Richards why do you keep removing Leon Haller’s posts? I read them in Trash, and they are completely on point for this topic. Maybe because on the longer one he showed that you really don’t know what you’re talking about (I did a internet check, and from what I could tell he’s right)?

I think this censorship is shameful, worse even than getting rid of a smart Jew or black because you don’t like them. Here it’s just personal antagonism.

They do this at samizdat also (not to mention yahoo).

If that isn’t true Jew behaviour, what is? I think Richards is a Jew out to make majorityrights look bad or creepy.

Ex-Pro White Activist @22, 23

Do you mean someone from my brokerage doesn’t run over to the CBOE with paper money in a briefcase every time I execute a listed stock options trade on my PC?

Yes.

I ventured to introduce you to a world of highly scalar micro-industrial technologies.  These can be learned, controlled and supplied at “community” level.

To which I have no objections.

You claim “federal” central bank money is best.

No.  I’ve told you I don’t want the government in banking.  For a couple of months I’ve maintained that the government should issue and control money, not get itself into banking.  Before your post, I revised my stance and now state that government control of money is the second best proposal: http://www.majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/sound_money_arthur_kitson   

After reading that I’ve concluded your understanding of production and technology is probably inferior to Mordechai Levy’s knowledge of industrial processes circa 1848.  Here is proof certain that you are ignoring everything said…,  CAD Plans Corp (DIY earth digging equipment)... OSE’s equipment is buildable for 80% discounts over comparable central factory equipment that you claim is ‘cheaper’ and ‘efficient’.  Doing so;

a)  Bypasses a hell of a lot of taxes and usury interest

b)  Enables individuals and family groups to directly capitalize their own labor.  And they can do so without paying taxes, bar association ‘taxes’ (a/k/a “insurance”)  or usury interest on it.

c) Offers routes for unemployed whites to become employed and generate economic surpluses capable of supporting more little whites.

You’re confusing production and money issues.  You can’t argue against the notion of greater efficiency of production by a factory as opposed to individuals assembling factory products themselves by referring to money issues in the present.  Get rid of interest and have money controlled by a government or the people and then tell me if people assembling tractors on their own is anywhere as efficient as a factory doing it en masse.

What’s pathetic is the monomaniacal monetarist obsession that you share with Leon Haller.

Money is the lifeblood of an economy.  You’re concerned with the working of the kidneys when blood flow issues in the body can cause kidney failure or destroy the body and then the kidney would be grub for microorganisms.  I’m not opposing your interest and work on the kidneys, but you don’t seem to grasp the relevance of blood flow issues and take a cheap shot by suggesting that I’ve never produced anything of any worth.

Your “money” will soon have just as much value as Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwean dollars.

The kind of money I want doesn’t exist.  It’s fiat money okay but under the control of a government or, preferably, the people.  I’ve told you before that Mugabe has nothing to do with Zimbabwean dollars as the nation’s central bank is under private control.

That proposes many illegal acts.  I will not even discuss it conceptually.  Safety note:  there is plenty of room in Matt Hale’s wing in ADX Florence Supermax.  Or in Simon Sheppard’s half-way parole house.

Don’t discuss it if you wish, but don’t tell me I’m clueless about how to proceed.  If focused mass protests can’t be brought about, operating within the law will achieve little to nothing. 

In the big scheme of things who gives two hutes about toys like smart phones and tablet computers?  Do you support yourself and a family?  Or are you another of these ‘white leaders’ still living with the parents?...

Run down a notional white nuclear family budget.

1.  And at the very top of the list are housing costs…

2.  In second position is Food….

3. Education costs are another big ticket item…

The discussion was prompted by Apple’s products and went into the issue of technology displacing people from work.  Yes, housing, food and education are important issues, but they require plenty of money.

The trickle-down technologies you’re talking about don’t solve the money problem.  They facilitate relatively more independent community living assuming there’s no initial money problem in setting up such communities, but rest assured the people behind the money problem would like humanity enslaved to them and won’t be too pleased with independent communities.  So whereas I’ve nothing against independent micro-communities, I’m more inclined toward focusing on the broader money control issue.

Proof positive of Haller-clone behavior on your part, combined with ignorance.  You write this because you are throwing jello at wall, not because you actually understand what “20 MW” really is.

“20 MW” means “20 megawatts.”  And this is very small for a modern central thermal plant run with uranium, coal or natural gas.  New design single reactor plants can easily generate 1,000 MW.  Coal plants run around 600 MW and up.  Even fast start n-g plants come in at 250 MW and up.

And it’s small for existing mega-scale hydro plants like Hoover or Grand Coulee Dams.  But 20 MW is right up the alley of the “Small Hydro” projects that I’ve advocated here periodically.

Okay so you do understand what 20 MW is, but what you don’t get is that the argument isn’t about 20 MW or 200 MW or 2000 MW.  The argument is that a single power plant producing a given amount of power is clearly more efficient than multiple power plants producing the same amount of power in totality.  You know this is true and that the analogy applies to division of labor in a complex society.  Modern societies work better with a high level of division of labor.  Your proposal reduces the division of labor and makes the system less efficient.  What I’m saying is that when the people control the money supply, then society can prosper under the more efficient high level of division of labor, which increasingly involves people being displaced by machines, without a money problem if one employs some of the ideas of social credit. 

You’re grasping at straws by focusing on issues such as the 20 in 20 MW instead of the broader issues that prompted the post.

I do admit that I don’t care about unemployed Chinese in Asia or North America.  Nor am I worried about unemployed blacks either in Africa or the USA.  They can tend to themselves.  My sole interest is what’s best for the future of white people.  Consequently I am uninterested in multi-racial and multi-cultural monetarism and economics.

This reveals your problem, not the fact that you’re not concerned with the Chinese or blacks, but the fact that you don’t seem to think beyond micro-communities.  You’re not appreciating blood flow issues because you’re so focused on internal working of the kidneys.

Unemployed blacks will be looking to mug you.  Unless you have a way of shipping them off to Africa, you have to think about what happens to the blacks in your midst.  And if a 100-IQ Chinese population could suffer from massive unemployment issues because the workers are being displaced by technology, then it won’t be long before the problem strikes white societies, too.

Dr. Lister @38, 40

As for Richards and his ‘biological insights’ two things: (i) they hardly represent the subject area in its totality (more cherry-picking of evidence) and (ii) the alleged specific qualities of different groups is very much a second order question - I’ve used this example before but it is useful – it could be frightfully nice ‘objectively’ superior ‘little green men’ with 200+IQs taking over the society I live in – the effects of becoming anything like a minority in a polity in which I was a member of the former majority group would largely be the same (i.e. a devastating loss of collective social and political power). That is political sociology 101.

In order to show that I’m cherry-picking and citing non-representative scientific literature, you’d need to cite the scientific literature I’m omitting and show that this was published in places prominent enough for me to not miss it.  You’ve done nothing of the sort.

As to your political sociology 101, if the ‘little green men’ with 200+IQs have benevolent attitudes toward the human species, humanity will benefit from them.  Higher IQs don’t necessarily accompany a desire to subjugate or rule over others.  And the analogy isn’t apt to anything relevant.  We’re not dealing with separate species and extreme IQ differentials.  We’re dealing with Jews, not “specific qualities of different groups,” and IQs are irrelevant to their success:  http://www.majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/intelligence_or_control_of_the_money_supply

However, in making your politics revolve around the polarity of inferiority-superiority, is to miss actually what is structurally important in the argument,...

Irrelevant digression.

One feature of real science is that it attempts to be systematic; one does not generally ignore data that goes against your hypothesis, nor at a meta-level does one ignore all the experimental and empirical evidence that might go against one’s hypothesis.

So when will you be citing the scientific studies/data I’m ignoring?

Forgive me if I think it might be beyond the ability of people that think David Icke, or Richards are ‘thinkers’ to grasp even the basics of such debates.

Postmodernist sociology/philosophy 101: discredit by association [even when I’ve never cited Icke to support any of my arguments], never address facts.

Joseph Heller @35

Will no one rid of this troublesome priest Haller? The spam has more intellectual content and at least is true to its purpose.

A few shots of platitudinous waffle distilled from other men’s thoughts, served over a mixer of whining pretension. It gives nauseau without even drinking it.

Sorry, this is one stubborn creature.  I send his comments to trash as soon as I come across them.  Unfortunately some people encourage him by replying to his posts.  Trolls shouldn’t be fed. 

A couple of hours ago, I sent an incredible 15 comments to trash!  Only two of these were reposts of trashed comments, a number were lengthy comments and one even stated that he’s too busy to blog at his own website!

Haller had his own blog, but nobody ever commented on his useless posts: https://hallerontheright.wordpress.com/

So Haller scoured the net for where hasbarim activity is most needed, and unfortunately set his eyes on MR.

Speaking of this creature being too busy to blog or even comment, Haller was recently challenged to a theological debate.  The sincere Catholic that he is, he said that he had to go eat dinner, and a reader responded “I hope you eat shit faggot,” knowing fully well that Haller won’t be back to participate in the theological debate.  Indeed, Haller was gone for two days, and when he came back, he said that whereas he’d like to comment, work was piling up and he won’t have much time for commenting for the next couple of months.  And now look at how desperate he is to comment here: 15 posts, some lengthy, in less than half a day!

Addendum to reply to Dr. Lister’s post

Guessedworker @24

I am sorry to tell you that I understood every word of Graham’s post.

I don’t see why you should be sorry.  I understood it, too.  Let me expand on my understanding.

Many of us in the sciences have learned how to deal with the likes of Dr. Lister.  We’ve learned that it’s useless to cite scientific evidence because they couldn’t be less interested in facts, analysis of facts or evidence-based reasoning/conclusions.  Lister et al. revel in the fact that a good deal of the scientific literature is beyond the common man and thus the common man can’t, via a reading of the scientific literature, be made to see through the empty arguments Lister et al. bring forth.

So the facts used to expose these creatures had better be of a historical nature, if applicable, not because these postmodern sociologists/philosophers have any greater interest in historical facts but because the common man can be exposed to historical facts and thus made to see the garbage coming out of these individuals.  The historical facts pertaining to liberalism remain a discussion for the future.

The second approach is exemplified by Alan Sokal and the computer programs developed subsequently.  One needs to talk to Dr. Lister et. al. in their own language.  If I hadn’t added a comment to Parts1-3 of my criticism of Dr. Lister, you wouldn’t see him attempt to critique it, and he couldn’t critique it because if he attempted to to so, he couldn’t maintain that his own writing has any value——this is why a leading sociology peer-reviewed journal published Sokal’s nonsense paper.

A third approach has been undertaken by a few researchers with apparently a lot of time on their hands.  Anyone who can handle arcane words and concepts in science could easily handle the words and concepts coming from the likes of Dr. Lister.  Now what happens if one looks up the references and traces back the development of the field/argument to the original sources?

Those that’ve attempted this task noted that the bulk of the writings comprise of references to each other without any content, and by the time one arrives at the original sources, one doesn’t know whether to be amused or appalled.

I’ve included these excerpts before, but if you look at the roots of much of the sociological understanding of political orientation, personality, etc., you end up with things like:

The forbidden action [of killing one’s father out of Oedipal jealousy] which is converted into aggression is generally homosexual in nature.  Through fear of castration, obedience to the father is taken to the extreme of an anticipation of castration in conscious emotional approximation to the nature of a small girl, and actual hatred to the father is suppressed” (Dialectic of Enlightenment, Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno, p. 192).

With regard to authoritarianism, masochism manifested itself in the surrender to authority, and sadism was evident in the acceptance of social hierarchy.  In the developmental and sexual sense, the authoritarian character had suffered a regression from genital sexuality to infantile sexuality.  Accompanying this regression of libidinal energy, Fromm also expected a shift from heterosexual to homosexual behavior among authoritarian personalities (from The Frankfurt School in Exile, by Thomas Wheatland, p. 68; summary of Studien über Authorität und Familie by Erich Fromm (1936)).

Oedipal ambivalence toward the father and anal-sadistic relations in early childhood are the anti-Semite’s irrevocable inheritance. [see MacDonald for review: http://majorityrights.com/uploads/Frankfurt-School-MacDonald.pdf ]

Now, because MacDonald has traced the matter to Jews, he’s beyond the pale of the mainstream, but you can look up the conclusions of the mainstream that has browsed the postmodernist sociological/philosophical literature to get to the original sources and figure out their development:

Paul Gross, Norman Levitt. Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science. The Johns Hopkins University Press (1994).

Paul Gross, Norman Levitt, Martin Lewis (Editors). The Flight from Science and Reason (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences). New York Academy of Sciences (May 8, 1997).

Now if you’ll recall, sociologist John Ray used to blog here.  There were a couple of issues with his approach, and on one count he frustrated many but was in reality impeccable on scholarly grounds: his analysis of political orientation (left vs. right, liberal vs. conservative).  Using statistical tools, Ray clearly showed that nationalists types [true, not phony hasbarim] were of a leftist political orientation and that national socialism was a leftist ideology.  One can only imagine how outrageous this sounds to a large number of people, but in the decades of statistical literature Ray cited, nothing ever refuted him and not one critic ever attempted to challenge him on statistical methodology or scientific grounds.

Starting from roots such as the excerpts MacDonald cites, the Frankfurt School and its developments such as postmodernist sociology led to a picture of political orientation that serves Jewish agenda, not reflecting underlying reality.  Accordingly, a large number of people waste their time debating the structure of political orientation, and many are outraged at John Ray for using statistical tools to show what really underlies political orientation and at the behavior geneticists for confirming the structure of political orientation as argued by Dr. Ray.  Dr. Lister openly discombobulates when I refer him to this literature from behavior genetics.  But undeterred, Dr. Lister posts a “promising” article at MR that will supposedly show us the way out of our predicament if expanded into, say, something ten times as long.

They’re wasting our time with nonsense and distractions.  I’d advise you not to look to these individuals for an analysis or solution.  The only “solution” coming from them is a Marxist twist on Hegelian dialectics: provide the thesis, provide the anti-thesis, provide the syn-thesis; no matter which you choose, with Jews you lose.

@Graham Lister

Graham, no doubt many philosophers of science write creditable pieces on the scientific method, how it proceeds, ever edging closer to the truth and building up a larger more representative picture as it progresses.

Yet when we look at scientific areas that have some level of contention we see a different picture resulting in reality world, do we not? Theory does not always agree with practice and in fact sometimes is wilfully used to obscure it.

Reports from the frontline in the social sciences, biological sciences, psychology, environmental sciences (not to mention other fields such as philosophy, humanities and so on) are replete with stories of scientists who are shunned and smeared by their peers, whose leading journal doors are closed to their contributions, whose grants are rarely given for their fields of interest who struggle to proceed in their careers or find suitable positions or tenure.

The Age Old Question.

Who is a Jew?

A Race ? A Religion ?

The Question itself really spotlights the War that is being waged upon us. Ablity to exchange ideas and concepts is hindered when set definitions for words are “hateful”. It is a tactic that affects your enemies ability to unify and fight against you - or your interests. When definitions and classifications cannot be made , then ideas and concepts cannot flow from one to another without confusion. Words like Capitalist, Liberal, Conservative , Jew , Semite, Race, European, Religion become difficult to use in conversation with your average zio-goat shabbos goy self-hateing white..

Before the year 1775 the word Jew did not exist.

The word came from translations of the Bible.

In the bible it is used to refer those that live within an area of land - known as Judaea.

Co-incidentally around the exact time the word was translated from “Iews” to “Jews”  “a well-organized and well-financed international “pressure group” created a so-called “secondary meaning” for the word “Jew” among the English speaking peoples of the world. This so-called “secondary meaning” for the word “Jew” bears no relation whatsoever to the 18th century original connotation of the word “Jew.” It is a misrepresentation. ” This occured between the 18th and 20th century.

If religion is an indivudual beleif system, then anyone can be a jew, but if it depends on the acceptance into a group ?....not so much. I can say I am in the MAFIA and even ACT like im in the MAFIA that doesn’t neccesarily make me a member of the Itallian Mafia. which raises the question that if the members of said group are not like minded, or if the group only exists to profit - is it really a religion?
Religion is linked to behaviour , mannerisms ect which are clearly linked to dna/genetics , the same genetics which cause race/ appearance. Humans were linking together behaviour/mannerism’s with Race/appearance LONNNNGGG before anyone knew anything about DNA and longgg before the infantile idea that race is a social contruct and is dictated by environmental conditions.

The people in Jesus’s time read a religous book called the Torah.
But some of them taught the written law(the torah) by day , and taught the mishrah by night which cancelled out most of the written law, which Jesus apparently did not like, in the bible he calls these people Pharisies and Scribes (also refered to them in negative light as snakes and vipers).

They eventually turned this oral law (mishrah) into writing. Over time because of the nature of these people, this written law was perverted time and time again until it became what is now known today as the Talmud (aka modern day jewish religion)
Ashkenazi jews, which are the ones that look white are descended from the Khazarian Kingdom which converted to this Talmudic Religion around 1400 years ago - a religion which is against the laws of the Torah.

For example taxing water is expressly forbidden in the Torah - yet on every bottle of water you can get your hands on you will find the Kosher Tax symbol U/K/k/CoR which means a Talmudic rabbi has been payed to bless the food and/or ensured that it adheres to the food rules in the Torah. The rabbi sends his cut to the kosher organisation and most likely send a cut to the boss-Israel. If a company refuses to pay for the kosher tax , Jewish organisations will rally together and boycott the company for who-knows what at the behest of they’re priestly class handlers, with the help of the press they will make it financially more viable to just pay the gangster fee - just like the mafia.

They define the rules of the torah the same way they define everything else. If it is to their benefit, they accept it , if not, they don’t. If “being white” is profitable for them at the time, they will claim they are - and perhaps (in some cases) have jussssst enough aryan blood to justify it. But oversly, if it is not beneficial, for example when white liberals cry that all whites should bow-down to blacks and indians ect , then they are distict enough to be different and special(and will cry all day to you about how the evil aryans opressed their people too!). You cant have it both ways…..unless you control certain peices of societies infrastructure it seems (like Education/Money supply). As well as other methods of indoctrination and programming ( MEDIA ).

When the organization needs to be a Race to suit a function of purpose ....it’s a race….........when it needs to be a religion to suit a function or purpose…..then it is a Religion .............anything is possible when you’ve seized control of the mass majority of programming for the best method of brainwashing ever invented ( Television ). And have laws like here in Canada to imprison “hater crimes”(aka -thought crime). With the left side of their cheek they proudly boast how smart and gifted they are and how they control the news or the banks or the government…..whilst from the right side they defame any non-jew for repeating their own words as “anti-semetic” and “racist” (whilst maintaining that jews are a ethnoreligious(ethnic/religious) group, of course). Wouldn’t wanna lose that religous human-shield, +6 Strength +3 Armour.
Ethnicity became a word in the 1970’s i beleive, now it starts to make sense?
Accounting for only 1% of the population here in Canada , and only around 2% for the United States, yet controlling most levers of power, it doesn’t take very long to realise there is some conspiring going on.(and not the beneficial kind)

When Isra-hell digg’s up old jewish cemetaries so they can build roads, it’s the real jews in the area that get upset (which you will never see on television because they are anthropoligically the same as “Talmudic Jews” which would hella-confuse most average zio-commie-libs). The 20,000-40,000 jews in Iran are an example of real religious jews. Isra-Hell offered these real jews $10,000 a head to come live in Isra-hell, so they could play the “Iran persecutes jews” card. Fortunatly they respectfully declined the oh-so-generous offer. 

I guess you could call the new version of Judaism “Political Judaism” as opposed to “Religous Judaism” as the older version has some actual spiritual angle to it, for the most part the new created version does not.

The hard truth is that racially most people who call themselves jews or Modern Jews are Mongrels (a mix of racial groups) , it explains why they have larger numbers of members with certain specific unnatractive features (nose, posture, eyes, ect), and also explains their hate for every other racial group with any purity. 
Basically all the most intelligent mongrels have gotten together and created a Political Religion that they use against everyone else. 
They only pretend to be a race so they can call you racist and anti-semetic, to them race is only another tool to be used agaisnt their enemies(all who stand in their way), there is no genetic test that can distinguish jew from non-jew , or non-jew from jew. The genetic proof for the existance of Jews as a race is simply not there, but they certainly try their best to convince the gullible that DNA and genetics proove that to be true.
The current theory on the jews is that they are an amalgamation of the worst of all races, i.e. the worst of the White, Asian and Negro races mixed into one single bastard breed of degenerate evil scum.
You can say whatever you want about Europeans(Aryans) or Christians or Jesus or Muslims or Islam , but question Holocaustianity or Jews/Israel and you will go to jail, and they will tell you that is why your going to jail when they lock you up.

Why else would they hate Jesus Christ & Adolf Hitler so much other then the fact they hate justice and love injustice. Hate - thats a jew thing, it’s not permitted for US goy….

Thank You All

For a Good Laugh, Search - Evian Conference

Seig Heil !

Robert Stark also interviewed Tanstaafl recently, worth a listen.

I have no issue at all with identifying the demarcation between a closed epistemic community and an open one. Does ‘not impressed’?

Indeed I can even tell the difference between pseudo-science and the real thing.

One feature of real science is that it attempts to be systematic; one does not generally ignore data that goes against your hypothesis, nor at a meta-level does one ignore all the experimental and empirical evidence that might go against one’s hypothesis.

Even if individual scientists act like a lawyer and put forward the best possible positive case for their hypothesis, the broader epistemic community of which they are a part will, in the long run, not allow significant counter-evidence or creditable alternative explanations to be ignored. It’s a pattern of confirmation and refutation that is seen in the history of science.

There is a large and sophisticated literature - the philosophy of science - that has much, much more to say on such topics.

Forgive me if I think it might be beyond the ability of people that think David Icke, or Richards are ‘thinkers’ to grasp even the basics of such debates.

Science as a model is very good to think with. I’m no post-modernist. I do think there is an ontologically independent reality and we can gain real knowledge about. But funny enough when discussing political philosophy we not really debating, in any strict sense of the term, ‘scientific’ propositions are we?

Unless ‘not impressed’ is of the ‘scientific socialism’ school of Marxism perhaps?

Not impressed,

It’s clear why discussion of science, physics, facts and evidence are routinely attacked here, about the so-called “existential issues” while pretentious crap spewed from the Listers and Hallers receive mutual reach-arounds from the usual suspects.

Who by?

Excellent show. There’s a personality who combines significant intelligence with a high level of articulation. Robert Stark does well to say little, not a voice for net radio but well meaning. Look forward to the second instalment.

One of my regular ports of call is the Daily Bell blog.

Usually, on a Monday, (Which today is) it is quieter than later days in the week, but I was interested to see they have an interesting interview on offer, none other than Mr David Icke whose name it has been noticed has appeared here (in this thread at MR.)

I’ve been reasonably familiar with Icke’s works for several years now, but was somewhat taken aback when someone on one of these threads said he’d only just heard of him.

Well for those here who haven’t heard of David Icke, or for those have heard his name but no little or nothing about him, then I offer for your delectation Mr David Icke.

http://www.thedailybell.com/3578/Staff-Report-David-Icke-on

I issue the usual caveat when talking Icke, the jury is out about the usual claims about him, all I ask is, does David Icke aid or hinder the nationalist cause?

It is a fairly lengthy piece so be prepared to put a few minutes aside.   

Just a question - a fairly simple one related to a matter mentioned in the thread.

What criterion or criteria should someone employ to distinguish a ‘concern troll’ from someone with a honestly held difference of view or a contrary reading of the evidence/topic at hand?  Add to that, obviously, one would also wish to avoid becoming gripped by the ‘echo-chamber’ effect, yes? The idea that much of the discussion on the internet consists of ‘inwardly directed’ groups of individuals that primarily wish to only hear their own views repeated back to them by others.

OK back on topic sensu stricto.

I’m sure the cardinality of pairwise duels to European history and society is a much under-appreciated and under-researched topic and their re-establishment would be an extraordinary important public-policy priority in any sensible polity.

Unfortunately I am too busy to listen to the interview.

@Leon and others with sensible comments, thanks.

Yes atomization is a better term.

The Sartrean cogito is of course not a scientific description but it is one of the most clear formulations of the absurd assumptions contained within liberal theory. At the level of lived experience if people really acted like the possessors of a Sartrean cogito – or indeed as Ayn Rand suggested - then the texture of that society would be very different from one with alternative values and differently grounded model of the self. That is why the issue is pretty damn important in my view.

It was but a fragment of a longer piece, hence the rushed feeling and as both GW and Leon H. pointed out, the themes only touch the surface – it really was a test item. I mean at under 1500 words (seemingly far too much for some) how could it be otherwise?

I don’t actually think it was a very difficult piece at all, in that it had no technical terms etc., (obviously some people have never read a serious piece of political philosophy). As for Richards and his tendency yes they are annoying (in so much as they do more harm than good in lots of ways – they should be ignored as a rule of thumb). I did explain what was generally wrong with their general methodology a while back. Discussion with the ‘raving nutter in the pub’ is a waste of anyone’s time. Intellectual honesty, a full and balanced assessment of all the available evidence etc., is the foundation of all serious enquiry which is sadly lacking in some characters around these parts. As for self-styled ‘elitists’ some middle-brow, middle-Americans do seem to run a mile from anything with several multisyllabic words, yes?

As for Richards and his ‘biological insights’ two things: (i) they hardly represent the subject area in its totality (more cherry-picking of evidence) and (ii) the alleged specific qualities of different groups is very much a second order question - I’ve used this example before but it is useful – it could be frightfully nice ‘objectively’ superior ‘little green men’ with 200+IQs taking over the society I live in – the effects of becoming anything like a minority in a polity in which I was a member of the former majority group would largely be the same (i.e. a devastating loss of collective social and political power). That is political sociology 101. It is the persistent differentiation of groups and the political and social consequences of such within a society that is the issue. Think Northern Ireland or the partition of India – horrible and explosive intra-societal cleavages, not grounded in race, but mere politics and culture. Of course, ethnic origin can also be a source of very deep-rooted and persistent differentiation.

However, in making your politics revolve around the polarity of inferiority-superiority, is to miss actually what is structurally important in the argument, as well to embrace a whole series of tropes that signal to a wider public moral turpitude, all for no positive gain whatsoever – unless of course being a marginal ‘martyred’ antinomian is how one gets one’s kicks, which frankly is the case with most WN types. I suspect they are a classic sub-culture in that sense. I’m not a WN, neo-Nazi, a fascist or whatever. I’m a European patriot with important and real ethnocentric concerns – quite a different beast so to speak. Let alone the added crackpot ‘conspiracy around every corner’ routine which again just signals to anyone remotely normal that they are dealing with fruit-loops; hence all of what they say can be safely dismissed. And people wonder why such ideas are so marginal and why the educated middle-class (a key group) generally avoid them (and the characters promoting them) like the plague.

OK well Dan Dare suggested a while ago more book reviews and essays on wider cultural topics – if I can get GW to agree there might be one or two items of that type coming soon.

Oh and now I see DC aka ‘Prof. Logic’ has now piped up – he wouldn’t know a post-modernist from Postman Pat - even if he was bitten on the arse by one or both. For the record, I and Mr. Haller do not agree on any number of issues. The sociological significance of religion being one, for example. On top of that I have also compared Catholicism to Voodoo – hardly Haller’s take on the topic. By the way Prof. Logic did you seriously respond to any of my posts concerning the faulty thinking typically displayed in ‘generic conspiracy’ talk and pseudo-scholarship?

Finally returning to the content of the post – Leon is not both the suggestion that we have inter-generationally transmitted duties and obligations to our particular bio-cultural inheritance and a robust notion of the concept of moral particularism – both of which are not typically liberal thoughts – of interest to you in your own work?

Great interview. Well worth an hour.

Bye, bye Yellow Mist!

It’s an interesting idea and directly relevant to evolution/selection, although I’m not sure if it would select for the best brains or simply the biggest brawn.

The great beasts of nature are much stronger than the strongest men. But much weaker men routinely slay such beasts using tools and the natural environment.

I enjoyed many belly laughs from the GNAA back in the day. Obviously, my favorite campaign of theirs was JewsDidWTC. But hasbara and the Chinese 50 Cents Army are “trolling” in a different league, it’s not a joke to see who takes the bait, it’s organized propaganda using the same sort of focus groups and audience statistics that the billion dollar ad agencies do.

Somewhere online there is a “how to” about dominating message boards, burying content you don’t want seen, and using sockpuppets to simulate consensus on certain topics. Some WN site somewhere had an excerpt on an old communist technique of running a public meeting. The idea is to take four people, plant them at the four corners of the audience, and have them each speak. The typical audience member will then have to turn their heads four times to see the speakers, and this was considered psychologically powerful enough to create the impression of a consensus.

The previous comments on Frankfurt school/postmodernism were quite interesting. Falsely ascribe to your opponents outrageous beliefs and motivations and completely ignore any facts or reasoning they give. You win that trolling contest when the opponents starts defending themselves from your false charges. In US politics, this is how “racism” works:

A. I oppose Obama for his policy X.

B. You just oppose Obama because he’s black, you’re a racist.

A. I am not racist! I don’t care that Obama’s black!

The most common trolls I’ve seen on the pro-white websites are called “concern trolls” - these are especially used to bury certain topics. “Don’t talk about this subject Y because it will make us look bad.”

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/06/18/general-petraeus-concern-troll/

The most interesting aspect of the new internet media is the organized trolling campaigns, of which Israeli hasbara is perhaps the most well known, although the Chinese 50 Cents Army is surely bigger.

The GNAA is worth mentioning in this context, although the question as to whether GNAA trolling qualifies as “organized” could trigger a flamewar.

http://www.gnaa.eu/wiki/about

The highlighted excerpts above have convinced me to download and listen to the interview. Finally, interesting topics worthy of discussion.

“Horizontal transmission – border crossing - key to evolution of Jewish virulence.”

It brings a new shade of meaning to the oft-heard term “the international community” yes?

“Civilization removed characteristic European male way of challenging interlopers to a duel, placing immigration control in hands of state, creates drone males;”

Was it Bowery who used to go on about dueling? It’s an interesting idea and directly relevant to evolution/selection, although I’m not sure if it would select for the best brains or simply the biggest brawn.

“Internet most promising aspect of situation now – bypasses central controls, facilitates voluntary associations, independence from global forces;”

There’s a recent article in the US press about how the Republicans threw Hollywood (content/copyright owners) under the bus, since Hollywood and the media are generally hostile to the Republican party and base (unspoken - because Hollywood is Jewish) and the anti-piracy/copyright industry is generally hated by the young, internet savvy crowd. The media companies - including the political media - have been screaming about the disruption to their business models ever since the early 2000s.

The most interesting aspect of the new internet media is the organized trolling campaigns, of which Israeli hasbara is perhaps the most well known, although the Chinese 50 Cents Army is surely bigger.

“They are pretentious idiots, who offer a kind of facsimile of erudition is lieu of the real article.”

I think that JRichard’s nailed the “false erudition” earlier in his reference to the Sokal hoax.

Heller and Lister are boring twats dressing up truisms in fancy words to try to impress people, but any undergraduate English prof would mark the essay down for its showy verbiage. The essay is mostly content free, as is Heller’s breathless, thesaurus addled defense of it.

“First, I am anti-deconstruction, because I absolutely believe in the possibility of metaphysics. Second, deconstruction is extremely complicated (and it is arguable there is less ‘there’ than there appears to be), but in essence, it is a radical critique of the possibility of metaphysics conducted by attempting to undermine the possibility of stable assignations of meaning. The deconstructionist focuses on the alleged indeterminacy of texts, positing a kaleidoscopic cosmos of interpretations where formerly there were thought to be hierarchies (ie, one understanding being better than another). Anyone with a scintilla of knowledge knows this tripe is associated with the late Derrida, an obnoxious leftwing Jew, to be sure, but not a “critical theory” ‘Frankfurter’.”

This is an example of “false erudition” and Richards nailed these people in his discussion of pomo above.

Lister and Heller are not just boring, but content free. The flowery language only appeals to those who wish to impress as opposed to making a clear point.

It’s clear why discussion of science, physics, facts and evidence are routinely attacked here, about the so-called “existential issues” while pretentious crap spewed from the Listers and Hallers receive mutual reach-arounds from the usual suspects.

“You are your own parody, a veritable (cyber)embodiment of the most unrivaled peevishness.”

An excellent example of Jung’s idea of projection.

What is the traditional solution to the meddlesome priests? Something about hanging them by their entrails? Now that is a tradition I can endorse.

@Leon

They are pretentious idiots, who offer a kind of facsimile of erudition is lieu of the real article.

fwiw, I really do believe you are a lawyer who probably attended an expensive school.  Your mode of argument is suited to an adversarial proceeding.  As is well known, lawyers will persist in advocating the most ridiculous propositions until they are either laughed out of court or are ejected by the bailiffs.  They never admit fault and do not engage in any sort of Socratic discourse.  You have clearly either been to law school and/or have spent many years in a yeshiva.

However, I do not believe you are either studying Catholic theology or are a white nationalist.  In you we have an example of;

a.  a “Catholic graduate theology student” who shamelessly boasts of regular fornication.

b.  a “white nationalist”  who boasts of fornicating a non-white woman.  Although you claim to do this I believe ‘she’ only exists at most in RAM as a graphic image.  I lack sufficient imagination to envision a female of any species enduring more than one encounter with you.  What is important is your claim to do this.

c.  A “white nationalist” who constantly tries to associate positive ideas and images with the word “Zionism”.

d.  Your love of money and Jewish economic ideas above all other things is well established.

This kind of mocking contradictory behavior is typically associated with a short dirty looking ambulance chaser.  I envision you as very short grungy-looking Jew like the pimp portrayed by Dustin Hoffman in Midnight Cowboy.

This is the first time I have ever accused anyone of being a covert Jew troll.  In your case I do so with a great deal of supporting evidence.

p.s.  Unlike Danielj my greatest hope is that you don’t reproduce and certainly don’t reproduce with a white woman.  I think not having inflicted your genes on yet another generation is your sole virtue.

One of the most important thinkers of our time.

JR @25

Do you think these individuals should be confronted with clarifying their behavior or asked why are they prompted to do damage control for Jews?

To what avail?  Can you imagine Jews spending 10 years dissecting, analyzing and writing about thousands of manifestations or perceived malfeasance, and more Jews further analyzing, reviewing, and commenting upon those writings?  I laugh as I type those words.

It’s incorrect to think that the Partisan Review and Jew York Intellectuals that changed America from Gentile to Jewish; a better case could be made for the Frankfurt School Jews to have played a greater role.  The change was brought about by all of the actions taken in as many forms as there were activists, meaning people who act, whether as principals or supporters—whether forming phone brigades or removing shoulder pads and fitted waistlines or producing F-Troop television or having Streisand walk down the aisle in a traditional white wedding with an 8-month pregnant belly in a movie or enforcing the comics teach reading as well as McGuffy readers or spelling and handwriting don’t matter lines in school.

Not long ago, there were lengthy threads on Mainstreamers vs. so-called Vanguardists, a temporal term distorted to mean some illusory violent wing that came before and threatens to return.  Who and where are these baddies that people (even KM and GJ do it in the recent CC broadcast) keep referring to, that we must beware of letting into our midst?  What is “our midst” anyway?  Who’s in and who’s out is a constant preoccupation when eyes are focused inward, instead of outward.

Yesterday I read a comment at OD to the effect that certain vocal White activists can’t find it in their hearts (minds?) to dislike Romney.  How is this possible, given that his Bain connection, his Israel connection, his Jewish connection, his placing a known Israeli spy on his election transition team connection, are all public knowledge?

With respect to MR traffic, JR, it’s true that more than 900 comments were made to your 9/11 thread, 32 of them on the actual date.  There were also more than 500 comments to the Elitism/Secrecy thread, 11 on 9/11.  Both of these attracted traffic far above the normal rate.  Neither accomplished closure.  The Elitism thread did produce change: the secret, elitist CMS list burrowed deeper underground.

About 10 years ago, the form of WN activism, embryonic except for Pierce/s NA, changed from email groups to web forums.  This represented a huge shift in the privacy level.  The only possibility of any sort of real world action taking place as a result of participating in web forums lies in the personal alliances formed there leading to private email groups, connecting with other email groups, leading to a network capable of carrying out collective actions in opposition to things perceived as detrimental to our welfare.

Other than this, participating in groups like MR, TOO, C-C or whatever others, is a social activity—oh dear, the image of a cow chewing its cud just appeared, along with the thought, at least the cow produces milk, so maybe there’s still hope, despite the years of settling for mere contentment?

The third bullet point should be:

Both freely chosen ecologies of the new world and deeply evolved European ecologies made ready for globalist onslaught by county sized political units;

would be a bit more clarifying. But ok

Will noone rid of this troublesome priest Haller? The spam has more intellectual content and at least is true to its purpose.

A few shots of platitudinous waffle distilled from other men’s thoughts, served over a mixer of whining pretension. It gives nauseau without even drinking it.

- arguing about “who is a Jew? 

  **  hey, we do that frequently here in Israel !!    in our case, it’s an artefact of the rabbinate having been given control of “personal status” issues.  Ie, if you want to marry, or divorce, you (if you claim yoursel f to be a Jew) need a certificate of approval from the rabbinical court.  If you claim to be Muslim (tons of them here, of course) or Christian (there are today more mother-tongue-Hebrew, native-born-Israeli Catholic kids (typically Filipino-heritage, and I’m happy to have them here, they do a good job in the IDF) who faithfully attend Mass in Hebrew (check out http://www.catholic.co.il/index.php?lang=he), than there are who do so in Latin in the whole world!), then your religious bodies will handle you. There is no civil marriage in Israel.

-  returning to the “racial homeland” in another Continent

  **  hey, we know all about THAT!    If you believe that history is the best guide to the future, then look at our experience with “Ingathering of the Exiles”.  The native-borns will always give socially-acceptable answers about welcoming you when questioned in public.  The jokes they make about you behind your back, are a different matter!

Now let’s take some Aryan-dream example: Latvia.  They already had it up to their eyebrows with Russian speakers.  Exactly how thrilled do y’all think they’re gonna be to receive a flood of Americanish speakers, who statistically are EXTREMELLY bad at learning a new language, who typically are too old to produce new Latvian-speaking children, and are actually looking for a pension and medical benefits!

Nowhere have I indicated that we shouldn’t do anything.  It seems to have escaped your attention that in my previous post, I directed the reader to low cost computer boards that could be used for smart phones and hand-held computers:

In the big scheme of things who gives two hutes about toys like smart phones and tablet computers?  Do you support yourself and a family?  Or are you another of these ‘white leaders’ still living with the parents?  GT & I do have living breathing families.  And thus we have more than passing familiarity with real rubber-hits-the-road family economics.

Run down a notional white nuclear family budget.  Like Willie Sutton’s banks, that’s where the big money is.

1.  And at the very top of the list are housing costs.  Now you can revisit OSE and review the “Compressed Earth Brick” press.  This is also why Community Land Trusts loom so large for us.

2.  In second position is Food.  See the OSE Life-Trac.  FYI, the “Life Trac” Powercube is a hydraulic power unit.  This is convenient since many devices use hydraulic power, including many of the backhoe and trencher designs sold by CAD Plans Corp.

3. Education costs are another big ticket item.  And this is where the stuffed shirt eggheads of the non-Movement are MIA, missing in action.  Hint-hint:  http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm  Nah!  Better that young white girls take on $150k in lifetime student debt to pay for non-white professors teaching useless subjects.  And then afterward prostitute themselves on Craigslist and other venues to try to pay it back.

A single power plant producing 20 MW is more efficient [fewer losses] than a 100 power plants producing a total of 20 MW.

Proof positive of Haller-clone behavior on your part, combined with ignorance.  You write this because you are throwing jello at wall, not because you actually understand what “20 MW” really is. 

“20 MW” means “20 megawatts.”  And this is very small for a modern central thermal plant run with uranium, coal or natural gas.  New design single reactor plants can easily generate 1,000 MW.  Coal plants run around 600 MW and up.  Even fast start n-g plants come in at 250 MW and up. 

And it’s small for existing mega-scale hydro plants like Hoover or Grand Coulee Dams.  But 20 MW is right up the alley of the “Small Hydro” projects that I’ve advocated here periodically.

I do admit that I don’t care about unemployed Chinese in Asia or North America.  Nor am I worried about unemployed blacks either in Africa or the USA.  They can tend to themselves.  My sole interest is what’s best for the future of white people.  Consequently I am uninterested in multi-racial and multi-cultural monetarism and economics.

I am interested in white community but I want more than a virtual empire of the mind here. 

Breivik appeared in court today.

No again.  Money doesn’t have to exist in printed form.  Bits and bytes will do [it’s just that computer entries by private banks had better correspond to money issued by someone else on a 1:1 basis].

Really?  No kidding?  Do you mean someone from my brokerage doesn’t run over to the CBOE with paper money in a briefcase every time I execute a listed stock options trade on my PC?  Imagine that.  Hoocoodanode?

Ok.  We’ll substitute you gaining control of Ben Bernanke’s laptop, user id and password for the Bureau of Printing and Engraving. 

“A few household items is definitely true of the capabilities of the low cost 3D printers at present.”

Why do you complain so much about Leon Haller’s obstinate behavior and then turn right around and emulate it?  Do you perhaps suffer from autism?  I ventured to introduce you to a world of highly scalar micro-industrial technologies.  These can be learned, controlled and supplied at “community” level.

In response you behave exactly like Dustin Hoffman in “Rainman”.  “Fiat money fiat money fiat money.”  You imagine there is a universe of difference between yourself and Leon.  From my perspective you are two adjacent peas in the same monetarist pod.

You claim “federal” central bank money is best.  Leon claims commodity backed private central bank money is best.  My goal is to outfit young white men to accept either.  Or to refuse both forms and still get all the pussy they can handle.

Modern societies work more efficiently with a high level of division of labor.  A single power plant producing 20 MW is more efficient [fewer losses] than a 100 power plants producing a total of 20 MW…  Similarly, there’s no way the efficiency of people buying modular tractors and assembling them can compare with the efficiency of a factory assembling the tractors.

After reading that I’ve concluded your understanding of production and technology is probably inferior to Mordechai Levy’s knowledge of industrial processes circa 1848.  Here is proof certain that you are ignoring everything said, exactly as Haller does.  Clearly you didn’t bother actually reading anything.  The CAD Plans Corp (DIY earth digging equipment) is run by an engineer who used to work for Caterpillar Corp.  Similary, OSE’s equipment is buildable for 80% discounts over comparable central factory equipment that you claim is ‘cheaper’ and ‘efficient’.  Doing so;

a)  Bypasses a hell of a lot of taxes and usury interest

b)  Enables individuals and family groups to directly capitalize their own labor.  And they can do so without paying taxes, bar association ‘taxes’ (a/k/a “insurance”)  or usury interest on it.

c) Offers routes for unemployed whites to become employed and generate economic surpluses capable of supporting more little whites.

Both you and Leon constantly miss this with your common asinine obsession on central banking and Mount Olympus level “economic policy”.

A pathetic strawman.

What’s pathetic is the monomaniacal monetarist obsession that you share with Leon Haller. 

I will hazard a guess that you have never produced a single physical item that one other human would purchase with any kind of money.  I know Leon hasn’t.  Taking the most favorable viewpoint, I choose to believe that you are fundamentally ignorant about any kind of production process.  This might not be your fault and it can be remedied given a willingness to do so.  What is evil is persisting in invincible ignorance on the Ingsoc principle that “Ignorance Is Strength”.

Or are you also a lawyer like Leon?

And control of courts, police, etc. isn’t required to solve the money problem.

Yes they are.  Your “money” will soon have just as much value as Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwean dollars. 

http://www.majorityrights.com/money#implementation

That proposes many illegal acts.  I will not even discuss it conceptually.  Safety note:  there is plenty of room in Matt Hale’s wing in ADX Florence Supermax.  Or in Simon Sheppard’s half-way parole house.

@GW, “If anything, it was too rushed.  It needed more time to unfold itself.”  Please carry the thoughts further for us, perhaps then I won’t feel like I’ve been violated by a limber tongue.

Comments, thoughts, reactions?

OK.

This conception of the subject, it is argued, precludes from the start the possibility of genuinely communal forms of association, of “constitutive” communities “bound by moral ties antecedent to choice”. This is why communitarians stress the cultural constitution of the subject, the way the individual forms his or her identity, sense of self, and intuitive system of values by inheriting and passing on an unchosen legacy of collective orientations, shared meanings and standards, networks of kinship and pre-contractual forms of solidarity which are a prerequisite for, rather than the outcome of, the subject’s capacity for moral commitment.

As it stands your definition of communitarianism merely describes another virtual reality entity of choice.  The example of the Old Order Amish are available as an instructive contrast.  They are not merely a religious community of like-minded persons.  They are economically co-dependent.  It is only in this context that the deterrent discipline of “shunning” can be fully understood.  It is not merely a ‘social’ sanction, although it is and therefore exerts the greatest fear deterrent on Amish women.  It is equally an economic sanction.

Until comprehensive disciplines like these are available to pro-whites the non-Movement is doomed to remain just another momentary emotional choice of the liberal “Sartrean cogito, spontaneously reinventing itself ex nihilo, permanently free to choose and revise its definition of the good”. 

“Rising discontinuity is accompanied by the diversity of visible cultures and lifestyles. This is promoted by the density of urban populations, high social mobility and change, unprecedented choice for the individual consumer - albeit at the potential cost of a rapid decline in the overall diversity of our natural stocks - and the impact of transport and communications technology, especially on the tourist industry. Exposure to different forms of life, particularly those that are too exclusive or stylized to permit participatory understanding by outsiders, inevitably creates a sense of cultural relativism. Where ethnic, class, national and religious traditions do intermingle and combine, discrete cultural narratives are severed or reinvented, and hybrid cultural forms emerge which lack historical precedent, thus weakening the constitutive bonds between generations.”

All of these effects are enabled by and are a consequence of “multi-diversity” economics. 

“There is also the well-documented impact of the mass media, another factor which has served to heighten many of the trends already noted. The entertainment media have encouraged the privatization of society and the decline of face-to-face interaction through which communal narratives are reaffirmed and passed on.”

I think “atomization” is preferred to “privatization” as a description of what happened in the 20th Century.  I am starting to doubt that “mass media” was either a primary causative factor or that it can ever play a major role in advancing the pro-white cause.  Accumulating experience suggests that it cannot acquire its (fairly weak) mass power until other social-economic structures are destroyed.  Put another way, a homogenized mass media was not a weapon of an alien elite coup.  It is a tool subsequently used by a hostile elite to direct an atomized polity, similar to the way rails in a cattle chute direct cows in a feed lot or abattoir.  As we are seeing in the US election cycles, the capacity of the “mass” media to positively galvanize individuals into action is subject to a law of rapidly diminishing returns.

The Social Nationalist recognizes community structures that exist in between Rothbard’s false Hegelian paradigm of “individual” and “state”.  “Family” is first stop after “individual”.  Although to be perfectly honest, Rothbard also recognized non-state intermediary organizing structures to a degree.  But in Jew Rothbard’s universe these were all (get your smelling salts, big surprise coming) simultaneously defined and commoditized by legal contracts valued in strictly monetary terms.

Hoaxing the hoaxers is risky business.

Don’t be too surprised when the Muzzie tries to direct us, guys. It’s that Semitic control urge acting up again.

See, Muslims are basically the Made-In-Hong-Kong version of Jews.

They are both Semites, they are both hateful, they both vamp off Whites, they both tell us we don’t exist. The Muzzies are just a few notches down in the cleverness/effectiveness department. Jews say “White culture is nonsense”, the Mohammedan says “White Nationalism is nonsense.” They have to start somewhere.

White Nationalism is the desire for a secure future for Whites as a whole, not only for Russians, or only for Scots, or only for Greeks, or only for Poles, etc. This future cannot exist as long as Whites take marching orders from Judaism and its estranged brother Islam.

I suggest a supplemental strategy when dealing with the Mohammedans. When they give us advice, shit-can it and do the opposite.

So, when a Mohammedan calls a White person a Jew in an attempt to cast doubt on that person, it means that person is almost certainly good for Whites.

Kievsky, good article. Though I was never a true “left liberal”, I gave it a lot of thought in college and was a die hard anti-racist (read: anti-White). I woke up when I realized that the line the left was feeding me did not square with reality.

The only change I would make is that it is the anti-Whites who are the virus, the harmful mutation. Pro-Whiteness is natural among Whites and must be driven out with intense brainwashing.

Jim Giles’ site is back up and promising radio soon:

www.rebelarmy.com/