that he is Jewish and that your buds here like Svigor, ben tillman, and Wintermute would deport him.

108

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 04:14 PM | #

you are nothing but a complaining idiot

It seems you were never taught good manners. Its a bit late for that now.

109

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 04:16 PM | #

now you’re just copying and pasting crap that has little relevance to what I said about him

It only addresses other accusations Arcane routinely threw at people here. Unless that was then at the whim of the moment, just for the fun of it with no real seriousness.

110

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 04:16 PM | #

Phil,
Why the reluctance to answer questions, eh? I stand by my comments… if you do nothing but complain and never advocate or take any action, then you are nothing but a complaining idiot.

111

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 04:22 PM | #

Phil, You said:
It seems you were never taught good manners. Its a bit late for that now.

Hmmmm… what if I said this?

“The other individual is a third-rate intellect and anti-white bigot who has this constant neurotic tic of extreme insecurity about his math powers (he must be pretty bad at math), is mentally unstable, and is a moral dog-turd.)... As it is now, I don’t soil myself by going there… Don’t cite examples supposedly to the contrary which would be too wishy-washy for the Teletubbies audience, please. We’re talking about frankness and explicitness.”

Oh, that’s right… I didn’t say that. Fred Scrooby did.

I say throw some soap in Fred’s mouth, and when you’re done you can try to wash out mine.

112

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 04:27 PM | #

if you do nothing but complain and never advocate or take any action, then you are nothing but a complaining idiot.

Nietzsche’s writings (for the duration of his life) focused on the inadequacies of liberalism and the need to destroy it. He does not, however, provide a political order as an alternative to the new liberal order.

By Arcane’s logic, Nietzsche would be a “complaining idiot”. Allan Bloom wrote “Closing of the American Mind” exposing the vulgarity and sheer rottenness of Liberalism in the modern American University. But he lays down no prescriptions, no “solutions”. By Arcane’s logic, Bloom was also a “complaining idiot”. Quite a pedigree!

113

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 04:31 PM | #

and when you’re done you can try to wash out mine.

Im not your parent.

114

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 04:38 PM | #

Phil, You said:
<i>Allan Bloom wrote “Closing of the American Mind” exposing the vulgarity and sheer rottenness of Liberalism in the modern American University. But he lays down no prescriptions, no “solutions”. By Arcane’s logic, Bloom was also a “complaining idiot”.

To the contrary, on pgs. 380-382 he says exactly what he thinks should be done and why it should be done.

As for Nietzsche, if there is anybody in the world who can actually find some coherence in his work, well, I’d say that’s an achievement in and of itself.

115

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 04:40 PM | #

Phil, You said:
Im not your parent.

Then why are you complaining about my manners and not Fred’s, eh?

I didn’t realize you were Fred’s dad.

116

Posted by dlg on April 08, 2005, 04:40 PM | #

Phil, I certainly wouldn’t want you to hold unquestioningly philo-semitic views (I certainly don’t), but I would question your assertion that Jews want white people to become a minority in America. Maybe I just haven’t met enough Jews in my life, but I have never heard this opinion expressed, directly or indirectly, by a Jew. (I have encountered the decidedly non-Jewish Robert Lindsay wishing destruction on white Americans on this site, however.)

As for your point about Jews having Israel to go to, I could counter that non-Jewish whites have every country in Europe to fall back upon.

I am not sufficiently well-informed about the immigration issue to debate it, but my impression is that while many Jews err on the side of excessive liberal tolerance, there are also many who would like to see more reasonable and restrictive immigration policies and the halting of illegal immigration.

117

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 04:41 PM | #

To the contrary, on pgs. 380-382 he says exactly what he thinks should be done and why it should be done.

And his solution is? Please tell us…..

118

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 04:46 PM | #

Phil,
I’m not going to type out the entire set of pages. Since you cited it, just go pick up your copy (or if you don’t have the paperback, go borrow a copy) and start at the second paragraph on pg. 380.

119

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 04:49 PM | #

Maybe I just haven’t met enough Jews in my life, but I have never heard this opinion expressed, directly or indirectly, by a Jew.

Have a look at the article by Lawrence Auster. It should answer your question.

As for your point about Jews having Israel to go to, I could counter that non-Jewish whites have every country in Europe to fall back upon.

They don’t. If whites anywhere on earth cold just get into Europe, most South African whites would leave in an instant. But they can’t. Getting in is not straightforward.

120

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 04:50 PM | #

I’m not going to type out the entire set of pages.

We dont expect you to. You could provide a summary.

121

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 04:52 PM | #

I didn’t realize you were Fred’s dad.

Neither did I! How wonderful of you to tell me.

I thought it would be physically impossible knowing that Fred is in his 60s and I am 28. Silly me!

122

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 04:57 PM | #

Phil,
Well, you did cut out my quote about how you needed to wash out Fred’s dirty mouth before you tried to wash out mine. It was a joke, but I guess it flew right over your head like a little tweety bird.

123

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 05:01 PM | #

Well, you did cut out my quote about how you needed to wash out Fred’s dirty mouth before you tried to wash out mine. It was a joke, but I guess it flew right over your head like a little tweety bird.

Ah yes, I have been reminded very often of my low intelligence in many places. I must say we are all priviliged to have the genius of our friend Arcane in our midst to remind us of our lack of intellect, our ignorance, our bigotry, our lack of adherence to Christian principles and of his superior wisdom, superior courage and so on.

We are privileged, as I said.

124

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 05:08 PM | #

Phil,
LOL… anyways, since you love Auster so much and think that if any of his beliefs that are contrary to my own must force me to revise my position, I guess you would agree with his beliefs that Pat Buchanan is an anti-Semite because he doesn’t support Israel?
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=3341

Or, better yet, we can ditch this topic all together and go back to what we were talking about at first, specifically the “JQ”.

125

Posted by Geoff M. Beck on April 08, 2005, 05:10 PM | #

Arcane’s Question:

There is not one corner of gov’t capable of inquiring or arresting Jewish influence in the government, academia, or media.

Furthermore many Churches, both Catholic and Protestant, are so saturated with dispensationalist thought they too much are of no help.

Traditionally western societies simply evicted/deported Jews when they were deemed a nuissance by the authorities. That is no longer an option under the current regime, at least in the United States.

Perhaps the last government assembly capable of addressing organized Jewish involvement was HUAC (1950?). Which probed communist activity in government, a tangent of Jewish power, IMHO.

For established organ or institution to probe organized Jewry would itself be a revolutionary threat to the current American regime. Furthermore most Americans are essentially “Jewified non-Jews” because of the pervasive influence of TV and ‘News’.

IMHO

126

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 05:14 PM | #

And then there’s this screed by Auster that says that Buchanan is an anti-Semite.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12650

Or this one attacking The American Conservative:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=3342

127

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 05:17 PM | #

Geoff,
OK, so you think we live in a Jew-dominated society… that still doesn’t answer my primary question, based upon the hypothesis that you’re right and I’m wrong about this. The question is, what do you want to do about the “JQ”?

128

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 08, 2005, 05:22 PM | #

I would send the FBI unto ACLU, Foxman, AIPAC. I would stop funding Israel.

I would ban Jews in higher education, both as students and faculty. This was the policy in many universities until the 1960s.

Of course, such policies will never be enacted by the regime that occupies Washington DC.

129

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 05:26 PM | #

Geoff,
So you would basically take away the rights of Jews in the US? That would solve the “JQ”?

130

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 05:30 PM | #

anyways, since you love Auster so much

In the same way that you love the Neocons and the “proposition nation” so much…...

Or, better yet, we can ditch this topic all together and go back to what we were talking about at first, specifically the “JQ”.

If there was enough time and bandwidth in this world…...

Incidentally, if you are asking me for a “solution” to the Jewish “problem”, my own thoughts are the following:

Jews who live in western nations, especially America have a high intermarriage rate and a low birth-rate. The same is true also for England I believe.

England received large number of Jews in the 19th century. That population has melted away. The Jews that remain distinctively identifiable in present day England came during or after WWII. My own impression is that Jews will eventually melt away into the European and American white populations. The only Jews left will be Orthodox Jews. I wont hazard a guess as to when this might happen but it seems to me that this is possible based on current trends.

The “problem” is however, that in the US at least, Jews have been supportive of various left-liberal movements that have had numerous destructive effects. American whites would perhaps wish to reverse the current slide and their descent into permanent minority status (not to mention the fact the country would far worse off with millions of aliens who have nothing in common with them). This is, in my opinion, the central problem for white Americans because American Jews are allied (at least organized Jewry) with the opposition. It would provide little solace to American whites that Jews are no longer a unique people when white Americans have themselves lost their country.

If you read Auster’s article, the final conclusion is despair and hand wringing at Jewish attitudes to immigration. He doesn’t provide a “solution”. Neither do I but I don’t need to because I am not American. I am English and my primary concerns are with England and Britain first.

Here Mike Howard has indicated that a Tory government would control the borders. I am sceptical but willing to give him a chance over the shameless liar that currently occupies 10 Downing Street.

In Britain, organized Jewry is probably a factor in favour of open immigration but there are far more destructive white gentile leftists (many at newspapers such as at the Independent which is usually anti-Israel). I have said before on this blog that the Jewish Question is complex because Jews are a complex people. I do not hold the views of the “Natvan” character who graced our site earlier, nor do I hold absolutely unquestioning philo-Semitic views that modern day US Republicans hold.

131

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 08, 2005, 05:34 PM | #

Arcane:

I think I’m being fair, and quite reasonable.

I don’t believe in equality, and nobody does. I do believe in mercy, so I won’t take part in mob violence or dispossesion of property.

Look they can leave for Israel if they don’t like the terms.

132

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 05:36 PM | #

Phil, You said:
This is, in my opinion, the central problem for white Americans because American Jews are allied (at least organized Jewry) with the opposition.

Then why not just oppose the ideology that supports open borders? Why single out Jews?

Michael Howard is Jewish, too. But I’m sure you already knew that.

133

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 05:41 PM | #

Geoff,
OK, two questions…

1. How would you determine who is Jewish?

2. What counts as “higher education”?

3. So you would still allow Jews to run for office and have organizations?

4. If you refused to give any political, military, or financial support to Israel, would you also cease any political, military, or financial support for Arab nations?

134

Posted by Geoff Beck on April 08, 2005, 05:45 PM | #

Look I’m not going to play the game. I’ve stated what I would do, how the bureacracy manages this, like how they manage how to deliver mail, is anyone’s guess.

You asked me what I would do, I just told you.

135

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 05:49 PM | #

Then why not just oppose the ideology that supports open borders? Why single out Jews?

Because Jews are the wealthiest ethnic group in America. 25 percent of all American billionaires are Jews. The vast majority of American TV is Jewish owned as is the press. Hollywood is heavily Jewish. Academia is about 30-35 percent Jewish.

To pretend that Jews are irrelevant is to either be ignorant or engage in deliberate dishonesty. Auster says that Jews see a non-white America as safe haven for them. To that end, they have poured money and resources into the project. A great deal of this effort is purely tribalistic (as may perhaps be the reason for your persistence but we wont get into that). Jews practice tribalism (all human beings do for that matter. Some more so some less).

Since Jews as an organized force have had such an enormous and destructive impact, it is only natural for white gentiles in the US to question Jewish loyalty (or the lack thereof). So before you run around painting everyone here with a Swastika and smear everyone with cries of “Nazi!”, do ask yourself this question: White American Christians gave refuge to Jews during times of their worst persecution. Jews have responded (for the most part) in organizing to turn them into a minority. If white Americans feel betrayed by this, is it not natural?

Respect and love are a two way street. They can never follow in only one direction. So when you encounter Geoff in an angry mood, instead of engaging in verbal attacks, you should ask yourself if his anger has simply dropped from the sky without good cause. Anger is also a dangerous thing and it can propel men into immoderation. So why stoke it?

136

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 05:51 PM | #

Geoff,
Hey, you’re the one who chose to speak in generalities. If you refuse to say who you think is Jewish or not, what counts as higher education or not, whether or not you would allow Jews in government, and if you would also defund Arab states, then you’re not answering the question.

Are you scared of your own opinions?

137

Posted by ben tillman on April 08, 2005, 05:52 PM | #

...I would question [the] assertion that Jews want white people to become a minority in America.

That assertion is not the proper way to frame the issue. The question is whether this is a desideratum of THE Jews, i.e., the organized Jewish community.

138

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 05:58 PM | #

Phil,
Because Jews are the wealthiest ethnic group in America.

Actually, Indians are the wealthiest ethnic group.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0321/p03s01-ussc.htm

As for the rest of what you said, you just basically repeated what you’ve said before. Perhaps you could answer the questions I gave Geoff?

139

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 06:02 PM | #

Michael Howard is Jewish, too. But I’m sure you already knew that.

As is Oliver Letwin, the shadow chancellor. My choices are between Labour and the Tories.

I cannot ever imagine voting Labour. No one in my family ever voted Labour. If I feel any sense of uneasiness voting for the Tories, it is because they have also done nothing historically about immigration.

But I would vote Tory because I believe the flood would reduce substantially even if we can’t get rid of the “Asylum seekers” in our midst. I wont say I have great “trust” in Howard but I have more faith in him than in Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and the rest of that gang.

I look at the several thousands of pounds of my hard-earned money disappear in taxes to build houses for illegal immigrants that have no right to be in this country. I cannot not feel a sense of outrage.

All said and done, I would give Howard a chance. If he can’t fix the problem, then perhaps a third party would be a serious proposition in this country.

140

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 06:04 PM | #

Actually, Indians are the wealthiest ethnic group.

You are now talking averages. I am talking aggregates.

141

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 06:06 PM | #

Phil,
I have no problems with Michael Howard. I like the guy… I just wanted to see what you would think about having a Jew in charge of your country.

Not even in America have we had a Jewish president or even vice president.

142

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 06:10 PM | #

I have no problems with Michael Howard. I like the guy… I just wanted to see what you would think about having a Jew in charge of your country.

I wouldn’t trust Howard more than I would trust any politician. But we have had 8 years of Labour nonsense. Its time for a change.

143

Posted by Guessedworker on April 08, 2005, 06:10 PM | #

This idiotic fixation with the final solution is getting me down. We are fighting a war of ideas, Arcane. Is it not possible for you to to use your no doubt quite high IQ to good effect and separate the thought from the thinker.

As things stand you would be making the same mistake, in my humble opinion, as several otherwise wise members of the MR commentariat. You would be seeking to reverse the effects of liberalism through the assumption that the Jewish ubermensch must be neutralized. Actually, it works the other way around. Neutralize liberalism and the effects of the Jewish ubermensch are reversed.

For pete’s sake desist in your attempts to turn Conservatives into National Socialists.

144

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 06:13 PM | #

I just wanted to see what you would think about having a Jew in charge of your country

Howard was in the Thatcher cabinet and his record was actually quite good. He has also been heavily criticised by Organized Jewry in the UK for his opposition to the Asylum nonsense. So given the circumstances, he is the best bet we have for the moment.

Also, he is more than a match for that charming pixie who is our current Prime Minister. Fingers crossed.

145

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 06:15 PM | #

Guessed!
This idiotic fixation with the final solution is getting me down. We are fighting a war of ideas, Arcane.

I’m not talking about the “Final Solution”! I’m just looking for answers, and quite frankly I wouldn’t want my friends who are 25% or 50% of 75% or 10% Jewish or 0% Jewish, but is neoconservative, from having their rights taken away from them because some guy refuses to define who is Jewish and who is not.

If you refuse to define who is Jewish and who is not, then you shouldn’t talk about Jews at all because you obviously have no idea who is a Jew and who isn’t, thus it becomes subjective.

146

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 06:16 PM | #

“I know a Jew when I see one” does not count as a definition.

147

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 06:19 PM | #

wouldn’t want my friends who are 25% or 50% of 75% or 10% Jewish or 0% Jewish, but is neoconservative, from having their rights taken away from them because some guy refuses to define who is Jewish and who is not.

Not meaning to barge in since its none of my business but surely its not that difficult to define who is Jewish and who is not. The state of Israel does that perfectly well doesn’t it?

148

Posted by Guessedworker on April 08, 2005, 06:24 PM | #

Arcane,

We can define Organised Jewry without recourse to details of lineage. In a battle of ideas you know your enemy by his actions. But even so it is not necessary to directly confront even Organised Jewry if one sets out to revolutionise the polity itself.

There is a ghastly, historically repetitive poverty of imagination in the attempts of Western Man to deal with the negative effects visited upon him by Organised Jewry. We must get beyond this - which is, perhaps, the import of what you are saying. I hope it is, even if for the moment your vision doesn’t look to the same horizon as mine.

149

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 06:25 PM | #

Phil,
So you would use the Israeli definition of who is Jewish?

That seems contradictory to me… especially since many of the “Jewish” neocons and liberals wouldn’t be sufficiently Jewish to go to Israel.

150

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 08, 2005, 06:28 PM | #

That seems contradictory to me… especially since many of the “Jewish” neocons and liberals wouldn’t be sufficiently Jewish to go to Israel.

And that ends our discussion. I had hoped that you would finally engage in honest debate. I should have known better.

151

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 06:29 PM | #

Guessed,
We are fighting a war of ideas, Arcane.

Alright, then why are you and so many on this blog so obsessed with the ethnic origins of a person? Obviously, you care about much more than just “ideas.”

Then what specific actions are those of “Organised Jewry?”

152

Posted by ben tillman on April 08, 2005, 06:29 PM | #

Arcane~ Actually, Indians are the wealthiest ethnic group.

Phil~ You are now talking averages. I am talking aggregates.

He is not talking averages. He is talking nonsense.

153

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 06:32 PM | #

Phil,
What I said was completely honest. You just refuse to debate any. Let it be known… come to central Florida. I will debate you in a public forum. My guess is that you’d be too cowardly to take me up on that.

So, run away, coward.

154

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 06:32 PM | #

ben tillman,
Perhaps you have the guts to answer my questions?

155

Posted by Guessedworker on April 08, 2005, 06:58 PM | #

Arcane,

There are many contributors here. I am only one so I do not speak for any but myself. Our enemy - the enemy of Western Man - is advanced liberalism, meaning the polity we now live and breathe every day. All our discontents flow from that, including the migrational ones.

It is, of course, true that we are not merely concerned with noumena - mere shadows on the wall cast by intellectuals fencing one another. The physical reclamation of the West cannot, in my view, be achieved without the moral reclamation of Western Man. Real consequences would flow from both, naturally. Real life is entwined in these “big ideas” we are trying to comprehend. Today, in the maw of the race-blind Multicult, they certainly include discussing ethnic genetic interest, Western identities and so forth. Is that obsession? It seems perfectly logical and right to me.

Naturally, you admire those Indian guys you work with at GNXP. But their future world is no use to us, is it - not if we want Western Man to be sovereign in his own lands. A time of choices is approaching. Most everybody on this blog has made theirs. You seem to be somewhat loathe to confront the issue. But even you will have to do it one day.

156

Posted by JW Holliday on April 08, 2005, 07:15 PM | #

Honest Abe,

I really didn’t want to answer “if you disagree with the Neo=Nazi dogma, then you must be Jewish” types of accusation. But given that Honest Abe is more reasonable than Natvan:-

1. I am not biologically or culturally Jewish,nor do I have any close Jewoish contacts.

2. I never said that Jews are white, other people said that, so if you are honest, stop putting words into my mouth. By white, I mean people who are biologically, culturally and historically European. It is my opinion that this description does not apply to Jews. If this view is wrong and misguided, then I will consider contrary evidence.

3. David Irving is not Jewish nor can he be considered philo-semitic. His book, Hitler’s War, clearly points out the anti-Slavic attitude of the German National Socialists and the anti-Slav war aims in the east. Hitler wouldn’t even support Vlasov’s National Liberation Army, even when the Axis was clearly losing the war – couldn’t give those “sub-humans” the idea that they could ditch communism and pursue their own ethnic destiny apart from German colonization and lebensraum fantasies. And Koch in the Ukraine managed to turn people who greeted the German troops with flowers into anti-German partisans. Hitler was not an infallible god, and he was a Germanic nationalist, not some sort of pan-Aryan hero.

Salter critiques National Socialism and Fascism in his book. I agree with his comments that those ideologies were too aggressive to other national groups and that the National Socialists had a disjunctive, unscientific view of race (e.g., in Irving’s book, “German species” is used by the Nazis to describe their people, as against the Slavic “sub-humans”. The genetic differences between these groups - though real - are slight and do not justify such marked distinctions). On the other hand, I disagree with Salter’s criticisms about the lack of democracy in those ideologies, since I view (mass) democracy as an unalloyed evil. But, one can agree or disagree with Salter, without labelling him a Jew.

4. Jared Taylor’s worth is self-evident. AR has done a lot of good. One need not agree with everything Taylor believes to understand he is on the right side.

157

Posted by JW Holliday on April 08, 2005, 07:21 PM | #

dlg,

Jews may consider themselves white, but they certainly do not behave or vote that way. They have the mindset of minorities and vote like that as well. They must consider that they have interests distinctive to that of white gentiles.

Arcane,

Your comments about Israel make no sense. The “law of return” is not based on belief. If a neoconservative is at least 1/4 ethnically Jewish, then they get into Israel. My understanding is that one Jewish grandparent is sufficient. It does not depend whether or not they actually practice Judaism.

Don’t try to obfuscate by making things more difficult that it is. Dershowitz, Foxman and Chertoff are Jews. Any doubt? In America, you have millions of people who identify as Jews, most of them descended from Eastern European Ashkenazim, who are closely related to each other genetically. By Jewish law, a child born of a Jewish mother is considered Jewish (although some Jews would look askance even there). Jewish father and gentile mother is not by Jewish law, and I’ve known such people frustrated by the fact that some Orthodox Jews refused to acknowledge their Jewishness despite the fact that they were bar mitzvahed in Reform congregations.

Under the NS regime, 1/4 Jews were considered German (Nuremberg laws), but could not join the SS, nor intermarry with SS men or the governmental elite. It is reasonable to say that all people of full Jewish descent are Jews, as are half-Jews or less who openly identify as Jews. IMO, a person who is 1/4 Jewish or less but does not identify as Jewish (eg, Olivia Newton John) can be considered non-Jewish. But in the majority of cases, it isn’t an issue.

158

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 07:22 PM | #

Guessed,
Naturally, you admire those Indian guys you work with at GNXP.

Yes, I do admire them and I admire many people of Asian-descent. Michelle Malkin is another that I admire, for example. All of these individuals are Westernized and as interested in the national question as any paleocon. Most Jews are Westernized, as well, in my opinion. I admire high-IQ immigrants, especially Westernized ones on the political right. In fact, in order for the United States to ever be able to compete with Asia economically, we’re going to need all the high-IQ people as we can get, including Jews. Without them, many of the hard sciences, especially physics, would collapse. See this post, for example:

http://www.webmonkey.ws/flillip.php?url=http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/002907.html

A time of choices is approaching.

Well, yes; yes one is.

Most everybody on this blog has made theirs. You seem to be somewhat loathe to confront the issue.

You guys know my stance on the issues, it’s your stance that I’m trying to understand, and the fact that you refuse to answer even the most basic questions means that if you have made a stance, you are way too fearful of saying what it is. And for that reason alone it becomes obvious that you’re fearful for some reason of saying it. I’ve made my decision…

You know, white people wouldn’t have this problem if they reproduced more. And that’s including Jewish people, whose birth rates are in a much higher state of decline than European-Americans or even Europeans.

You guys seem little concerned about birthrates… you seem more concerned about finding scapegoats so you don’t blame your own people.

159

Posted by JW Holliday on April 08, 2005, 07:25 PM | #

Arcane,

1. Who would qualify as a Jew? How much Jewish blood would a person have to have in order to not qualify as a Jew?

Answer: my immediate answer is that a person who is 1/4 Jewish or less and who does not identify as Jewish is not Jewish. I do need to consider this is more detail, thus I reserve the right to change this opinion.

2. Would you simply eliminate the rights of Jews, or would you deport them?

Answer: I favor voluntary separation in America. The USA needs to devolve into ethnostates, with perhaps a multiracial diversity rump America that would probably be the nation of choice for most American Jews, as well as you, godless, and Razib. Or a mini-state centered around New York City may be useful for those American Jews who eschew multiracialism (eg, Hasidim). Separation in Europe should not be voluntary, as that is the ancestral homeland of the European peoples. European Jews may wish to emigrate to Israel or to areas of the previous USA (above).

3. To where would you deport Jews? To Israel?

Already answered.

4. Once deported, would that mean that the Jewish Question had been solved

I’m not saying deport anyone from America, all I’m saying is voluntary separation. Once different peoples are separate, and have control over their own destinies, there is no “question.”

160

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 07:26 PM | #

dlg:
Svigor, if being a Jew is in fact an ethnic category, then one can’t cease being a Jew any more than one can cease being white, no?

No. In my opinion being a Jew is actually a mental category, at least that’s the “active ingredient.” I view Jews as Caucasoid (in the main of course; this discussion is rife with exceptions and clauses), and I view Ashkenazi Jews as in the main white. I think the term “tribe” is the most appropriate, since a tribe can have ethnic, historical, religious, cultural, and racial connontations and that jibes well with Jewry.

There’s nothing whatsoever inborn into Jews that makes them non-white. I categorize them as non-white in terms of WNism for reasons that others here (can’t remember if it was this thread) have outlined; because the practical definition of being a Jew includes opposition to white solidarity, and furthermore part of the very essense of being a Jew precludes loyalty to whiteness and to Jewishness.

Fyi, I am a Jew who considers himself white (I’ve never met one that didn’t).

The problem is that this causes a conflict of interest.

How many white people are there in the world? How many countries are majority white? For Jews, there is always the issue of self-prerservation. For white people and nations, it is more a matter of getting collective houses in order (e.g. through restrictive immigration). There is no danger of extinction.

Yes, but Jews have their house in order, and whites are out on the street begging for change in this context. Numbers won’t help the suicidal.

Arcane:
Svigor,
OK, for hypothetical reasons, let us suppose that, yes, Jews are indeed the main antagonist to the survival of the “White” race. What would you say should be done about the “Jewish problem?”

I think mass white awareness would solve most of the problem. In fact, that lack of awareness essentially is the problem.

1. Who would qualify as a Jew? How much Jewish “blood” would a person have to have in order to not qualify as a Jew?

I don’t regard “Jewish blood” as the problem. My guess is that the authors of the Nuremberg laws didn’t either. “Jewish blood” is a marker for Jewish tribal loyalty.

To illustrate (this also goes to dlg’s post above): If someone is born of the Cohen caste, 100.00% Jewish by blood, as stereotypically Cohen Haplotype-looking as one can get, yet is raised by WNs, never told of his heritage, and he fights for the WN cause, then he is white and a WN. It’s mental. Yes, there’s a Jewish genotype, but divorced from this psychic state I could care less about it. It’s a blending of Semitic and European populations, but to me it’s a non-issue.

Note I don’t hold beliefs that represent WN sentiment on this issue. Many agree, many don’t.

2. Would you simply eliminate the rights of Jews, or would you deport them?

You’re jumping wa-a-a-a-y out ahead of the gun here. That’s a simple question with many potentially complex answers. First of all, it assumes there are any Jews to deport or deprive of their rights? What if a WN state is set up where there are no Jews? Assuming there are Jews, I would be in favor of differing rights, rather than deportation. Forced expulsion is something I don’t think my race is really capable of carrying out. I’d rather see things like prohibitions on who can own/operate media companies, who can join academia or law, etc. Really, I think the best thing to do would be to encourage emigration whether by carrot or stick or both.

Still, all this is way out in front of the gun. I think of WNism as having several stages, each more amorphous than the previous one. The first stage involves a mass white racial awakening. After that, we can all sit down and hash this out; who am I to pretend I have the solution to the JQ, or any other huge, thorny problem? My position is, we wait for the awakening then everyone decides what to do. Why put the cart before the horse?

161

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 07:27 PM | #

No, it doesn’t. I don’t object to conversos or New Christians or whatever. I do object to crypto-Jews, given the historical record. I wouldn’t and don’t frown on Auster, though I do add an extra grain of salt. I would probably vote to keep him out of any WN organization in which I had a vote. That’s the rub here; the issue is so thorny because only Auster knows where his true loyalties lie. We can only suppose (i.e., if one has no Jewish heritage, if one’s livelihood doesn’t depend on Jews, Jewish loyalty becomes orders of magnitude less likely; the converse is true as well). Would I refuse to read, quote, or correspond with Auster because he’s a converso? Absolutely not. I have no personal animus against Jews per se (usually; sometimes I get emotional).

dlg:
I would question your assertion that Jews want white people to become a minority in America.

Maybe I just haven’t met enough Jews in my life, but I have never heard this opinion expressed, directly or indirectly, by a Jew. (I have encountered the decidedly non-Jewish Robert Lindsay wishing destruction on white Americans on this site, however.)

Actions speak louder than words. Self-deception is at the heart of much of stereotypical Jewish behavior. That one wants to be friends with me while punching me in the face makes no nevermind.

As for your point about Jews having Israel to go to, I could counter that non-Jewish whites have every country in Europe to fall back upon.

Eh? I won’t argue that all Jews should make Aliyah or anything, but…huh?

On this, they’re powerless? Organized Jewry supports open borders, they’re the ones who opened them in the first place. Joe and Jane Jew may oppose this, but they still send that check to Organized Jewry every year.

Geoff Beck:
I would send the FBI unto ACLU, Foxman, AIPAC. I would stop funding Israel.

I would ban Jews in higher education, both as students and faculty. This was the policy in many universities until the 1960s.

Of course, such policies will never be enacted by the regime that occupies Washington DC.

How about quotas? Quotas would destroy Jewish power: no more than 3% of academics, political appointees and employees, media owners/operators/employees, etc., could be Jewish.

Arcane:
So you would basically take away the rights of Jews in the US? That would solve the “JQ”?

How would quotas abrogate rights more than Affirmative Action or set asides do now?

How would you determine who is Jewish?

If a legal definition of Jewish is required, something like that in the Nuremberg Laws makes sense, or perhaps with today’s advances in genetics something more scientific could be added.

3. So you would still allow Jews to run for office and have organizations?

It’s all contextual, as I said above, but if I had my druthers no, in a WN nation Jews would not be eligible for public office or for donations.

4. If you refused to give any political, military, or financial support to Israel, would you also cease any political, military, or financial support for Arab nations?

I would.

162

Posted by Guessedworker on April 08, 2005, 07:35 PM | #

Arcane,

At present we are talking past one another to no mutual profit. I believe that the reason for that may simply be that you are not racially aware. You are aware of the issue that is race. You understand the politics. But there is something missing. There is some fatal disconnect.

So our subjective reference points are really not the same, Arcane. You keep insisting that some reference points you perceive (negatively) must somehow apply to us. We keep saying, “No, that isn’t it.”

Keep reading us, anyhow. It’s interesting to debate.

163

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 07:37 PM | #

JW Holliday,
In America, you have millions of people who identify as Jews, most of them descended from Eastern European Ashkenazim, who are closely related to each other genetically.

Slavs are closely related to each other genetically. Anglo-Saxons are closely related to each other genetically. This is obvious. And those very same Ashkenazim Jews that you so deride are closely related to most Europeans genetically, probably as closely as the Spanish. Show me the paper that shows that Ashkenazic Jews from Europe are less closely related to other Europeans than other European ethnic groups are.

I’d say it’s pretty nuts to say that Michael Howard or Benjamin Disraeli in the UK is less genetically related to Anglo-Saxons or Celts than they are to Sephardic Jews in the Middle East.

I see you reject the concept that a person can be Westernized if they aren’t genetically European… bizarre, but OK. Yet you say this:

His book, Hitler’s War, clearly points out the anti-Slavic attitude of the German National Socialists and the anti-Slav war aims in the east. Hitler wouldn’t even support Vlasov’s National Liberation Army, even when the Axis was clearly losing the war – couldn’t give those “sub-humans” the idea that they could ditch communism and pursue their own ethnic destiny apart from German colonization and lebensraum fantasies.

So, you think Hitler should have given the Slavs the benefit of a doubt but you refuse to give Jews the same? What gives?

Can’t you see the similarities in thought?

164

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 08, 2005, 07:38 PM | #

“I thought it would be physically impossible knowing that Fred is in his 60s [...]” (—Phil, 8:52 PM)

In his 50s, gentlemen. (Forgive me for going all the way back to a topic from the middle of the thread but hey, this is important!)

Back to more serious things:

As for what I called “Godless Capitalist” in the quote of mine which Arcane went back and found somewhere (8:22 PM): I apologize to the blog if I embarrassed it. I also take nothing back. I could go on here, but I won’t except to say this individual is not a person of integrity and is no friend of white people. Let everyone understand that: this person blogging under the pen name “Godless Capitalist” does not wish white people well and that’s putting it as politely as it can be put. Arcane defending the likes of this individual at every turn is pathetic—from some of Arcane’s other positions you’d think he had more sense.

“A great deal of this effort is purely tribalistic (as may perhaps be the reason for your persistence but we wont get into that). Jews practice tribalism (all human beings do for that matter. Some more so some less).” (—Phil, 9:49 PM)

This is a fundamental truth which all whites would do well never to forget in today’s world: all human beings practice tribalism—some more, some less. The biggest tribalists will attempt to couch their pure unadulterated tribalism in universalist language. The whites who fall for that are doomed to extinction, let no one make any mistake. Extinction. Falling for that is positively the worst mistake they can make. The people trying to eradicate whites aren’t in the business of handing out second chances.

165

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 07:47 PM | #

JW Holliday, You said:
favor voluntary separation in America. The USA needs to devolve into ethnostates, with perhaps a multiracial diversity rump America that would probably be the nation of choice for most American Jews, as well as you, godless, and Razib.

See, this is just the thing that I was getting onto you guys about the other day. You want to destroy the United States.

Svigor,
Thanks for actually being honest and answering my questions… I wish half of the other people on this thread would be willing to do the same…

You said:

How about quotas? Quotas would destroy Jewish power: no more than 3% of academics, political appointees and employees, media owners/operators/employees, etc., could be Jewish.

That’s basically Nazi law. There’s no denying that and don’t say I’m trying to smear you with this, because it’s undeniable FACT. See here:

http://www.webmonkey.ws/flillip.php?url=http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/002907.html

You’re basically advocating a reverse system of affirmative action that seeks to, instead of oppressing smart white people, oppresses smart Jews [or rather, white people classified as Jews]. Don’t you see a problem of principle here?

166

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 07:48 PM | #

Let’s not pretend it’d be difficult to peacefully encourage outgroup emigration from a racially nationalist state. A tax here, a quota there, an ineligibility there…poof! Instant mass emigration.

Oh, and regarding JW Holliday’s idea about a sector of “New America” remaining multiracial, I’m all for it. In fact, I think the continued existence of multiracial multicultural western nations might just be essential to the viability of WNism: can anyone imagine a more nightmarish scenario than trying to keep the whole white world monoracial, given the fifth column we have now? It’d be impossible. All those people will need places to happily racemix.

Me, I’ll take my monoracial nation, which’ll be blissfully free of racism and race-exploitation (a fact of course ignored by the enemies of WNism).

167

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 07:54 PM | #

That’s basically Nazi law. There’s no denying that and don’t say I’m trying to smear you with this, because it’s undeniable FACT. See here

Are Affirmative Action and set-asides “Nazi law” too?

In any case, you are of course trying to smear me, but I don’t really mind.

Also: the Nazis used toilet seats too. Are you sitting on a “Nazi device” when you pinch one off Arcane?

Are large swathes of Israeli law best characterized as “Nazi laws?”

168

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 07:58 PM | #

Svigor,

Well, at least you admit you like some of the Nazi laws and actually reference them as good things. I wish the rest of the people who have ideas similar to yours would be as honest.

And yes, if you read my post, you’d see that the Nazis basically had an affirmative action program for whites designed specifically to ensure that the number of students and professors in university were directly proportionate to their ethnic groups overall makeup in the population.

So, when I tell my liberal friends that affirmative action and quotas are Nazi programs, I mean it.

169

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 07:59 PM | #

You’re basically advocating a reverse system of affirmative action that seeks to, instead of oppressing smart white people, oppresses smart Jews [or rather, white people classified as Jews]. Don’t you see a problem of principle here?

Nope. I’m all for double-standards.

I think GW was right, you’ve surveyed the “racial right” but you haven’t understood much. You know “us” like you know a history text you’re going to be tested on. I don’t mean this as a shot at you, it’s just my honest assessment.

170

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 08:03 PM | #

Svigor,
So you agree with JW Holliday’s desire to destroy the United States? Please note that he said:

European Jews may wish to emigrate to Israel or to areas of the previous USA (above).

The former USA. So much for WNism not being separatism, eh?

171

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 08:04 PM | #

Arcane, that just brings me back to your use of the word “Nazi” as an epithet and how I find that laughable.

Can I assume that you think any given law, policy, or idea supported or enacted by the Third Reich is to be shunned and labeled simply “Nazi?” If that isn’t to your liking, maybe any law, policy, or idea uniquely supported or enacted by the Third Reich merits this treatment?

Weren’t the Nazis the first to ban smoking, or at least the first to carry out an antismoking campaign? Are antismoking campaigns “Nazi” too?

172

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 08:04 PM | #

previous USA, rather

173

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 08:07 PM | #

The former USA. So much for WNism not being separatism, eh?

No, so much for my hopes of you learning logic to go with your penchant for argumentation.

Sigh.

174

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 08:08 PM | #

Svigor,
The Nazis killed at least 20 million people, 6 million of which were Jewish. They went to war with the Soviet Union, after allying with it and taking part in a joint Nazi-Communist pillaging program of Eastern Europe, and killed probably 12 or 13 million Russians. Not only that, they gave the liberals and socialists all the reasons they ever needed to start the dismantlement of Western Civilization by their atrocities and their constant invecting of the idea that Nazism was somehow the vanguard of Western Civilization…

And that’s not even mentioning that they basically destroyed Europe in the process and, if they had of been in power longer, very possibly could have destroyed what remained of Christianity in Germany.

So, yes, when I use Nazi, I use it as a disparaging term, because it is. Nazis are scum.

175

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 08:10 PM | #

Svigor,

It’s not I who wants to breaks apart the US, like JW Holliday and now you. Pretty sick. Why don’t you convert to Islam while you’re at it? Heinrich Himmler would applaud you.

176

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 08:16 PM | #

Holy Mother this thread is getting long. Is there any hope for a part II thread? I’m on dialup here.

You guys should get vBulletin, then just put your posts on the front page and have the link lead to a forum thread. Of course, that’s easy for me to say, I have no idea how hard vBulletin is to install or maintain.

177

Posted by Arcane on April 08, 2005, 08:17 PM | #

Yeah, this thread is starting to lock up my browser… I have cable and it takes a good 10 seconds to load.

178

Posted by ben tillman on April 08, 2005, 08:24 PM | #

I admire high-IQ immigrants, especially Westernized ones on the political right. In fact, in order for the United States to ever be able to compete with Asia economically, we’re going to need all the high-IQ people as we can get, including Jews.

How funny! It has not occurred to Arcane that, under his principles, there is no point in “compet[ing] with Asia economically”.

179

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 08:25 PM | #

So, Nazis waged all of WWII by their lonesome now? It takes two (or more) to tango. Btw, the Nazis didn’t kill 6 million Jews; your numbers are out of date.

I understand of course your desire to attribute all death (whether by violence, disease, or starvation) and property damage caused in WWII to the Nazis; that way, you can buff up their death & destruction toll to rival that of the Commies, who killed 100 million souls without going to war to do it.

Also, you get to justify your mile-long hardon for “neo-Nazis” by applying the sins of their fathers to them, and then you get to paint all racially aware whites with that same brush. It’s a “get out of logical argument free” card, why shouldn’t you use it?

Americans waged a war on their fellow citizens in the latter half of the 19th century, a war more horrific than any preceding. They took away the rights of their fellow Americans en masse. Therefore, Americans are scum and I use the word “American” as an epithet.

See, anyone can play the Arcane Logic Game! It’s loads of fun! C’mon kids, try it!

180

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 08, 2005, 08:28 PM | #

“Michelle Malkin is another that I admire, for example[, in addition to the Indian guys at GnXp]. All of these individuals are Westernized and as interested in the national question as any paleocon.” (—Arcane, 4/8, 11:22 PM)

In what way is GC “as interested in the national question as any paleocon” apart from his robust loathing of whites anywhere on the planet who wish to take reasonable, humane steps to ward off their own genocide? (I said apart from, Arcane ... apart from ...)

“You know, white people wouldn’t have this problem if they reproduced more. And that’s including Jewish people, whose birth rates are in a much higher state of decline than European-Americans or even Europeans.” (—Arcane, idem)

This is one of the most important truths connected with the current worldwide effort to stamp out white people, one whites would do EXTREMELY WELL TO START PAYING ATTENTION TO—THEY REALLY WOULD, TO PUT IT MILDLY. IF WHITES CAN’T GET THEIR BIRTH RATES UP, IN THE LONG RUN THEY’RE GOING STRICTLY NOWHERE BUT DOWN. THAT’S DOWN, AS IN, BYE-BYE! BEEN NICE KNOWIN’ YA! ...

181

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 08:32 PM | #

Svigor,

It’s not I who wants to breaks apart the US, like JW Holliday and now you. Pretty sick. Why don’t you convert to Islam while you’re at it? Heinrich Himmler would applaud you.

Extending your logic, the founders were “sick” (I assume you mean pathological by “sick”) for breaking with King George. Am I right that you think they were “sick?”

I’m not necessarily in favor of the abolition of America. In fact, if all of Europe were to go WN and expel all non-whites, I’d be satisfied. However, until then, I would like to see America move in a WN direction.

This doesn’t necessarily entail destruction. America began as a union of nations, and if she could be returned to such, she’d be an ideal proving ground for the kind of solution many WNs suggest. A Constitutional nip and tuck here and there and she’d be perfect for the task. Yes, the current rampaging beast that is the federal government would have to be remade (almost entirely gutted).

Sorry, I don’t have the holy reverance of the almighty status quo that you do.

182

Posted by ben tillman on April 08, 2005, 08:43 PM | #

To illustrate (this also goes to dlg’s post above): If someone is born of the Cohen caste, 100.00% Jewish by blood, as stereotypically Cohen Haplotype-looking as one can get, yet is raised by WNs, never told of his heritage, and he fights for the WN cause, then he is white and a WN. It’s mental. Yes, there’s a Jewish genotype, but divorced from this psychic state I could care less about it.

Yes, but it’s more complicated than that. Look at the responses of Madeleine Albright, Wesley Clark, and Linda Chavez to the discovery that they had Jewish ancestry. This seems to apply to Steve Sailer, to a lesser extent. And Rushton’s genetic similarity theory predicts that those of Jewish ancestry will have an affinity for others of similar ancestry.

183

Posted by ben tillman on April 08, 2005, 08:50 PM | #

You want to destroy the United States.

You mean the centralized national government. But the only reason to preserve such a government is to use it against others to take what belongs to them or to force them to do what you want.

We want to restore the status quo ante. You want to commit aggression. By any objective standard, we are morally superior to you.

184

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 08, 2005, 09:36 PM | #

“Yes, but it’s more complicated than that. Look at the responses of Madeleine Albright, Wesley Clark, and Linda Chavez to the discovery that they had Jewish ancestry. This seems to apply to Steve Sailer, to a lesser extent.” (—Ben)

I can’t understand this business of making the awareness of a certain sort of Jewish mischief into a kind of mysticism. It’s just ordinary crap some of them they’re pulling. Why get mystical about it? Just tell the creeps to cut the crap. A lot of diaspora and Israeli Jews do exactly the same crap to Israel—they try to destroy it in the sickest possible ways: they actually try to destroy Israel. To see examples browse the log-entry archives of a Jewish college professor in Israel who teaches (I think) economics and signs as “Plaut’s Complaint” over at
Moonbat Central
.

185

Posted by Svigor on April 08, 2005, 09:52 PM | #

Yes, but it’s more complicated than that. Look at the responses of Madeleine Albright, Wesley Clark, and Linda Chavez to the discovery that they had Jewish ancestry.

You’ll have to be more specific. I don’t know Clark’s or Chavez’ responses, and all I remember of Albright’s was that she suddenly became interested in Jewish causes, which only proves my point - it’s Jewish identity that is the active ingredient. They never had any Jewishness until they discovered it, and their genes aren’t the issue.

This seems to apply to Steve Sailer, to a lesser extent.

I didn’t know that, though if true it does explain a bit. Source?

Rushton’s genetic similarity theory predicts that those of Jewish ancestry will have an affinity for others of similar ancestry.

I know, but really if every, Jew woke up tomorrow with permanent global amnesia, and every scrap of Jewish history and culture was somehow erased, I’d consider the JQ closed.

186

Posted by Guessedworker on April 09, 2005, 03:30 AM | #

Can we consider the thread closed ... please? There will be plenty of other occasions to air the arguments.

Thank you.

187

Posted by Phil Peterson on April 09, 2005, 04:20 AM | #

Phil,
What I said was completely honest. You just refuse to debate any. Let it be known… come to central Florida. I will debate you in a public forum. My guess is that you’d be too cowardly to take me up on that.

So, run away, coward.

I said before that we are most privileged to have our friend Arcane with us to remind us of our deep seated bigotry, our lack of intelligence and our cowardice. Our dear friend is a brave member of the United States armed forces spreading democracy in this world.

At present he has more time to blog than all of us put together - somewhow the US Army it seems lets its recruits twiddle their thumbs before a computer all day for the express purpose of exposing and fighting “Nazis”.

As for coming to Florida and for cowardice, Arcane is most welcome to come and visit me in Surrey. I have been to Florida before. Too many blacks and hispanics. Not to my liking. It is perhaps to his. He is a US Army recruit dodging bullets from the Iraqi insurgents in Florida.

As he is the epitome of courage, he may begin first with revealing his identity. Then we take the argument further. At present, the only person on his blog of the courageous who reports his identity is Razib. The others hide behind a veil (including our courageous friend Arcane).

Can we consider the thread closed ... please? There will be plenty of other occasions to air the arguments.

Thank you.

I agree.

As with other threads, Arcane has contributed little of value to the discussion with his fixation with “Nazis”. The thread had many interesting posts until Arcane entered and started with his usual Nazi fixation. For someone who is not Jewish, his obsession with Nazis is rather odd I must say unless of course he is just like one of those Jews that doesn’t qualify for citizenship of Israel like those “Jewish” Neocons and Liberals.

Post a Comment:

Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Smileys

You must prefix http://anonym.to/? to gnxp.com links...
e.g., http://anonym.to/?http://www.gnxp.com/...

Copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting
it just in case the software loses it because the session time has been exceeded.

bold

italics

underline

quote

code

@

link

Close Tags

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below: (not needed for preview)

Next entry: Some thoughts on “The Simpsons”

Previous entry: Q & A: Managerialism Part I

Existential Issues

White Genocide Project

Of note

General News

Science News

Science Categories

All Categories

The Writers

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Controlled Opposition

Crime

General

Immigration

Islam

Jews

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Whites in Africa

Gene Wars

Comments:

Post a Comment:

Existential Issues

White Genocide Project

Of note

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

General News

Science News

Science Categories

All Categories

The Writers

Links