Call to Action, 9/30/22

And Odds and Ends that are in der news.

Call to Action:

My reaction to this is - Fuck You, "Gregory Hood." I for one am sick of Amren and its "litany of woe" posts without that site ever giving its readers a viable plan of action to do anything about any of it. No, instead we get this here from them. That's it. Let's all get together and discuss the Amren idea that by every standard, Asians are superior to Whites. That'll save us no doubt, right? Or how about this ridiculous nonsense from Counter-Currents (see more about that below) - is that the solution?

Der Movement itself is the biggest threat to Whites, not all of the retarded Coloreds that Hood quotes. It is Der Movement that is standing in the way of the development of an effective White resistance. It is Der Movement that clogs up the political and metapolitical niche space on the Far Right, preventing the growth of healthy alternatives, much like weeds choke off healthy productive plant growth in a garden. If therefore stands to reason that Der Movement must be opposed and defeated if we ever have a chance of developing the healthy alternatives that can stand up to the System.

This post is therefore yet another Call to Action by the Sallis Groupuscule for sane activists, those who are disenchanted by Der Movement and its motley crew of freaks, defectives, incompetents, fetishists, and grifters, to make a stand against Der Movement.  Over and over again I say this, post after post, year after year, and there is no real response. I have to assume that either everyone is satisfied with Der Movement and I'm yelling to the wind or else some people are disenchanted by simply don't care enough to do anything about it.

And there's plenty you can do, apart from the obvious tactic of withholding support from Der Movement.  You can join with the Sallis Groupuscule, including following this blog and my Gab account and, more importantly, contributing material to the Sallis Groupuscle blog, targeting Der Movement and proposing alternatives.  I can be reached at my Gab account.  Or you can start your own blogs, your own sites, your own entities. You can organize IRL locally. You can, even at the lowest level of resistance, go to  "movement" blogs, websites, livestreams, social media accounts, etc. and challenge their self-interested and moronic paradigms. Or do something else - maybe you have other ideas, but if you are disgruntled, there is more to do than merely read this post, agree with it, and then forget about it all as if none of this is a serious problem.

Odds and Ends:

There are many Whites, including those fairly far on the right, who are afraid of radical change, as they do not want their comfortable lives disrupted.  However, radical change is going to occur whether they like it or not, and indeed, such change has been occurring, always in the direction of the anti-White Left. So, the question simply is – our change or their change? If we do nothing, they win by default. Unlike what some deluded conservatives have believed, we cannot successfully stop history.  We can only attempt to channel it in the proper direction. Change is coming.

And here in this Counter-Currents post we have the ideological, metaphysical underpinning of Der Movement and its Bring Out Your Dead ethnostate.  We observe a promotion of, and celebration of, irrationality and ignorance, the elevation of superstition above science, and, as is always the case with these mendacious retarded traditionalists, a complete misunderstanding of science. Science is a method, not a set of "laws" or a compilation of facts; indeed, if it is discovered, via empirical analysis, that "Friday the 13th" indeed results in a greater frequency of misfortune (so defined), and if a testable and falsifiable hypothesis can be proposed, then science - or better, the scientific method - will support the (tentative) validity of the finding. And, by the way, predictions of future events based on the past are based on (again, tentative) understanding of underlying mechanisms, based on hypotheses that have so far survived falsification. In this sense, we can make predictions of what would happen if, say, a traditionalist Counter-Currents writer jumps off the roof of a tall building in the belief that Odin will save him. In that fervently-hoped-for scenario, predictions can be made based on various natural "laws" derived from the scientific method, and the outcome of that scenario would, I am sure, match the predictions from those "laws" more than it would match traditionalist retardation. 

I won't even bother pointing out, to a degree more than this sentence, the ludicrous hypocrisy of these types using the technics of modern society, which are all based on the work of science, to live their daily lives, including the use of harnessed electricity, computers, and the Internet to spread their drivel - as opposed to, say, using runes, Norse spells, and black cats to spread the message.  

As I have been saying, a victory by Der Movement would literally bring Whites down to the level of the Dark Ages, leading to the destruction of Whites by both avoidable natural disasters as well as attack by technological savvy opponents. Of course, the real danger is that Der Movement destroys Whites by delegitimizing sane activism and by filling the Far Right niche space with unspeakable stupidity, therefore alienating normal, productive people and preventing the emergence of alternatives that would actually have a reasonable chance at saving Whites.

While I am critical of Nutzis who are enthusiastically hyper-pessimistic about Meloni in Italy, that does not mean that I am optimistic about that. Four issues:

1. Wops always disappoint.

2. Der Right always disappoints.

3. I am not fond of female leaders in any endeavor, certainly not as a national leader.

4. The characteristics that allow someone to achieve power are not the same that allow them to be an effective leader; it is very rare for an individual to exhibit both sets of characteristics. Given the oft-cited "volatility" of Italian politics, Meloni needs to demonstrate fairly quickly that she is such an individual.

Odds and Ends, 9/28/22

In der news.

Oh boy, someone is going to get banned from Counter-Currents:

No. Ancient North African admixture in Southern Italy is between 2.5-5%. Insignificant. Now, why don’t we start questioning why Jewish Ron Unz, Jamaican Lipton Mathews, Filipino Michelle Malkin, or South Asian mongrel Neil Kumar have prominent roles in the movement. What do you think their non-White admixture percentages are? Perhaps its time for “White Nationalists” to stop obsessing over Southern Italians so much. I blame True Romance. A piece of advice for everyone here, don’t base your racial views around Hollywood movies.

That was in response to a classic example of Sallis' Law. A Counter-Currents post about Meloni and the Italian election devolved into discussions of "racial admixture" in Italy, True Romance, guidos. "tanned" Italians, and "honor killings" in Italy.

If we agree to the premise that White ethnics have every right, and every need, to engage in pro-White politics as any other Whites, then what is way forward in the face of so much hostility toward White ethnics in such politics, particularly in America?  I say that White ethnics are going to have to build and participate in pro-White constructs that they themselves have helped to create and shape, and demonstrate extreme competence and dedication to the endeavor. As an integral part of this activity, White ethnics should have a zero tolerance policy to Nordicism and other manifestations of hostility and lies about their ethnies, and refuse to ally themselves or associate with any way any entities who promote or tolerate such paradigms.  Conversely, White ethnics should ally with and associate those Whites, of any ethnic provenance, who espouse an authentic and sincere pan-Europeanism. In this manner, pan-Europeanism can be strengthened, and opposing, hostile ideologies left to wallow in their own failures and rank incompetence.

While I will defend White ethnics – indeed, all Whites – from unjust attacks and mendacious lies, I also urge those peoples to engage in self-reflection about why they are constantly attacked in this manner.  To say “it is for no reason” or “just racism” makes them sound like the Negro; to say it is envy makes them sound like the Jew. And, yes, it is true that Racial Proximity Theory ethnocentrism on the part of the attackers informs much of the attacks, the nature and intensity of the attacks, and their specific manifestations still require the aforementioned self-reflection. Let us consider the Italian, for example. The Italian is not feared or respected, and therefore is not admired for his virtues and is instead constantly ridiculed for his faults, real or imagined.  And this occurs with no restraint and with complete impunity.  It stands to reason therefore that it is appropriate for the Italian to self-reflect on why he is neither feared nor respected and, then, what can be done to remedy the situation. Merely opposing external problems, like Nordicism, is not enough. The internal problems need to be tackled as well; indeed they may be more important, and solving the internal problems may be a prerequisite for effectively solving the external ones.

Is Meloni's victory an example of successful mainstreaming? It depends on what you compare it too. In comparison to Italy's original post-WWII "neo-fascist" parties, then, yes, it is successful mainstreaming (and it is interesting that Europe had to look to Italy for such an example of success). However, compared to the original formulation of Brothers of Italy, the answer is no - the party has not compromised its principles, did not move to the center to win, and is at least as "far to the right" - if not more so - than its coalition partners. So while this is as close to a mainstreaming success as we have seen in Europe, it is not mainstreaming per se. It is not strictly farstreaming either - more a success of "staying the course."

This here is one of the best posts ever at Amren.  It is all true.

Italian Rightist Victory

Meloni – now the hard work begins.

See this. Winning obviously is not enough.  The Italian Right needs to avoid infighting and fracturing of their coalitions and, most of all, they need to govern effectively. They cannot mimic Trump and squander their opportunity, merely replacing Trump’s Big Macs with Italian pasta.

I would advise first governing according to the limits of practical Italian politics – stretched to the limit of course – and according to the issues and platforms of the campaign. There must be a crackdown on illegal immigration and if possible a reduction in legal immigration. It is important to get the economy on track, focus on quality of life issues, law and order, etc. Foreign policy should include collaboration with other right-wing governments and parties of like mind throughout Europe. 

Once the Italian Right has proven the ability to govern effectively, and has solidified and increased their base of support in the population – and especially the electorate – and continued political power is assured, more ambitious activity can be attempted.  This can include, for example: eliminating legal immigration as well of course zero illegal immigration, incentives for the repatriation of alien elements, incentives for native (and only native) family formation and reproduction, overturning “hate speech” laws and other restrictions on speech and political activity, rethinking EU membership, rethinking treaties on refugees, rethinking the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and considering a nuclear military, nuclear power for domestic energy production, ruthless law and order including a crackdown on organized crime, shifting rules to make it easier for the Right to maintain power, legal prosecution of those who aid attempts at continued illegal immigration, and more aggressive alliances with other hard right elements in Europe and in the European Diaspora).  Rightist governments in Europe should - while ostensibly staying in the EU (and getting Far Right representation in the EU) - build an alternative alliance, an alternative union. And as the EU gets weaker and weaker, this alternative can become stronger and stronger, until the day comes that the EU can be replaced by the alternative.

The Proper Dose

Let us consider together.

Long time readers of my work know that I am critical of the “worse is better” paradigm as it applies to the race crisis and to White racial activism. On the other hand, it is obvious that a certain amount of “worse” is required to stimulate an effective defensive response from Whites, who in general seem less ethnocentric than are other peoples.  Indeed, As Salter makes clear in his book On Genetic Interests, the only thing worse than a multiculturalism that does not work is one that does – since the latter leads to the relatively painless dispossession of the majority group without properly stimulating their resistance to that dispossession.  But how much “worse” is enough, and how much is too much?

Consider a dosing stimulus – for example, vitamins, medication, physical exercise, etc. – and the desired response.  If you give too little dose then you will of course have an inadequate response.  On the other hand, if you give an excessive dose, that can cause illness, injury, overtraining (for exercise), or even death.  What is required for a proper response is an appropriate dose, not too small and not too large. The dose must be large enough to stimulate the desire response, but no so great that it destroys the target in which the response is desired. Optimally, to be most efficient, what is best is the minimum effective dose (MED) – the least amount of stimulus required to result in the desired response. Of course, determining the MED is easier for things such as vitamins and medications, or even physical exercise, than it is for sociopolitical entities and events affecting large numbers of people.  However, even with that, the basic principle remains the same – an excessive dosage can be as bad, and often even worse, than too little.

In this sense, too little chaos and pain from multiracialism and multiculturalism may not trigger a defensive ethnocentric response from Whites – it would be an insufficient dosage not triggering an adequate response.  But “worse is better” excessive chaos and pain, too much anti-White repression, can cause the White population to be completely cowed, intimidated, and dispirited, leading them to give up and/or not having the opportunity to do anything effective even if they wanted to.  After all, taking “worse is better” to its extreme, one can say that total White extinction is “best” since that would trigger a White response more than anything else – a bit self-defeating, no?

An intermediate level of racial and cultural chaos should trigger a response but still leave people with scope for action, still leave them with hope, and provide opportunities to pressure the System to display weakness is granting concessions that can trigger Suvorov’s Law – that revolutions typically do not occur when the repression is greatest but instead occur when that repression is suddenly relaxed. That could be a result of what Salter calls democratic multiculturalism; that is, White majorities demanding a seat at the table and leveraging the multiculturalist apparatus for majoritarian benefit. If the System resists, then that exposes the anti-White nature of the regime and prompting Whites to continue to make demands, if they make concessions, then Whites should simply continuously “up” the demands, destabilizing the System and potentially leading to a Suvorov’s Law scenario. The scenarios to avoid here would be for too much “worse is better” and a completely stifling repression (that the System may try if they recognize the dangers of concessions leading to Suvorov’s Law), or, conversely, that weakly ethnocentric and gullible Whites becoming satisfied with piecemeal, temporary, and largely ineffective concessions (a tactic the System may use if they sense that more repression is not feasible, particularly if they depend on the White population to run things).  That is why we need clever and effective leaders to find the optimal path through all of these possibilities.

One can think of the dose-response relationship as a bell curve, with anti-White repression on the X axis and effective White responses on the Y axis. The optimal response would occur with an intermediate level of repression, enough to stimulate people to respond but not so much as to cow the people into complete submission. An intermediate level of repression allows for democratic multiculturalism, organization, and Suvorov’s Law.  

Again, we require wise leadership (that we currently do not have) to help Whites navigate between the two extremes and to leverage the dose into an effective response.  We can count on the System to continuously supply anti-White repression, at least for the foreseeable future; thus, leaders need to know when and how to act so as to take advantage of the “sweet spot” of intermediate levels of a repressive does so as to allow for the most effective White racial nationalist response.

Brief Notes, 9/24/22

Some notes.  In all cases, emphasis added.

Recently, I wrote of my differences with MacDonald, re: individualism:

It comes down to how one defines individualism.  I define individualism as most people do – prioritizing the autonomy of the individual over the demands of the group; thus, the focus in on supporting the opinions, desires, and identity of individuals over that of their community.  Individualism promotes the independence of the individual, allowing for their self-actualization regardless of what the group requires of the individual.  According to this, any group that is conformist, suppresses individual autonomy, and strictly enforces group social norms via social pricing including ostracism (or worse!) cannot, by definition, be “individualist.”  Such a pattern would be considered collectivist and completely inimical to individualism. 

Then, MacDonald wrote this nonsense; apparently MacDonald can't write a post without shilling for his refuted work on "western individualism." And apparently he has attended the Greg Johnson school of editing:

...going against such views may have a variety of negative consequences—form getting fired from your job or getting ostracized from friends and family.

Note: "...form getting fired..."

More to the point, he wrote:

The social glue of Western societies is based on establishing moral communities rather than communities based on kinship...The moral communities of the West are a powerful force for social cohesion...violating the moral sensibilities of the group was an evolutionary dead end...These lock-step moral communities produce a hive-mind, cult-like mentality.

And MacDonald calls those communities "individualist!" That is precisely my point - by definition, according to all reasonable definitions of individualism, communities that are are "lock-step" and enforce a conformist adherence to social norms via a "hive-mind, cult-like mentality" cannot be individualist, they are instead collectivist. Think about this, and consider how virtually everyone except for MacDonald defines individualism and then re-read: "These lock-step moral communities produce a hive-mind, cult-like mentality." How can that be in any way, shape, or form "individualist?"  

But you see, in the Anglosphere, with its pretensions of "individualism" (to hide its conformity), individualism has positive connotations - the "rugged individualist" defying the faceless mob and going his own way - while the designation collectivist is a de facto pejorative. Thus, superior Nordics must be individualists, facts and common sense be damned.

The whole guilt vs. shame culture paradigm is suspect as well. So-called individualist guilt cultures end up forming “lock-step moral communities” that enforce social norms with punishments including public shaming. So, aren’t they in reality actually shame cultures? What is the real difference between an individualist guilt culture that enforces collectivist conformity via shaming as opposed to a so-called collectivist shame culture? Practically speaking, they both conflate to the same thing.

The thing is, Der Right considers individualism and guilt cultures to be good and Western, and hence that must be characteristic of Nordics, while collectivism and shame cultures are considered bad and alien, and hence must be characteristic of non-Nordic wogs. However, the actual behavior of the people in question, the real-life behavioral facts on the ground, is often completely the opposite of this dogma.

Likely, egalitarianism explains more of the types of behavior that are wrong ascribed to individualism and guilt, but egalitarianism is bad according to Der Right, so in order to make Nordic egalitarianism more palatable, it is falsely coupled to individualism, while in reality it is collectivist (egalitarian collectivism being the hallmark of the Left, whether it manifests as communism or as SJWism).

The High Trusters in the EU seem to prefer to socialize production EU-wide but to privatize debt nationally. They dictate to other nations what they are allowed to produce and export and what they must import. Then when those nations suffer the economic consequences of this restricted production/export and run up debt, they are called "lazy and undisciplined" and the High Trusters ask "why should we bail them out?" It's OK to control, in socialist fashion, economies within the EU to benefit certain industrialized nations in the north, but when others run up debt because of this, the ones who benefit from these economic controls whine and complain about sharing paying down that debt.  Very well. Then everyone should produce and export whatever they wish and if they prefer native products to imports, good for them as well. How about a PIGSexit?

Interesting that it also seems that the same folks who express hostility to White ethnics (and especially anti-Italianism) are the ones who have, in general, lurched from one catastrophe to another, manifesting piss-poor judgment, ineptness, and endless failure. When is the last time American Nordicists did anything right and had a success? The Reed-Johnson Act of 1924? Even that was questionable from a Nordicist perspective, since it still allowed Colored Western hemisphere immigration (from the WN 3.0 perspective, perhaps a feature and not a bug, eh?). While that failure fits well with Racial Proximity Theory (and once again refutes MacDonald, since the 1924 Act was a manifestation of Nordic ethnocentrism targeted against Southern and Eastern Europeans) it didn't help "Nordic preservationism" to have Caribbean and Latino peoples enter the USA. In Europe, Nordicist racism, coupled to German nationalism and militarism, not only helped instigate WWII, but then prevented the Axis from gathering the support of Europe as a whole in an anti-communist, anti-democracy, pan-European crusade. The end result of all of that has been mass Colored immigration into Europe. So, now all of these constant failures, these raging incompetents, are left with nothing but sniping at White ethnics online, as part of their tragicomic "movement."

Odds and Ends, 9/21/22

In der news.

See this.  That's fine as far as it goes and helps to explain much Der Movement behavior.  But what about leftist conspiracy theories and the flawed thinking therein? Such as:

• Race does not exist
• Institutional racism (in the absence of race, by the way) exists, and is what holds back Coloreds (instead of their well-documented deficiencies)
• Biological men can get pregnant
• Some guy running around the capitol building dressed like a buffalo was a dire threat to democracy
• Police are killing thousands of unarmed Blacks every year
• Months of protests that caused over a billion dollars of damage, and which included arson, assault and battery, murder and attempted murder, were "mostly peaceful"
• Trying to storm the White House, forcing the President into a bunker, and then burning down the church across the street was not insurrection and neither was setting up an autonomous zone in Seattle
• White Privilege is a real thing
• Man-made global warming must be real and if you question it you're crazy
• Lying about population genetics to obfuscate White identity is good
• The popularly elected Viktor Orban is an "authoritarian leader"

Should I go on?

An enlightening interview.  A leftist political beginning, influenced by Jews (and alienated from “stuffy country club Republicans” – a bit of innate anti-WASPism?).  The time in Jamaica, etc. He talks about collectivist Jewish behavior of group controls enforcing social conformity - the exact same types of behavior he ascribes to "individualist" egalitarian NW European societies.

Laugh at this:  [Note: Shortly after being posted, the Jeelvy Counter-Currents article about Lady Diana's phenotype was taken down. It is still down at the time (9/21/22) that this EGI Notes post is out. Was the article's deranged Nordicism too much for even Counter-Currents? If not for that reason then why was it pulled?  Will it be going back up later, perhaps in edited form?  Who knows. But you can enjoy the relevant excerpt below; keep in mind there was much else equally, if not even more, ludicrous, in the deleted article. The excerpt:

If I met Lady Di — blue eyed, her blonde hair worn boyishly short or in the ‘80s blowout with a hint of Margaret Thatcher, with a slender figure and rarely disfiguring her strongly Nordic figures with makeup — on the street, I’d assume she was Danish. Lady Diana Spencer had a wide smile full of perfect pearly whites and delicate arms and legs, and always the hint of an eating disorder about her — never excess flab, but she had it where it counted. Contrast her with Diana, Princess of Wales, at home in Balmoral and Buckingham as well as her London flat, the pinnacle of Norman womanhood, her ancestors more noble and more ancient than the upstart Windsors themselves…the delicate-limbed, Nordic-featured, blonde and blue-eyed Diana Spencer…

Reverse Sallis' Law in action again; in every possible circumstance, Nordics must be praised. No wonder High Trusters believe that they are Eloi, swans, and angels when they have fetishists like Jeelvy and their worshipful groveling. Der Movement’s typical obsessions duly noted.

In the broader American society, White ethnics experienced a one-two punch.  First, they were insufficiently White, discriminated against, and occupied lower strata of society.  Later, as they underwent assimilation and exhibited upward mobility, they were then begrudgingly classified as White and then, as “White bigots,” were subjected to ethnic cleansing via racial integration of the cities and had the professional advancement retarded by affirmative action, which disproportionately impacted urban Whites. 

In Der Movement, White ethnics experienced a three punch combination.  First, the left jab of being considered non-White.  Then the right cross of being begrudgingly classified as White but placed in a lowly subaltern stepandfetchit position below their “masters,” and, finally, the left hook of once again being considered non-White and placed in status below Jews/Coloreds in WN 3.0.

I can concisely and without (too much) ad hominem summarize my differences with MacDonald, re: individualism.  It comes down to how one defines individualism.  I define individualism as most people do – prioritizing the autonomy of the individual over the demands of the group; thus, the focus in on supporting the opinions, desires, and identity of individuals over that of their community.  Individualism promotes the independence of the individual, allowing for their self-actualization regardless of what the group requires of the individual.  According to this, any group that is conformist, suppresses individual autonomy, and strictly enforces group social norms via social pricing including ostracism (or worse!) cannot, by definition, be “individualist.”  Such a pattern would be considered collectivist and completely inimical to individualism. It seems to me – and maybe you would consider this to be ad hominem – MacDonald is defining “individualism” as encompassing all behaviors typically exhibited by Northwest Europeans and then works backwards from there; in contrast, I believe that you first need to establish a reasonable definition of individualism and then you can investigate what groups actually exhibit such individualist behavior.

I also see MacDonald's focus on families and marriage with respect to individualism as being irrelevant in the current day. I look at extant European-derived peoples and everywhere I see nuclear families and marriages based on individual personal preferences. In America, all White ethnic groups are primarily intermarrying with other Whites ethnic groups, and have been doing so for many decades. The idea that Southern and Eastern Europeans are, like NECs, marrying their cousins in arraigned partnerships to further clan networks is, frankly, bizarre. It is a non-issue, a diversion.

Funny how the "threats to democracy" all come from the Right. How about these alternative (and real) threats to democracy: Race replacement immigration, in part utilized to subvert democracy by "electing a new people" rather than convincing existing native voters; social pricing and other methods (including violence) to suppress dissident opinions; and the unequal application of the law for political purposes - all courtesy of the Left?  And by the way, as regards "the will of the majority" being ignored, how about decades of ignoring majority opposition to mass immigration and affirmative action? How about state referenda being overturned by leftist judges?

First, see this nonsense.

A Chilean who is 50 percent Italian, 25 percent Basque, and 25 percent Greek would be considered white as well — though his skin may be darker than a Chilean who is actually less European, such as one who is 10 percent Araucano, 10 percent Incan, 50 percent Spanish, and 30 percent Belgian.

Because of the large presence of Mediterranean whites, the genotype and phenotype of whiteness in Chile do not correlate as neatly as in the Anglosphere. The result of this is that Chileans have a “big tent” view of whiteness; those who are considered white in Chile are certainly majority white, but plenty would not be considered white in the United States or Australia...

...The Basque genetic makeup is easily distinguished, and Basque skin tone is whiter and their IQ is higher than the average Spaniard. Many people find Basque people very attractive.

A person's work needs to be judged objectively, independent of personal variables, such as an untimely death. Thus, I can seriously question Rojas. The same person (who was Roberts/Rojas) who wrote that Amren article having an Anglo-Nordicist criterion for "Whiteness" wrote a series of articles for Counter-Currents, ending with this.

In that last article he claims that this person is "White" with "no qualifiers." That woman’s mixed race ancestry is described here.  That ancestry is clearly written all over her phenotype.

I understand that people can change their mind about things, but here we have a radical change about a fundamental - an existential - core concept of racial identity, in the context of the general ideology staying the same. Something here is not right. In one forum, he suggests that Old World Europeans from Southern Europe can be darker than outright mestizo types and not perfectly White in a Nordic/Anglosphere sense, and then in another forum he shows an outright Mestiza, obviously non-White, who is likely at least 25% (and maybe 50%?) Amerindian (and maybe part-Black as well), and says that that's White with no qualifiers and he expects American Whites will one day agree with that absolutely absurd classification.

Either this guy was so confused about race that his opinions were essentially worthless or else all of this doesn't (to me at least) pass the smell test of sincerity. We'll likely never find out now what the real deal with that guy was.

The American “civil rights movement” and its aftermath was a perfect example of Suvorov’s Law.  When White America held firm with Jim Crow, the Negro and his handlers could make little headway against White survival instincts.  But once Whites showed weakness and made concessions, opposing the resistance of the White Southrons and the White ethnics, and suddenly relieving the repression of segregation, etc. than it all fell apart, and fell apart quickly, resulting in a decades-long racial and cultural revolution in America that is only accelerating in its pace.  Thus, Coloreds, Jews, and their High Truster junior partners pushed against White America and found very little pushing back. Once that emptiness was revealed, the collapse was inevitable.

E. Michael Jones makes some good points about the ethnic cleansing of White ethnic urban neighborhoods, but then goes off the rails, making it about religion and narrow ethnicity, rather than its reality that was race and ethnicity. Blacks ethnically cleansed the White ethnic enclaves because they were Black and behaved as Blacks, not because they were mostly Protestant.  And their Hispanic junior partners in that enterprise were mostly Catholic, so whither religion?  Did Blacks make distinctions between White Catholics and Protestants (or Orthodox for that matter)?  To Blacks, even Jews are “White.”  Of course, the cleansing was mostly focused on White ethnic Catholic areas so in practical terms it was mostly Black/Hispanic vs. White Catholic conflict, but the White Catholics were targeted because they were White, not because they were Catholic, and, yes, while most of those White Catholics were Irish and Italian, they were, again, targeted by the Blacks/Hispanics for being White – not because they were Irish of Italian.  If any WASPs or Germans or whatever – even Jews – happened to get caught in the crossfire, they got it too. Now, the fact that the Blacks and Hispanics were weaponized in this fashion by the High Truster-Jew alliance was ethnic and religious (although with the Jews it can be a racial conflict as well, but let’s pass over that for a moment).  But it was as much (or more”) ethnic than religious and the race issue loomed large over the whole situation. Again putting aside the racial issue of the Jews, broadly speaking, one can say that the ethnic cleansing was a racial conflict being used as a proxy to fight an intra-White and White-Jewish ethnic conflict (with religion as an identity – not actual practice – being a part of ethnic definitions).  But after a while, the race proxy took a life of its own, and the race weapon began to slip out of control; Coloreds became a threat on their own, even independent of the guidance they were initially given.  To deny the fundamental racial basis of the conflict is mendacious and cowardly. The ethnic cleansing could take place only because of the race-based behavior and hatreds of Blacks and Hispanics.

Point of No Return

Book review: An analysis of Anglo-America.  In all cases, emphasis added.

Let us consider the author John Marquand, who concentrated on America’s Anglo-American elites, particularly the “Yankee” New England stock.

Marquand's life and work reflected his ambivalence about American society — and, in particular, the power of its old-line elites. Being rebuffed by fashionable Harvard did not discourage his social aspirations…

…In the late 1930s, Marquand began producing a series of novels on the dilemmas of class. Most centered on New England, and some were at least partially set in Clyde, Massachusetts, a fictional seaside community based strongly on Marquand's Newburyport. The first of these novels, The Late George Apley (1937), a satire of Boston's upper class, won the Pulitzer Prize for the Novel in 1938. Other Marquand novels exploring New England and class themes include Wickford Point (1939), H.M. Pulham, Esquire (1941), and Point of No Return (1949). The last is especially notable for its satirical portrayal of Harvard anthropologist W. Lloyd Warner, whose Yankee City study attempted (and in Marquand's view, dismally failed) to describe and analyze the manners and mores of Newburyport…

…For all of his ambivalence about America's elite, Marquand ultimately succeeded not only in joining it, but in embodying its characteristics. He forgave the upper crust classmates who had snubbed him in college…

Of particular interest is Point of No Return, which I have read:

Raised in the small town of Clyde, Massachusetts, Charles Gray has worked long and hard to become a vice president at the privately owned Stuyvesant Bank in Manhattan. But at the most crucial moment of his career, when his focus should be on reading his boss’s intentions and competing with his chief rival for promotion, Charles finds himself hopelessly distracted by the past.

Years ago, the Gray family was featured in a sociological study of their hometown. Charles, his sister, and their parents were classified as members of the “lower-upper class,” the unspoken strains of their tenuous social status cast in stark black and white. A chance encounter with the author of the study fills Charles’s head with memories—and when a business matter compels him to return to Clyde, it seems as if fate is intent on turning back the clock. As he reflects on the defining moments of his youth, Charles contends with one of the central mysteries of existence: how our lives can feel both predetermined and random at the same time.

Published in 1949, Point of No Return is a brilliant study of character and place heralded by the New York Times as “further proof that its author is one of the most important living American novelists.”

There is a little bit of Sallis’ Law in this 1949 book; as the WASP protagonist and his wife come home from a country club (inhabited by equally insouciant co-ethnics), he says to his wife (who visited a (“Italian”) shoe shop during the day): “I wonder why Italians always like to repair shoes.”  This is of course completely superfluous to the plot, a bit of WASP contempt for White ethnics thrown in. Whether that is reflective of the author, or if the author is trying to tell us something about his book’s characters, I do not know.  But, again, superfluous to the plot, but interesting as a focus on White ethnic immigrants and children of immigrants trying to make a living as small business craftsmen, while Jews were stealing America away from its founding stock.  Later in the book there is another completely superfluous Sallis’ Law comment, this one about “Sicilian peasants” “hiding women.”  It is quite remarkable that all of the crazed sweaty obsessive fetishism about Italians that we observe in today’s “movement” was already present in embryonic form in a popular 1949 novel.  Again I stress how completely superfluous those comments were to the storyline, unless it was the author’s intention to demonstrate how America’s WASP elite considered White ethnics to be like insects to be contemptuously examined and ridiculed. 

One particularly pompous character in the book was disdainful of those in the town who were not of the “good Yankee stock,” as he put it, and was horrified by how the crude behaviors of the White ethnic Morlocks affected those of the Eloi females. This same person also had class prejudices against his own co-ethnics; thus, his refusal to allow his WASP daughter to marry the “lower-class” (but still upper middle class) WASP protagonist of the book was a defining moment in the life of the latter. Remember, at this time, the Jews were conquering America and today, such an individual would smile benignly as his daughter came home with a brutal Negro.  

Further, the pompous character disparaged “stock market money” as being inferior to “inherited wealth.” Now, as the story line overlaps the stock market crash of 1929, apologists in Der Movement would attempt to retroactively justify the pompous fool’s comments (that were made before the crash, when the market was booming) but that isn’t the point, is it?  He wasn’t criticizing “stock market money” because he thought such investments were unsafe, oh no. After all, he also looked down upon upwardly mobile newly rich neighbors who earned their monies by inventions and/or ownership or productive companies.  The problem with “stock market money” was that it was “crass” and “uncouth” and “undignified” as opposed to the stately dignity of inherited wealth.  That’s why the newly rich created by productive hard work were also looked down upon (even when they were his co-ethnics) – they were crude grasping plebeians, not aristocratic patricians like himself.  When the book’s protagonist, the immediate target of this snobbery, justifiably pointed out that every family had to start somewhere, suggesting that at one point the pompous fool’s own family had to start somewhere, had to be at one time upwardly mobile grasping plebes generating the wealth that now bestowed patrician status, those reasonable comments fell on deaf ears. The pompous fool “had his” and all that’s mattered, who cares about the right or wrong of it?   In addition, the protagonist's wealthy WASP boss also has the same disdain for people who have become rich "the wrong way,"  Thus, he complains about his exclusive community being tainted by people uncouthly earning money through advertising or skin cream business - we certainly can't have that!

No doubt “movement” “traditionalists” and Anglomaniac worshippers of America’s WASP Yankee elites will defend and celebrate this aristocratic disdain for grasping upward mobility and “stock market money,” but, alas, groups like the Jews had no such compunctions or prejudices.  No, money was money, and money was power, and if that money and power was produced by the crudest grasping behavior, so be it.  Stock market?  Criminal activity?  Moneylending? Hollywood?  Peddling? Business ownership?  Sweat shops? Nothing was disdained, nothing was rejected.  With the money and the consequent power came the conquest of America (aided by the brainwashing of the goyim aided by such “crude” moneymaking enterprises like the movie industry, and, later, television) and the dispossession of WASPs who looked down on such lowbrow merchants and fast-talking conmen.  It didn’t matter though, and eventually the WASPs were forced to work with the Jews, as their junior partners, in an alliance to suppress the upward mobility of the White ethnics, a remaining threat that could still be constrained as the Jews were not.  The WASPs were not going to make the same mistake twice; they may have had to settle for second place behind the Jews, but they weren’t going to let upstart White ethnics erode WASP power and prestige (whatever was left of it) any further. If that meant alliances – and in some cases even inter-marriage – with Jews, so be it.  Better to salvage something of patrician exclusiveness, regardless of how degenerate, than show second place with Italians whose parents “worked with shoes” or were “needle workers” or whose parents were “raw Slavs” from Chicago’s slaughterhouses. Holding one’s nose to mingle with Jewish Wall Streeters and Hollywood movie moguls was bad enough, but to deal with hard-working craftsmen and first generation middle-class professionals who came from Europe’s South and East?  Impossible!  Even the Northwest European Irish Catholics were held at arm’s length; even the “lace curtain Irish” were looked down upon.  But – Italians and Slavs?  Greeks and Hungarians?  What?  Are you mad?

In summary, the WASPs were narrowly focused on the epiphenomena of their elitism (and attitudes of contemptuous superiority toward White ethnics) without properly focusing on the actual levels of power, which was seized from the WASPs by the Jews. Instead, WASPs thought that keeping Jews out of country clubs accomplished something useful; instead, that behavior did nothing but embitter Jews and make them more dedicated to their program of vengeance. So, the dispossessed WASPs became junior partners to their new masters, the Jews, and together they waged war against White ethnics. Particularly given the Jewish conquest of America and political dispossession of the founding stock (well underway in 1949), this book is not a flattering portrait of America’s “Yankee” WASP elite

In general, the navel-gazing ethnocultural self-absorption of the book is quite remarkable, but that may be the point. The Wikipedia summary of the book asserts that one of the book’s characters – an academic who did a study of the social structure of a New England town (the home town of the book’s WASP protagonist) - was a parody of real-life academic W. Lloyd Warner who performed similar scholarly activities.  And author Marquand also specialized in these sorts of social critiques in his books, so in a sense the book is a self-mockery of the author’s own obsessions. In any case, the ethnic self-absorption is still remarkable.

Read this for additional context.

[Spoiler alert]

The story line itself was a bit dull and certainly anti-climactic. The protagonist Charles Gray experiences some tragedy. His older brother dies in WWI. His feckless, dithering, procrastinating, romantic dreamer of a father loses all of his money in the 1929 stock market crash and commits suicide, which is covered up.  Charles Gray gives away his own savings to his family, pretending that this money was his father's money (as if it was never lost) and now cannot marry his WASP princess girlfriend (with whom he has had a passionate relationship) - her father, the pompous fool described above, being against the relationship (for class reasons) in the first place. Chuck then goes away, gets a good bank job in NYC, becomes successful, marries another WASP, has children, and is in the running for promotion to be VP of the bank (this is the current day "stress" of the story) after returning from WWII (he had volunteered despite being ~ 40 years old and with children).  He now needs to go back to his small home town on business.  Now, here is where the book goes off the rails - you would expect, as some sort of dramatic climax, that he has a "showdown" with his ex-girlfriend.  But, no.  He visits his best friend from his boyhood - an anxious, hyper-grasping, small town mini-success and finds out that this "inferior man" is now engaged to the former WASP princess. You see, she had been pining away for Chuck for years, but now, middle aged and desperate, she has given up and has fallen in with the grasping friend - her pompous father now too old and demented to object. The friend tells Charles that this old girlfriend is anxious to see Charles - she knows he is back in town - but Chuck refuses.  And that's that.  Perhaps that anti-climax is more realistic; I don't know. He then goes back home and is invited, with his wife, to his boss' elegant mansion for "supper."  From the conversation he believes that he is going to be told that he has lost the promotion to a colleague - another anxious grasping type obviously modeled after his boyhood friend - but instead finds out that he has gotten the promotion, which makes him feel "dull and tired" and not what he "dreamed." Apparently, Chuck is dissatisfied with his rat-race life, and perhaps secretly dreams of having made a life with his former WASP princess, but, no, poor Chuck must "make do" with a successful business career, a helpful wife, and two well-adjusted children. Oh, the agony!  The end.

Apparently then, the entire objective of the book was to dissect "Yankee" WASP culture, since there really wasn't much of an interesting story there at all.

Anti-Booth

Opposing politicized science. 

Look at this shocking display of a lack of scientific objectivity and integrity.

[Thanks to Gaston from Gab pointing that out]

What a mendacious piece of filth this Booth is.

That confirms everything I always write concerning the highly political nature of population genetics. Booth's agenda is NOT science; it is politics. It is an admission that politically-motivated “scientists” are going to intentionally, and with malice aforethought, LIE to the public about the meaning of genetic studies, in this case about ancient DNA samples, including LYING about the identities of the ancient peoples and their objectively determined relationships with modern populations.

This is why population genetics studies need to be examined with an extremely skeptical eye - because these studies are being performed and presented to advance political agendas. The authors sometimes OPENLY admit it, as in this case. And it is not only the interpretative section of a paper (e.g. the Discussion) that requires close examination. In addition, methodology can be chosen and modified to yield desired results – for example, the choice of reference populations for supervised admixture analysis or the choice of population comparisons in PCA and for other types of analysis. Population genetics studies are very sensitive to “input” with respect to what the “output” is and it is therefore very easy for population geneticists to skew the data in a particular direction based upon how the data were generated.  And omission is as important as commission – when have you seen researchers ever do direct kinship analyses of human populations? When have you seen genetic integration approaches applied to human genetics data? Approaches that would produce politically incorrect data are avoided, while the methods that are utilized can be, and are, designed so as to obfuscate truth. Couple all of that with left-wing political bias in interpretation and - presto! – “woke” “science” is generated.

Real scientists should objectively and dispassionately present and discuss their data, and the sociopolitical interpretations and ramifications of that data are for others to determine. Science is not about putting political “spin” on data and is not about manipulating the work and lying about it in order to achieve particular politically-relevant objectives.  Booth and all of the rest of his ilk should be rejected by the scientific community.

Population genetics papers – and certainly anything by Booth and colleagues – must be carefully scrutinized for signs of bias and for politically-motivated content. Of course, scientists have the right to privately engage in political activism (and I wish more would be on the Right instead of an almost unanimous slant to the Left). However, they need to be careful not to let political bias intrude into their research and contaminate the science. 

It is inevitable that some degree of unintentional bias will slip into research, particularly with respect to topics (like population genetics) that have sociopolitical implications. That is human nature, after all.  That is why readers always need to be alert to potential bias and need to read papers and scientific pronouncements with a skeptical eye. But what we see with the likes of Booth is much worse - it is the openly admitted intentional injection of politics and political bias into the work, which is then presented to the public as "science." That alone is unacceptable and dangerous, but it gets even worse - much worse - when the openly admitted goal is to obfuscate truth and mislead the public about the science for political objectives.

After all, it is objectively true that, in the majority of cases, ancient peoples from given territories are genetically more similar to extant indigenous populations in those same territories than they are to later, intrusive elements, such as more recent migrants. Indeed, there is often an ancestral relationship, to at least some degree, between the ancient peoples and the modern indigenous populations. This is uncontroversial and accepted, with no problem whatsoever, for Africa and Asia, and it is certainly also well-accepted for the Americas, where, often, today's Native Americans exercise legal control over access to ancient American remains, on the premise (accepted by all) that the ancient peoples were the ancestors of extant Native Americans. The only exception to the rule of accepting ancient-modern population links is, of course, Europe. The native, indigenous peoples of Europe are denied their basic human rights and their fundamental sense of identity, and have their deep connections to ancient Europeans obfuscated, for purely political reasons, with one stated rationale being "to protect marginalized populations."  It would seem to me that, given this unequal treatment, and this denial of basic human rights, it are the Europeans who are truly the marginalized populations. Indeed, denying the group identity of a people and denying their ancestral origins and their "blood and soil" ties, which are clearly demonstrated by both genetic and history analyses, is the first step toward genocide of that people.

In summary, the political activity of Booth and his ilk, being injected into the scientific discourse as it is, must be unalterably opposed.  When the likes of Booth spread their poison, please use this post (and whatever others like it that you may find) as an antidote to Boothite anti-White venom.

Fool Britannia

Laugh at this.

Laughably, MacDonald hosts at his site an essay that oozes with extreme ethnocentrism from one of his individualistic altruistic ethnically disinterested high trusters. Some excerpts and comments:

We recently saw the passing of Queen Elizabeth II, who may not have shared our beliefs entirely (we don’t know for sure) but who I thought spent her entire life maintaining the proper decorum and class of British tradition and conducted herself like a lady the whole time. Her tragic but expected passing has caused me to spend a few moments thinking of these special islands in the North Atlantic where my ancestors came from. I also shed a few tears thinking about them. I don’t think I love any other ethnic group more than the British when recognizing them historically and not just in the modern sense. I love them even more than I do being a Southerner. You could call me an Anglophile. Shouldn’t I be one since that is where my blood is from?

By her own standards (see below), if she loves Britons more than being a Southerner she should leave for the UK immediately. And of course, the paragraph reproduced above is a perfect example of altruistic low-ethnocentrism individualism, right?

People on both the Right and the Left look down on the Anglosphere for different reasons, yet they all choose to remain in Anglosphere countries.

Ah, yes, the Right. Der Movement as we know is just oozing with anti-Britishness, what with all of these non-British ethnics like Taylor, Spencer, and Johnson shitting on the British 24/7, right?  Just like William Pierce, that swarthy ethnic hater of everything British!

I have a great deal of respect for Eastern Europe. I think it is an interesting place with a remarkable culture and I wish the best for its people. Much of our movement has an odd fascination with moving to Eastern Europe, even people who have no ancestry from there. They fantasize about that part of the world, yet almost nobody moves there to start over. Nor do I encourage people to move there unless they themselves have blood ties to that part of the world. I want to see Eastern Europe survive just as I wish the same for Great Britain.

Hint - they have that attitude because they want Eastern European women. You wouldn't happen to be an obese Walmart land whale would you?  

…yet almost nobody moves there to start over. Nor do I encourage people to move there unless they themselves have blood ties to that part of the world. I want to see Eastern Europe survive just as I wish the same for Great Britain.

Tell that to all the British expats who are colonizing the warmer parts of Europe (including the southern parts of Eastern Europe).

What I find particularly disturbing is how many in our movement seem to cheer the future of Eastern Europe as our only hope for the future while condemning Great Britain as a lost cause doomed for destruction and no chance of survival.

Since you love Britain so much, spend time walking around London (or Rotherham) and report back to us.  By the way, you retarded ignoramus, commenting on the state of race and culture in a nation is not “condemning” it.  

...should not be condemned to disappear just because it has become obsessed with multiculturalism for 70 years. Again, to see actual people with British ancestry in our movement think this way is very concerning to me.

Dear dumb cunt: The ethnocultural future of the UK will unfold independent of what you and other online Nutzis think about it. Commenting on the racial facts on the ground is not "condemning" anything, you stupid bitch.  

I follow Mark Collett and his work with Patriotic Alternative over in Britain. He seems to be an optimist about his country. He is always giving uplifting reports about the progress of his organization and how they are constantly attracting more and more White British people. They even do door-to-door surveys all over the country and have interviewed a large number of White British people. If I recall correctly, one such survey had at least 60 to 70% of respondents agreeing that the current immigration to Britain is not a good thing. As Mark pointed out, how many more would have answered honestly if they could say so in private with nobody coming to their door?

Let us know when that translates into electoral victories, you yeast-on-the brain moronic imbecile.

I love being an American Southerner, but if the day comes where I have to move from Dixie, my first choice is Great Britain. I don’t care if they have a bigger diversity problem than Eastern Europe. I pick Great Britain because that is me. That is my blood. I can’t imagine going elsewhere.

Rotherham is waiting for you. Colored men like fat White women, don't they?  Not that has anything to do with you of course.

And I still have hope for that great country because that is naturally what you are supposed to do for your homeland where your very blood came from. If you think the future will be wonderful for the White race without Great Britain, I would be careful what you wish for. It might not be so grand. The world would be unrecognizable. So don’t give up on it so quickly.

This writing has the intellectual depth of a five year old with Down's Syndrome. Does someone need to explain to this unmitigated moron that reporting on a situation is not the same thing as wishing for it?  If I say “my friend John Doe has cancer and I’m afraid it may kill him” that does not mean I am wishing that he dies from cancer. If I see him on his deathbed and his doctors agree that he is likely to die soon that doesn’t mean I’m giving up on him “quickly” and that his impeding death is somehow my fault.

Perhaps, some commentators are unnecessarily pessimistic about Great Britain – if you want to make that case, fine. But don’t conflate pessimism (typically expressed as concern and regret) with some sort of malicious joy in “quickly” “condemning” Britain and “wishing” for a White future without Britain. This essay is the worst type of hysterical female inanity.

Zero ethnocentrism no doubt:

British men should stop having a low opinion of themselves. You have so much to be proud of. You are Shakespeare, Charles Dickens, Isaac Newton, George Washington, Thomas Savory, Francis Drake, Charles Darwin, Francis Galton, and many others. You are the creators of the Industrial Revolution, much of calculus, and much of modern medicine. You created the fairest justice system in the world. You settled new continents. Everyone in the world wants to move to countries you created. If they don’t respect the founders of these countries, then they should leave. I would be happy to see them go.

Zero ethnocentrism again:

A culture that has existed on that island (islands) for over 1,000 years and that spent the past few centuries leaving a mark on the world far more impressive than any other group...

No ethnocentrism here, no siree:

I see parallel disdains in other parts of the Right. In our very own movement, it seems common to look down on many of Britain’s achievements from more recent centuries, such as the idea of freedom, the creation of America, and what the Founding Fathers achieved. I am personally a loving fan of the Founding Fathers. They created something remarkable and monumental. I don’t think any other ethnic group would have come up with something remotely similar. What I find peculiar about the people in our movement who criticize Britain’s achievements and ideas from the Enlightenment is that they do it while choosing to remain in a country created by British men from that time, instead of moving elsewhere, and they also do it while speaking the English language and while using many British inventions.

Look, I have nothing against a person of British descent being proud of their ancestry, being ethnocentric, being concerned with the future of their mother country, and being critical of people who may be unnecessarily pessimistic. But:

1. This type of ethnically British hyper-ethnocentrism is ludicrous when it is hosted on a site whose fundamental premise is that Northwest European groups like the British are composed of altruistic individualists lacking in ethnocentrism.

2. The idea that Der Movement – as part of the “Right” – is somehow anti-British is almost as ludicrous as Andrew Hamilton writing at Counter-Currents long ago that the “movement” is “anti-Nordicist.”  A “movement” deeply steeped in Anglomania, with most of its leaders being of full or part British descent, is not “anti-British,” any more than a “movement” whose fundamental founding principle is Nordicism, and that literally worships Nordics, is somehow “anti-Nordicist.” These types are so full of themselves, so expecting to have they and their ethnies worshipped, that they construe the slightest criticism or even mere pessimism as some sort of innate animus.  If these types had to experience even a fraction of the constant attacks in Der Movement toward Southern (especially) and Eastern Europeans, they’d spend all their time curled up in a fetal position, weeping bitterly.

3. This idiot needs to distinguish descriptive from prescriptive comments. Just because someone is pessimistic about the racial and cultural future of Britain doesn’t mean that they are wishing for that negative future, they are not responsible for it, and they are not condemning anyone to it.

4. The idea that if anyone dares criticize the British they need to leave nations founded by the British is the sort of extreme intolerant ethnocentrism that helps to refute MacDonald’s theories.  Every group has something that they can be criticized about. I thought "freedom" was a British virtue in America that she admires - so what about freedom of speech that may include criticism of the British?  Or do such critics get deported?  And if criticism from non-British of the British means that they “need to leave” British-founded nations then the same can be said of people of full or part British descent who live in Southern or Eastern Europe and who critique those nations and peoples. Anyone remember Munro in Amren, re: Romania?

Archie Munro is of predominantly Scottish and German ancestry, and has been settled in Romania for longer than he would like.

“Scottish” is part of being “British” – right?

5. Good that this author stressed defending British men, because her essay hasn’t done anything to raise anyone's confidence in the abilities of British-descended women.

Addendum:

A High Trust Herrenvolk individual left the following articulate and erudite comment for that essay:

Howad A.says:

September 12, 2022 at 5:15 pm

I agree brittish males are great. And being orwegian I am apparenty patly brittish since the averege norwegian is like 15 % to 25 % brittish probs since WIKING times.

And I’m super awesome so….

Well britts invented the internet and computer also plus tons of other things.

Are all brittish men self hating now or just libtards.

Burr Ridge and Odds and Ends

In der news.

Since pro-Negro, leftist FOX News blocks direct links from my blog, I’ll just put the following link here and you can view it yourself:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/illinois-mayor-reacts-governors-ill-advised-comment-inferring-xenophobia-amid-chicago-migrant-crisis

But, alas, there has been more going on in that town than merely that. Carefully examine the following links:

See this.

And this.

Listen here.

See this.

And this.

Summarizing Burr Ridge: Conservative Italian Americans try to protect the town from a Black/Jew-directed colored migrant influx. Meanwhile, ethnocentric High Trusters, silent about the colored migrants, oppose the political and economic presence of Italian-Americans in the community, openly expressing their animus at public meetings with (childish) anti-Italian comments and slurs. That not only is a microcosm of America and of Der Movement, but it is another real-world refutation of MacDonald and it is supportive of Racial Proximity Theory.

On a related note: Were the politics of people like John Lindsay a response to White ethnic upward mobility? Mobilizing Blacks and Hispanics as biological weapons to terrorize White ethnics and suppress their upward mobility?

The Great Replacement is more obviously objectively true than is Man Made Global Warming, yet the gaslighting System would have you believe otherwise.

Stupidity:

Greg JohnsonSeptember 11, 2022 at 2:51 pm

The Covid vaccines obviously don’t work. Covid isn’t a threat to children, so vaccinating them is insanity. And at this point in time, the medical authorities and the pharmaceutical industry have lost so much credibility that I doubt that any future mass vaccine mandates will be politically possible, no matter what the circumstances.

My re-writing for greater accuracy:

Der Movement obviously doesn’t work. Der Movement activists aren't a threat to the System, so supporting them is insanity. And at this point in time, Der Movement and its "leaders" have lost so much credibility that I doubt that any future Der Movement ethnostate will be politically possible, no matter what the circumstances.

In the mid-1990s, Jew Hart proposed a "White separatist state" that would "include Asians and others" while excluding Negroes. Today, WN 3.0 would also include Negroes, but exclude White ethnics.

One of the more stupid things that I have ever read:

Moscow assumes Europeans are too dependent on material comfort and will therefore break if pain is applied. This, of course, is a fundamental underestimation of the Northwestern European character, whose first instinct when exposed to pain is to counterattack. Russians think themselves tough and capable of great endurance, but they are little children compared to Northwestern Europeans in the full throes of moral outrage...

Is he talking about the same Nords who drop their pants and bend over for Coloreds, who allowed their children to be sexually abused by Pakis for fear of being called racist, and whose weakness has made Sweden to have one of the highest rates of rape and with "no-go zones" (such zones being common throughout Northwestern Europe)?

If Jeelvy believes that the same Nords who grovel to Coloreds will make every sacrifice to beat Russia (and on second thought maybe they will - they see Russians as evil Whites), then he has tacitly endorsed Racial Proximity Theory. My thanks to the chubby Turko-Albanian.

Gas from Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Argentina, Canada, Cyprus, Israel, and America will rush into Europe to fill the gap, locking Russia out of the industry and bringing the Western coalition closer together.

First, these new infrastructures likely won't be in place fast enough for the coming winter. Second, how exactly is the Kazakh and Azerbi gas going to get to Europe, bypassing Russia?

A Lesson from Ivanhoe

How will we rise?  That is, if we rise.

I’ve seen the 1952 movie Ivanhoe, based on the novel of the same name.

Before I get to the lesson alluded to in the title of this post, I’ll critique the one big problem of the story – the depiction of the Jews as an unjustly persecuted people, a noble breed, more learned and sophisticated than the crude Normans and Saxons. Further, having British-American beauty Elizabeth Taylor playing a Jewess is absurd; the reality is actually this. And no, being a convert to Judaism (as Taylor stupidly was) does not count; conversion does not change your genes nor your phenotype.

That out of the way, we will now consider what I consider the real lesson of the story. The subtext of the plot is the long-simmering tension between ruling Normans and ruled Saxons in England after the Norman Conquest. The end of the movie is described by Wikipedia thus:

King Richard and his knights arrive to reclaim his throne. Prince John grudgingly kneels before his brother. Richard then calls on his kneeling people to rise, not as Normans or Saxons, but as Englishmen.

Therefore, one unified people, one nation, is forged from these previously feuding elements.  Hopefully, the analogy to the White racial situation is obvious.  

We need a leader, or set of leaders, who will call our people to rise, not as Nords or Meds or Slavs or any atomized ethnicity, but as Europeans.

We need to forge the European Nation, the Imperium of the West, out of these previously feuding elements.

That is the lesson we should learn from Ivanhoe.

Unfortunately, we are instead stuck with “leaders” who preach to us that Asians are superior to Whites in all respects.

Is it any wonder why the European race is on a collision cause with disaster and eventual extinction?

Will the lesson ever be heeded?  If not now, then when?  If not by us, then who?

Odds and Ends, 9/10/22

In der news.

So, Taylor spent time in West Africa, MacDonald spent time teaching in Jamaica, Johnson taught at Black Morehouse College, and Ruston fathered an illegitimate child with a Negress. These specimens are living advertisements for my Racial Proximity Theory; they have a natural attraction and affection for Color, in these cases the worst of the lot, the Negro. That contrasts to their disdain for White ethnics. I won't even get into those people on the Right with Asian wives and of course the rampant Yellow Supremacism and the whole WN 3.0 Kumar-Matthews-Malkin, etc. stupidity.

Is the racialism of the Quota Queens a form of noblesse oblige? The paternalistic High Trusters will uplift the Coloreds - The White Man's Burden. In order to protect the Coloreds, White ethnic bigots must be opposed; thus, the Quota Queens are Far Right versions of John Lindsay.

Just like authentic White conservatives get turned off by Turk Oz and his "Democrats are the real racists" spiel so will authentic White nationalists get turned off by Taylor telling them "that frog-faced, covid-spewing Chinaman over there is your superior by every objective standard."

If you want to discourage and dispirit White activists, telling them that a race of "human" photocopiers is their objectively absolute superior is a good way to do it. Whites are not going to fight under the banner of Yellow Supremacy.

Der Right is hostile to the French Revolution and of course I myself dislike that revolution's ideology of leftist egalitarianism. However, the parasitical French monarchy and nobility got what was coming to them, and the revolution opened up the path to Napoleon, so it wasn't all bad. The UK should be a republic. The Queen is dead, depose the King. Let Charlie earn a living digging ditches or something.

Those good White Southrons voted for her, so...you made your bed, lie in it.

The Hobbit Hole Nerds can simply not watch that nonsense. Let it collapse financially. But, no. They'll whine and complain and then jack off to hobbit holes.

I'm getting sick and tired of constantly getting Torba's "Christian nationalism" spam. Just like the System constantly pushing Negroes in my face makes me more anti-Black, so do the Jaysus freaks pushing their religion 24/7 makes me more anti-Christian. And what is it? Just like "National Bolshevism" is for people too cowardly just to say they are National Socialists, "Christian nationalism" is for people too cowardly to say they are White nationalists.

And why is Torba hiding out in the PA woods when he can be living in, and spreading the good word of "Christian nationalism" in, say, Detroit or Chicago or NYC or any other place where there are so many nice Christian dark-hued Children of God? These guys talk Christian but live White.

Odds and Ends, 9/8/22

In der news.

At Gab I predicted that Taylor's ASU speech would likely contain his usual spiel about Asian intellectual superiority. Sallis is right again – Taylor in fact did mention Asian IQ, brain size, and education accomplishment. Low quality Taylor ASU video is here. He repeated the same arguments from past speeches and essays over and over again. He also over-rated the accuracy of testing companies – particularly 23andMe, which in my opinion is the worst of them.

At around 10:00 he starts talking about IQ, noting of course high Asian IQ and bigger brain size, and of course, school grades – more Asian accomplishment!  Asians are more disciplined than Whites!  At 18:45 he starts with promoting Asian supremacy and openly says from 18:55-19:05 that Asians are superior to Whites.

Sallis always, always, always right.

Thus, Taylor was inculcating into young Whites a sense of racial inferiority to Asians.  There was nothing in his speech about Asians cheating on tests or browbeating teachers into giving then undeserved high grades (“my strict Asian parents will kill me if I don’t get an A”) or, in the pre-digital days, hoarding all of the course study materials.

Here’s a nice clip for you to play over and over again. Indeed, please share that clip far and wide. The next time some gaslighting lair says that Taylor mentions Asian accomplishment merely to point out that American society is not "White supremacist," you have handy that nice little clip to share in reply, with Taylor making a blanket statement of Asian racial superiority over Whites.  That is not me being "insane" and "paranoid" - listen to the video.

In addition, in his speech, Taylor critiques immigrants coming to America to escape their failed societies. Does he know that two of the major sources of immigration to America are China and South Korea? How does that square with Asians being superior to Whites in all aspects? How many Whites are clamoring to immigrate to Asia?

However, in the end, it is a good thing that Taylor was successfully able to speak at ASU. A precedent was set, and perhaps one day a real White nationalist can speak at a university as opposed to a Yellow Supremacist.

This is Amren:

Sicilians (along with Greeks and to an extent Vietnamese) can be sloven, sloppy, messy and disorganized.

Is Amren a danger to White ethnics? 

A Chinese commentator at Amren writes:

According to Peter J. White, Southern Italians score low on IQ tests, yet have excelled in money making in America, either via dishonest means (tax evasion and the infamous mafia)...

That is WN 3.0 - White ethnics get defamed by Chinese at HBD race realist sites.

Sallis' Law in action.  Taylor's ASU speech did not mention Italians at all.  But, alas, Chinese scum (more succinctly, Chinese) and their slavish HBD race realist worshippers get to work in the comments.

They HATE you.

A lot of "movement" race realist stupidity about how great Asians are and how dumb Southern Italians and other Meds are comes solely from Tricky Dick Lynn and his associates. All the cherry picked data, ignoring Chinese cheating on exams and using only educated urban populations' results, and "estimating" IQ from standardized knowledge tests - that's the "evidence."  And then there is the Irish IQ fiasco - averaging disparate IQ data sets.

More Counter-Currents Nordicist crap:

The Roman system carried out a Great Replacement, at least of the Latins within the city limits of Rome itself. In the Eternal City, Latins were replaced by slaves from elsewhere. While the Latin working class in Rome was replaced by slaves, the Latin people more generally expanded into other parts of Europe. Latin DNA is not much different from that of other Europeans, so one cannot measure the spread of the Latins that way...

Dem wops are descended from slaves and other Europeans are descended from Latin Romans. Dat right!