The war between white culture and white nationalism

Posted by Geoff Beck on October 11, 2005, 07:02 PM | #

Sailer has exposed himself as a crypto neocon.  Ironically Sailer was crucial in helping me to find my path from ‘respectable’ conservatism to WN.

Perhaps this is the true impetus for the WN purge, aka the McConnell AmConMag purge.

But as Phil notes all neocons have a very perverted and shallow understanding of history.

Posted by Freddy on October 11, 2005, 09:45 PM | #

What you say is quite right, & Sailer’s commenbts are simply silly.

“They want the law to treat people not as members of an ethny or extended family but as individual and equal citizens under the law.”

What? This would surely not even be an issue in a healthy & natural nation - that is, one which is monoethnic, monoracial & homogenous, with effectively no immigration.

Posted by Geoff Beck on October 11, 2005, 10:29 PM | #

BTW,
Kevin Lamb, with NPI, has an interesting article:

Conservatives and Race: How Political Correctness and Multiculturalism Have Transformed the Right.

Posted by Geoff Beck on October 11, 2005, 11:48 PM | #

BTW,

Kevin MacDonald appears in a phone interview at this page: http://www.currentissues.tv/

MacDonald appears at exactly 29 minutes into the show. The interviewer is some sort of annoying Arab, unfamilar with much of his material.

I’m sure most here are suitably up to speed without listening to this interview, but I though I’d pass it on.

Posted by Andrew on October 12, 2005, 01:42 AM | #

I think the judicial system is breaking away from main stream institutions, if they are all not broken away in the first instance.
A sitting High court judge makes no bones about stating that Judicial Adventism is well on the way, The Ultimate Elites(SO they Think), will be the ruling Chancellery in place of the Legislative counsel. I think with the International Umbilical chord and the way eventual and even steps in Western society do leave an odious taste of some newer Imperialism taking place, and it is worse than the gatekeeper “Chomsky’s”, linguistic masturbation chronologies of just American   Imperialism, or was he just the Magician that made the obvious disappear in the text as cover for the New World Order. That sounds feasible. Many on the left look at him as the Massiah.

Posted by JW Holliday on October 12, 2005, 06:54 AM | #

Sailer doesn’t answer the points brought up in our critiques.  He does not because he can not.  Rather, he desperately draws a card from the Desmond deck (presumably Sailer reads this blog) and attempts the “divide and conquer” strategy.

Once again the question that these guys NEVER answer: if WN is so impossible and delusional and if white Americans will never, ever go for it, why waste so much time beating this “dead horse” over and over again?

Let me answer, Sailer, Jones, and the boys at GNXP – because you are frightened by WN, know its potential, and as enemies of white survival, you’ll do anything and say anything to delegitimize it.

Are you guys here over your Sailer fetish yet?

I declare Steve Sailer an enemy of white racial survival, as much as is GNXP and Desmond Jones.

Posted by JW Holliday on October 12, 2005, 09:27 AM | #

Does anyone else here see Sailer as being once more inconsistent?

On the one hand, he keeps on refering to “white Americans” as a distinct, identifiable group that has (in his opinion) particular behaviors and characteristics.  Then, he suggests that a problem for WN is that the group “white Americans” is hard to define, and that they are so individualistic, they
won’t think as a group.

So, are they a group or are they not?  If they can be identified by Sailer, and if Sailer and Taylor can debate strategies concerning this group, then why can’t WNs do the same?

Posted by Matthew on October 12, 2005, 09:52 AM | #

JW Holliday,

Another Sailer memory hole blunder.  Didn’t he comment on a story that ran about researchers at Stanford that ran a study where individuals identified there racial classification 99.84% accurately!!!

How hard is it really to know who is white and who isn’t?

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/genetics_show_race_is_not_merely_a_social_construct/

Posted by Svigor on October 12, 2005, 01:02 PM | #

Are you guys here over your Sailer fetish yet?

Though my comments in the other thread (yours, JW) might seem contradictory, the answer is no.

Don’t have a Sailer fetish to begin with, but that’s not really what you were asking.

Yes, I still consider Sailer very useful and I still consider his political positions essential to that utility.

Posted by Svigor on October 12, 2005, 01:03 PM | #

I declare Steve Sailer an enemy of white racial survival, as much as is GNXP and Desmond Jones.

And I pray for enemies like that in editorial positions at every major newspaper in the Anglosphere.

Posted by Svigor on October 12, 2005, 01:13 PM | #

Another Sailer memory hole blunder.  Didn’t he comment on a story that ran about researchers at Stanford that ran a study where individuals identified there racial classification 99.84% accurately!!!

I freakin’ love citing that one.  It had a large sample size and used self-identification and compared that to genetic patterns.  As you say the correlation was above 99% accuracy.

A triumph for “18th century notions of race,” if I may say so.

How hard is it really to know who is white and who isn’t?

As Geoff so rightly pointed out in the other thread, it’s only hard when identification runs counter to our enemies’ interests; it’s simple when it comes time for “affirmative action” or “anti-discrimination” laws or non-white identity politics or a adjudication of “hate crime” or Amerind tribal identification via blood test.

Posted by Svigor on October 12, 2005, 01:27 PM | #

Flip Sailer’s arguments and see how they work.

How would liberalist anti-white warfare have played out in the 20th century if liberals had assumed whites would never go for sacrificing their own interests, would never budge to grant priviliges to aliens, would never accept aliens as their own, etc?

How would the 60’s had played out if liberals were as big a bunch of suckers as “citizenists” and liberals think we are?

Posted by AD on October 12, 2005, 04:22 PM | #

Sailer has proved quite a good thing from my perspective. I have been able to get two high rating radio presenters read on air 3 of his articles. These articles prompted hours of debate, which always lead to a number of callers thinking that the logical conclusion is to reinstate the White Australia Policy(even though only once did he mention OZ). Steve Sailor works as a good catalyst/taboo breaker, even if he ultimately rejects white nationalism. To even suggest the possibility of WN’ism is revolutionary….it gets people thinking thoughts they’re programmed to shut out.

Posted by Svigor on October 12, 2005, 04:28 PM | #

To even suggest the possibility of WN’ism is revolutionary….it gets people thinking thoughts they’re programmed to shut out.

Right.  Sailer’s useless on “is it good for us,” but he’s useful on “there’s an us!”

Posted by LiberalLarry on October 13, 2005, 02:25 AM | #

More racial fear from the white supremest wannabes.

What have YOU done about this? Fuck it, I’m white. Let’s see you racist, fearful ‘supreme beings’ raise above all your political enemies and actually WIN.

If you are indeed as strong as you say the white race is, then the war would have been over long time ago. No excuses. Where’s your Racial Strengths?

I don’t see any racial strengths in sports or physical activities. As far as football, baseball, or the majority of popular sports, there is a bunch of accomplished men and women of all races.

Ahh, but what separates you from them is your mind. Yes, your cunning, manipulative, fearful mind. Your mind that plots the execution of your racial enemies. Is that why you are so scared of arming your foes with books? Keep handing them the basketball and baseball bats, and keep the books for yourselves, but this racial war is not being won.

But keep it up. Seriously.

Posted by John S Bolton on October 13, 2005, 03:28 AM | #

The race war doesn’t have any handsdown winners, but it does have losers. Officials gain power, but they are also losers, to someone over them, who himself loses when he is overthrown. Liberals are the biggest losers of all, when they do at length succeed in setting off the race war here; they sacrifice their client minorities out of the polity altogether, and themselves grovel under a military dictatorship for years. Psychologically, they’re already perhaps as prepared for it as the commenter above, if they say what’s right is what wins. I’ll go back to the Sailer controversy.  A suppressed major premiss indicates often an easily refuted premiss. Sailer comes close to stating in explicit terms one of the suppressed major premisses of the traitorous immigrationists. How can we be expected to value as citizens the devaluation of our citizenship via such and such immigration? It is so contradictory, to ask that of us, that those who promote such immigration do not dare to do other than suppress this major premiss.

Posted by Steve Edwards on October 13, 2005, 07:55 AM | #

Say Larry, I understand you might not be particularly well endowed upstairs, but (and this is coming from a non-WN, BTW; I’m sure the MR wolves will be held at bay for at least the next coupla’ hours) surely you might be able to point to an actual example of “white supremacism” on this site.

You did imply that the readers around here were white supremacists without actually showing how this might be so, and I thought I’d better get you to corroborate your “argument”.

Posted by jlh on October 13, 2005, 09:20 AM | #

Liberal Larry,

Nobody here said whites are supreme beings. In fact, the “fear” you describe is a natural reaction to having our communities under constant assault, our culture mocked, slandered and debased and our persons attacked. Blacks are, in any given year, between 40 and 50 times more likely than are whites to initiate an interracial assault. Black domination of sports and sex-charisma-based activities like entertainment (in itself an assault on white culture which used to celebrate modesty and propriety) is just another expression of the oppositional nature of black culture, which is defined as “black” precisely to the extent that it reveals its hatred of whites. Now to your point that if whites were as strong as you say we say we are, the “war” would be over a long time ago. About 60 years ago a Marxist-trained cadre of “well-meaning” whites and members of a not so white subset of the European race decided to force the rest of us to unilaterally disarm a social system that for many years was successful in keeping at bay the very same characteristics you now chide us for fearing. While I understand the motivations of blacks and other minorities eager to advance themselves at the expense of whites, I’ve never understood why whites like you derive so much pleasure from watching everything our ancestors fought and struggled for be dragged in the mud: unless it’s the superiority YOU feel that you are not an evil “racist.” As has been said many times on this board, it’s you liberals who are the real white supremacists, not us.

Posted by Svigor on October 13, 2005, 04:38 PM | #

More racial fear from the white supremest wannabes.

What have YOU done about this? Fuck it, I’m white. Let’s see you racist, fearful ‘supreme beings’ raise above all your political enemies and actually WIN.

Beat that strawman Larry, beat it!.

Whites are inferior, in every sense.  Can we have a space (mental, physical, spiritual, political, economic) to call our own now?

I don’t see any racial strengths in sports or physical activities. As far as football, baseball, or the majority of popular sports, there is a bunch of accomplished men and women of all races.

But keep it up. Seriously.

Larry, if we WNs at MR were interested in this low a level of discourse, we’d stay at Stormfront.  I’ve answered this kind of “argument” there more times than I can remember.  You’d like SF’s Opposing Views section; there you can find stupid WNs willing to make bad arguments for you to oppose at the expense of the good WN arguments (a.k.a., strawman fallacy writ large - it’s very common amongst anti-racists there, in fact more common than not).  Then you can come away feeling like a righteous genius.

Posted by Steve Edwards on October 15, 2005, 03:26 PM | #

Surely if whites were as “inferior” as Larry implies, then, being a “liberal”, he’d grant us the right to affirmative action and self-determination. You know, it’s about “equality” and all, right Larry?