It and Essence

By Alex Linder

The American public, the evangelicals but the public generally, has been dog-trained to distrust rational logic, with evidence and ties, as something cold, hostile, alien, to be avoided as hate. And anyone who tries to string some reasoning together is regarded with great suspicion. If his reasoning involves some protected class they’ve been taught to worship, then they know the right response is to laugh about conspiracy theories. The public schools have done a great job not just spreading anti-white policies but in disabling the mechanisms of rational thought. It’s all attitudinizing and posing now. Whites think every other group is like theirs. So if you explain what jews are doing, they say, why would they do that? They can’t grasp a fundamentally dissimilar mentality. And they are very scared of anything that threatens their income or social status. They really are like cattle that, hearing a noise, can’t identify it, but feel it represents some kind of threat to them, so better run the other way.

[ The above is from a forum thread posting. ]

By Alex Linder

I’m not a Nazi, mainly because I’m not a socialist. I don’t believe in planned economies. I believe in market economies racially constrained. That is, penalty of death for breaching the racial grounding law of the new white state.

Whites can’t agree on much. The ones who want to keep being white, the only way to do that is live in all-white nation. That’s pretty much the it and all of white nationalism. Which is why it draws criticism, but I think it’s a strength. It’s like a tent pole barn. You can have whatever you want at the picnic tables, but you get protection from racial rain. That’s the only function for the central state. The rest, people can divide up into the freedomists like me (fuck off, leave me alone, get off my grass – private, voluntary arranements), religious freaks like catholics, other arrangements. But race will be the law of the land and the basis of the new state.

I differ from Pierce somewhat in that I don’t get off on bossing people around, and, unlike 99% of racialists, I know a lot about the limits of government. It simply isn’t a good way to accomplish most things – see the government we have now. That doesn’t change because Aryans are running things. They’re still corrupt and likely to enrich themselves. But at least we’d have an all-white nation. Yes, it would have to be dictatorship, permanently on the racial stuff. For the rest, microstates beneath the federal umbrella are the way to go. Whites are the most individuated race. They need their space. They need privacy and private money to pursue their dreams. They can’t have this when they’re working 50% of their time to fund the central state. This is something that half or more WN do not understand. They want what we have now, but without the anti-white part. I don’t want 99% of what we have now, from the central government. I don’t believe in Jebus or regulation, and that puts me apart from right and left.

BTW, I have discussed this stuff in various podcasts.

Now, how we get where we need to go, the political path rather than the end state we/I seek, I have also written about. In a nutshell I advocate:

– polarization.

between Team White (us) and Team Jew (our main enemy gets pride of name, but TJ includes all muds and white fuckheads/assorted (sex)deviants. TW is all who want a normal white America, which I don’t have to explain, we all more or less agree.

To get to that polarization, we must pursue a double-tined and necessarily simultaneous pitchfork attack on TJ and the professional conservatives.

– we destroy the conservatives. why? they’re sort of like us? why not work with them? because they are weak and useless – and they stand between us and the public. they have smart and well funded men who make plausible and articulate spokesmen. yet they wont do anything to defend our race. in fact they will denounce racialism as morally evil and collectivist. they are brainwashers of our people and no different from our outright enemy on the racial stuff. their religion (xtianity) and their political leaders both tell them race doesnt matter and race-free individualism is the only morally proper way to live and go. they believe this. they dont read or think, so they are misled. they must brought to our side by destroying their faith in their leaders by making them appear ridiculous and weak – thru mockery more than argument, altho incorporating the data used in argument.

We destroy the fake-white right, the “it was all a game, a way of making a living” (professional conservatives/tism) and at the same time we’re continually doing battle with the main enemy – the jews who formed and dominate and set the agenda (what I call The Agenda, i never define it because dont need to because it’s obvious in everything ‘mainstream,’ all frames, terms, etc conduce the same direction) for every official institution.

– final battle between Team White and Team Jew. Team White wins. Team Jew is destroyed – for all times. Unlike the foolish, weak, intellectually defective christians who came before us, we do not sweep the jews out our door to be let back in at a later date, we bury every last one of them twelve feet under (just to be sure).

Then we arrange our white society as we like, taking full advantage of modern technology to allow the individuation that pretty much defines or distinguishes our race from others the ability to flower and flourish. But no one is allowed to second guess the racial basis of the state. That is capital crime. On that there is no seconde opinion.

in this way we provide a context in which the white man can live as both a Man and as a White.

[ The above is from a forum thread posting. ]

By Alex Linder

The holocaust is an important part of a comprehensive attack on white racial character. It is a pseudo-event used to define whites to whites, children especially but also adults, to intimidate them and make them feel bad and guilty. When they feel this way, they won’t breed or fight or defend themselves. The holocaust, along with christian moral inculcation (original sin and need for moral redemption and loving our enemy and doing good), is a way to forestall white resistance, not a direct source of jew power. The jew power is controlling the media and the official idea-levers, ie public school indoctrination centers (teachers and textbooks) and public-addressing authorities (politicians but also priests). Through these they promote bogus history to intimidate and inculcate guilt in whites. We don’t have any choice but to resist this, and one way we do that is by pointing out that their biggest most popular story is a fucking LIE. How is it not valuable — how is it not absolutely MIND BLOWING — to demonstrate to our own people that the very worst things assert about our race ARE NOT TRUE. ARE DEMONSTRABLY FALSE. This is not attacking the jews at their strong point, as the Whitwoulds say, it’s taking out the leader of their gang. If they’re lying about the Big Thing, what’s the chance they’re not lying about the rest? That’s the legal principle – lying about one thing, lying about everything. Here’s something everybody “knows” – and we can prove it’s not so. We’re crazy not to. You are crazy for advocating we set aside this powerful weapon.

A revolutionary cause needs dynamism. That means energy. That comes from the young. The very ones who are exposed to Holo horseshit. We can prove that Anne Frank’s ‘diary’ (sic) and Wiesel and the 6m and gas chambers and soap and lampshades are ALL LIES? And we shouldn’t do that? That won’t instill doubt in them about everything else they’ve heard?

[ The above is from a forum thread posting. ]

By Alex Linder

[ The following is from a forum thread posting. ]

I avoided all news of Greece for a few weeks to try to get a fresh perspective. After reading the last few pages, I come out the same place. Here are the main conclusions I draw about things in Greece and what they mean for white politics in American and generally. I welcome any reaction to my points, either correct them or add things I missed.

1) Golden Dawn has used the system the way it’s supposed to: they politic. They canvas. They print materials. They talk to people. They go on shows. They donate blood, money, food, time. Their actions are entirely legal. Their support grows as they demonstrate over a period of years they are serious and have answers. A growing percentage of Greeks believes they have the right answers, as reflected in the steady growth of their vote, from under 1% to around 20% – and climbing.

2) Although Golden Dawn has acted legally and democratically, in keeping with both the law and spirit of representational politics, it has been treated as a criminal group by both the media and the government. It is clear that this has nothing to do with Golden Dawn but rather the ideas Golden Dawn represents. The media believe that only anti-white race mixing (helped along by open borders) and control by jewish central banks are legitimate political positions. Anything nationalist is inherently illegal and immoral.

3) When Golden Dawn’s support climbed to 7% two years ago, the ruling jews (out of NYC and Washington) and their local helpers, Samaras and crew, became worried. They put together a plan to destroy the party, indeed they demanded its destruction publicly. The jews in NYC demanded it, and Samaras scambled to comply, and had no shame in publicly stating his intent to destroy a legal, democratic party routinely garnering over 10% support in polls, with that support rising.

4) In order to forestall Golden Dawn getting up to or more than 20% of the vote in the 2014 spring/summer elections, the powers that be simply arrested Golden Dawn leaders on the pretext that the legal political party was a criminal gang. Not a single member of the media denounced this, although some feared this was not the right tactics. This points up:

5) the media and the state are on the same side. Notice the rhetorical freedom the fellow in the Greek Reporter allows himself. He call Golden Dawn lizards and criminals and all manner of foul things. These reporters won’t dare treat real criminals like bank robbers and murderers with that kind of disrespect.

6) Knowing the media are 100% in their corner frees tools like Samaras and his bosses, the ADL out of a foreign country (!) to operate without fear. It can’t be over-remarked how amazing it would be – if we hadn’t grown used to it – that a private jew group out of a foreign country is dictating educational (!) policy (as well as every other policy) in a tiny foreign country thousands of miles away. This goes either unmentioned or supported by the entire mass media. We need to remember to stand back every once in a while and remember again just how outrageous, ridiculous, anti-white and intolerable this state of affairs actually is – or ought to be to us. We have become so used to being managed by hostile aliens we seem to think nothing of it.

7) Will things change? Not till something changes things. The jews speak openly about their desires because they don’t fear consequences. They know that anyone speaking against jews or their agenda will be put on lists, denounced in the controlled media, fired or murdered if he persists. They themselves don’t fear the consequences of their genocidal anti-whitism because they don’t suffer any.

8) Virtually all leaders of white nationalists in the US urge pro-whites to ‘keep it legal.’ Golden Dawn has kept it legal. Not a single ‘keep it legal” advocate in the USA has noticed that what has transpired in Greece has interesting implications for his advice – implications he must address if he is serious. But he is not serious; not serious in that he has not thought things through. Rather, he has bought the lie that jews achieved power “without firing a shot.” Yet the fact remains that jews took power in the US far more by illegal means than by legal means. It is a measure of the lack of something – intellectual capacity and/or courage – that white nationalists in this country refuse to face that fact. I attribute it to WN’s roots in conservative cowardice. It is, at least, a good sign – a sign of intellectual and political growth – that Golden Dawn’s representatives in America have diffused information about sellouts in the Greek community. That is a blow at the enemy. Surely we are past the stage where we believe exposing the jew is enough. Of course we need more of that exposure, as we fight a uniformly jew-promoting and white-attacking controlled media, and there is a large and growing body of people out there on the internet and in social media who are jew-truthing, so to speak, but that’s only part of what is needed. We are creating, all of of us, a white mind-milieu on the internet; we are also going to need men (leaders and followers) and organizations, in order to regain white sovereignty.

9) Where do we go from here? I’m interested in hearing how people think things will eventuate in Greece. In my view, what the jews and their lackeys have done to Golden Dawn in Greece is completely illegal, and they have opened themselves to any response loyal Greeks deem appropriate. If you simply declare one political position illegal, when it’s the position of the majority (for example, controlling the borders), you have made yourself a tyrant, even if the media you control insist you’re democratic.//

 

By Alex Linder

Can writing be taught? Some say yes. Some say no. They are both right. But they are not talking about the same thing.

To the extent writing is error identification, it can be taught. That part is science. Instruction availeth in spreading its standards.

To the extent writing is the artful arrangement of words, it’s largely beyond instruction.

Mediocrity develops. Genius unfurls.

Some people can paint. Some can’t. Some can sing. Some can’t. Some can write. Some can’t. It’s inborn.

You can’t teach anyone to create word art any more than you can teach someone to create oil art or vocal art. The ability to write is genetic.

Teaching pretty much taps out at conveying the rules of spelling and grammar and simple construction; beyond that, about all that can be done is a modest enhancement in the ability to avoid the grosser cliches. Teaching can’t really bring anything truly positive, genuinely artistic out of the student, it’s wholly involved with avoiding or reducing the negative. Which is still something valuable.

Next week I’ll go into the reasons for widespread semiliteracy in an age of universal public education. If you’ve read or listened to what I’ve said about homeschooling, you know the answer already.

Today I want to focus on one thing: cliche aversion. Even those with little talent can improve their writing by recognizing and avoiding cliches. By cliches I mean a much broader concept than what is normally intended by that word. Wherever an adjective is ordinarily coupled with a noun – that is a cliche. Breaking up these word-blocks by replacing the adjective or the noun is a good way for non-artists to improve their writing. You don’t need deep talent to think about what you’re saying. Rather than, as a woman, being satisifed, even proud, of your ability to come up with the cliched expression, you can and should instead look for reasons not to use the typical expression.

Little thinking goes into most writing. Lacking artistic talent is not the same as lacking the ability to think. So think. Think about the words you are using. Don’t go with the conventional expression if you can come up with something better. Something closer to the reality. This will make your writing subtly different, and it will burr the reader, gently rasp him, like a slightly too cool breeze. It will make him just a bit more alert than he usually is, and that’s a good thing. He will have to pay attention. You’re not just producing boilerplate like everyone else does.

This is not the same thing as innovation for innovation’s sake. If a cliche is effective, then there’s no reason not to use it. I like ‘the bottom line.’ I think it effectively conveys the sense of the thing, even if everyone uses it and it’s as cliched an expression as it gets. Same thing with ‘at the end of the day.’ So I use them. But if I didn’t like them or didn’t think they worked, I wouldn’t use them just because they are now conventional. Just because everyone else does something is not a reason to do it – nor is it a reason not to do it – the other mistake that has become common, particularly in non-verbal settings.

We are talking about improving writing here; if you’re happy communicating with others in cliches, then that’s great. They will like your verbal comfort food, and you won’t have to put in any effort beyond a modestly logical structuring. But if you desire to write something a little more refined, a little more interesting, a little more artful, a little better, then thinking about the word-couplings you use, the cliches in the broadest sense, is a good place to start. Good writing, for the untalented, will begin with active thinking. The words you use are a matter of choice. You are the master. You do not have to use the same words in the same way others do.

It works like this: someone says ‘cutting edge.’ It’s original and effective. It’s easy to see in your mind. A million people copy the use. Eventually someone artistic gets bored. Changes it to ‘bleeding edge.’ Which is also effective and picturesque. The pioneer gets the arrows, as has been said. Eventually the masses follow this too. The alteration becomes the cliche. Now I have used pushing edge, just to give it a different twist. It is not as sharp as the original or the first alteration, but it has some value in bringing out a different aspect of the operation in question – the straining. It’s perfectly grammatically valid, too. Why does the edge have to be cutting or bleeding? It doesn’t. It can be whatever you want it to be – that makes sense. See, you have to think. You have to figure something out – if you can. That’s where the talent comes in. But whether you have lots or little talent, you can still think about what each word and each term means. These slight little alterations won’t precisely substitute for genuine talent, but they will set your writing apart in an effective and legitimate way. You are not expressing things differently for reasons of self but for reasons of sense. You want to bring out a different angle or aspect of the thing in question, and, in a meta-sense, convey to your readers that you are paying attention to the world around you and the language you choose to describe it. This serves the meta-meta purpose of enhancing literary culture, which is necessary in a world in which writing must compete with video, which was not the case in the 19th century, obviously.

So today’s lesson is to consider a cliche as a much broader category than you have in the past, and consciously choose to decouple the usually coupled in order to achieve new and legitimate discriminations and depictions. I will come back to this matter of cliche in future columns, but until then, just try to notice in your reading the thousands upon thousands of undeclared or, might we say, amateur cliches of which most writing — most professional writing, even — is composed. Legitimate individuation, like preventing forest fires, is up to you. It’s, by definition, not something someone else can do for you – beyond alerting you to the problem, as I have done here. If you wish to subcontract your sentence-formation choices to the mass-average, then you’ll be like everybody else, and you’ll reap the same not-very-satisfying result. But verily I say unto, thinking will make you a deeper and more interesting person, and this will reflect in your writing.//

By Alex Linder

[ The following is from a forum thread posting. ]

[What follows are ideas and snippets and concepts and quotes and links – either from me or stuff I’ve found in reading around.]

article idea: change in culture: german soccer, simona halep (breast reduction at 17), scottish enlightenment – contrast with southern inability to change, tho same genes as scotland. “A few years ago, the idea that a Germany team could boast more technically gifted, creative forwards than Brazil would have been deemed preposterous, but there’s no argument now. Only Spain, the one country with as many players in the ESPN FC Top 50 (eight in total) have more artistic skill on a player-by-player basis. The generation of Lahm, Schweinsteiger, Podolski and Per Mertesacker will forever be credited for kick-starting the renaissance of Germany in 2006 under Jürgen Klinsmann. But their countrymen care about trophies, first and foremost. There is no concept of glorious failure in German football, only win or defeat.
http://www.espnfc.us/fifa-world-cup/…-germanys-year

The value of feminism is condensing all female mental errors into one big pile, burnishing them, making them stinking clear to all who come near. Basically with feminists, there can never be any unimpeded flow of reality as we discuss something, we have to stop every two seconds because something is problematic. Because of their ideology, not because there’s actually anything interesting or any genuine point to be made. We just have to discuss how this or that broad feels about something. Women aren’t interested in reality, they’re interested in how they feel about X, Y or Z. That’s why men invent everything.

fetishising about the color of your skin

No one thinks about how the fat chick is going to feel uncomfortable doing a relay race as a fun team building exercise. ug.

Jew expulsion has been tried 110x. It must be the only “solution” in history whose advocates think that needing to do the same exact thing you did the first time 109 more times is success.

Keeping the floor clean is a problem that can’t be solved once and for all times. Jews do not belong to that class of problems.

Glutebund…the New Center. contrast w pussy-bund.

PARALLEL: all-22 cams in sport (NFL) – hiding things from people – the view they don’t want to get out – because it’s most revealing

http://deadspin.com/5867408/somewher…e-is-tim-tebow
What I was yearning for, in the end, was the chance to watch Tebow with God’s eyes?that is, with the NFL’s All 22 footage, the proprietary camera angle that shows every player on the field at once, and which the Wall Street Journal reported the NFL regards as too revealing and informative to share with the general public: Charley Casserly, a former general manager who was a member of the NFL’s competition committee, says he voted against releasing All-22 footage because he worried that if fans had access, it would open players and teams up to a level of criticism far beyond the current hum of talk radio.

The All 22 is what Bill Belichick will be watching this week, as New England tries to solve the particular risk-management problems posed by Tebow’s odd skill set and the Broncos’ skewed game plans. So the Patriots will get more than a quick telestrator scribble on the Bears’ safeties before the back end of Chicago’s defense drops out of the picture. They’ll be able to get a read on what Tebow really means on the football field. The rest of us will have to get by on metaphysics.

reactionaries must beware lest they become mere backwards-progressives or reverse progressives.

When the complexity and contradictions exist, it is wrong to force fit the person’s views into this box or that, but that’s what simpletons must do to restore retain their equanimity. They think they can make a contradiction go away by bleating, ever louder, that X is whatever they decide he is. Nuanced descriptions of motive are lost on these people as a book read to quacking ducks.

getting angry at muslims is the same as getting angry at mexicans or niggers. they didnt let themselves in or force themselves among us, the managers of society did. and in every society, those managers either are or are nearly entirely or hugely influenced by jews. that’s the part the euros don’t want to accept, but the ideology of multiculturalism came from an american jew horace kallen and was used as the ‘intellectual’ basis of the push that eventually led to American open borders in 1965.

getting angry at muslims is the same as the bull going after the cape rather than the matador. humans should be more intelligent than lesser animals. they’re mostly not. hence the derision.

breivik at least, if he read the conservative misleaders like Horowitz et al., at least was smart enough to go after the cause (the offspring and gonna-be successors of the people letting muds invade norway), not the consequence (the invaders themselves). that in turn leads the same dopes who blames muslims rather than jews to whine that he killed whites, as if the mere fact someone is of our race precludes him from being an enemy. it does not.

ok can answer this easily enough. nutshell: why in the hell would anybody want an economy run by a method as historically-documented bankrupt as central planning? we want as little dictatorship as possible. do you really want to go back to some ass-clown figuring out how many size 8 triple E shoes should be produced for lower spotsylvania region? Look at the way the world has evolved with the internet. What in the world could be more retrograde than to go back to a system where a handful of political clowns controls everything and makes decisions for everybody they are better equipped to decide themselves? It’s absolutely nuts. There is no serious economic problem in the US that is not essentially caused by government activity, and it’s the same elsewhere. Who queers the money? Government. Who subsidizes niggers? Government? Who supports huge standing armies? Who mongers war after war after war? Who runs shitty schools that don’t teach people to read but do indoctrinate them that homos and nigs and jews are saints? Gee, government’s not doing enough great things, let’s give it control over the entire economy!

Oh but, with Whites in charge, WN, it will be different.

No. It won’t.

If you could have a long, leisurely dinner with anyone who has ever lived, who would that be? And why.

would like to do that with mencken, and i would tell him that the irony of his writing is that one of the very few things he was wrong about, the potential danger jews as as class posed, is ironically the same thing he’s blamed for today: the ‘anti-semitism’ in his writing. he did critcize jews as jews, just as he did every other group, but his criticisms, while accurate and apt, were not deep or far-seeing enough. (nor were those of belloc or wynham lewis writing on same subject even later time). would be interesting to see what he thought about evolution of US history after his death, and just in general find out if he really doubted that race was the necessary basis of the culture that would produce the civilized man, extraordinary non-white examples of such notwithstanding.

but really my answer would be sam kinison, the only celeb i wanted to meet. i dont care about that part, but he always struck me as someone who would be even funnier than in his act in private, especially going off on his enemies and his friends, in that way some people have. I can just see him sitting in a big ol’ circle-c corner booth with scrawnier me sitting nearby and just listening to his massive breathlessness and darting beady tawny pig eyes. i bet he would be just funnier than fuck. if i could be reborn to life 2, i wouldn’t mind being a massive-girthed fatman, it would be an entirely different experience than i’ve had physically.

politically though, i would certainly want to have dinner with hitler and goebbels to hear what they say about communicating with the various classes in germany, and for the nuances of their dealings with the enemy jews and marxists. and also ask hitler why he didn’t summarily execute or at least imprison and use the frankfurters and like scorpions, rather than broom them out the door.

I can only wonder how my life would have changed if the internet had been public-available in 1975 instead of 1995. I doubt I would have gone to college; basically a waste of time if you’re into liberal arts. Would have understood the jew in a couple months instead of it taking until mid-twenties.

Whether I would personally, or whether others should, those are things for me and them to decide. I never tell others what to do about such serious stuff, nor do I try to pass off responsibility for my own acts onto someone else. Each man is responsible for his own decisions. I provide political analysis to help people understand our social context.

Quote: You do what you do best, you talk. You do great things for our cause, but if and when it is time comes to get our hands dirty, will you be thumbing through the pages of your books looking for the appropriate text.

What your ilk doesn’t grasp is that words in such a case are mere piffle in light of the heaviness of the decision. I don’t do bravado. I don’t do threats. I don’t do telling-others-to-commit-illegal-revolutionary-acts. What I do is write, mostly, talk some, and occasionally I do some activism, if I can see something useful and cost effective.

Look what I did at Knoxville. I didn’t tell others to do the usual, and follow the cops into the pen, I went to the middle of the street to address the enemies and antis because I know I can win them over. I never told anyone else to do the same, I told them only that 1) I was not applying for a permit, 2) we need to shake things up and stay a step ahead of our controllers, and 3) stay alert for what might happen.

I led by example. I did what I thought was right. It turned out to be illegal. I didn’t tell anyone else to follow, I showed them by my actions what I thought was best to do. Anyone who pays attention, which basically excludes the South, could have guessed that what I did do was at the least a very good likelihood to occur.

This is what I mean by these anti-bookish cultures not being able to compete with the powers that be. Is even one in ten Southerns intellectually-genetically capable of paying attention? I seriously wonder. I think it’s more like 2-5% that can actually pick even semi-subtle things up, and this was no subtle thing – I made it as clear as you could without overtly saying it.

But y’all do love a ritual. I don’t. I guess I’m an evil Northern innovationist – if something isn’t working, I get an itch to try something else.

I didn’t apply for a permit. How big a clue do you need? I aint playing their game, so far as I can force them, and lead us, I’m playing our game.

But no. No. You be like ol’ Smoky. You go get in the pen. Maybe bleat as you walk in.

I’m a fucking American, with no criminal record. Talking about the political media context that lets murderers go free to do it again while honest parents cry over their dead raped tortured mutilated murdered sons and daughters – while honest protestors are call vile haters and distubance makers and “outsiders” who must be penned up by the cops where no one can hear them. To accomplish my goal might mean stepping outside your comfort zone, well, what rally people don’t seem to get is this is real-world politics, it aint fucking entertainment.

Political rallies as dumb rituals are useless.

So when it comes to breaking the law, even when merely walking down a public street accomplishes that, I will lead by example, and you can infer my meaning.

But tell other people what they should do? I don’t know what they should do. I only know what I should do, and sometimes that’s not so easy to figure out.

What do you suppose would have happened if we had, say, 500 people at the rally, and 300 of them went out in the street with me? Honestly.

What do you think might have happened? Do you think it would have helped our cause or hurt it?

Stipulate I’m a coward if you like, or a hero, for that matter – it matters not to me or to our cause. The relevant question is whether my analysis of Breivik’s actions is correct. I believe it is. Calling Breivik a pro-White hero does not imply I could or would do the same myself, nor that I would advocate others copy him. It means I think his actions were genuinely heroic, and I also believe they helped our cause, for the reasons I’ve stated.

We have got to develop alternative local group structures that are far more organic, self-renewing and even addictive. This doesn’t mean these groups can’t back independent candidates at election time and thus contest keep the political ground contested. They can. But the partisan election certainly can’t be the primary focus.

Sean, I spent a few weeks in Haiti and can tell you from first hand experience it’s the same there. There are more American and European white do-gooders there than you can shake a stick at doing everything from feeding them, treating them, helping them give birth, etc. Many if not most of the do-gooders are young white women, most of the white men involved are older. Over a few weeks observing these types, it
absolutely intrigues me as what their motivation is. I’ve came to the following conclusion: For the vast majority it is pure, unadulterated air of superiority they feel when surrounded by these poor, downtrodden, noble savages. They love to be looked up to, fawned over, and feel so much more intelligent than those around them. And as a cherry on top, maybe they can adopt a Haitian baby or bring a Haitian boyfriend
back to the States to demonstrate their moral superiority over their evil bigoted families and communities. At least that’s my initial analysis in the short time I’ve had to observe. It’s not really about the natives, it’s about thier own egos.

Sweezy’s The Structure of the Nazi Economy.

The companies that are true Greek yogurt that I am most familiar with are Fage, Chobani, & Greek Gods.

best epithet for Brittanicals?

You can use them all, but only choose one! This is not a formal vB poll, but in your response, pick your favorite. If your preferred term doesn’t show up on my list, feel free to invent a better one.

The epithets:

a) island monkeys (German)

b) rosbifs (French – roast beefs)

c) sandbarbarians

d) West Frisians

e) North Portugese

f) Plonkerstanis

g) seemlanders

He’s finally discovered the truth about the English mentality; half surly, half cheeky, all can’t-be-arsed, will-this-do, and what’s-he-on-about-now.

cats i hardly need tell you rely on their feet!!! they RELY on them. for WALKING…SALTATING…POUNCING (a specialized form of saltating, you will now know) and for SILENTLY SNEAKING STEALTHILY in hirsute PURRRsuit of PILEATED WOODPECKERS and other OVERPOPULATED DENIZENS of the WORLD ARBOREAL. …

After thirty years of studying it, I’m less unconvinced than ever that conservatism is an intellectual cover for a sexual problem.

LEFTIST MEMES: reality is the enemy. pravda, not istina.

Not-so-wildlife, Laguna Atascosa (Texas). Would you believe this deer had the nerve to give me the full Billy Bob Thornton Bad Santa “I’m on my lunch break” when I approached it for a pet?

The Most Basic Failure
http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p…76#post1491976

Evelyn: Don’t worry, Marge. Her idea of wit is nothing more than an incisive observation humorously phrased and delivered with impeccable timing.

no proof except the reasoning-backward I described and which GLR pointedly denounced. l’white nationalism c’est moi, and if anyone disagrees with me, that proves he’s a fed or an anti.

TWEET: liberalism is not just a hatred of one’s race, but specifically a hatred of one’s own relatives. that and hybris, universalism, defines it.

Brilliance is confusing, even frightening, to those raised on nostrums of equality, positivity and political correctness. The jews strive to make it unthinkable for whites to defend themselves physically, and illegal to defend themselves verbally.

fifteen minutes from now…you might already have been dead for ten minutes.

“Thinking is too good for the common people” – joint attitude of Catholic church and public school system.

People who call Bill O’Reilly a nazi are not going to make distinctions between Evola and Hitler.

bates motel – yo-yo mothers – they spin you down and out of their womb, but they experience a strong desire, many of them, to suck you back in. the umbilical cord is a yo-yo string…

TWEETS

because on Team Making-Me-Better, I’m batting cleanup.

The world was created by a sniggering, sadistic god. Or it just worked out that way. Your choice.

It’s been a great few years for those who confuse the excretory system with the reproductive. But time is not on their side.

PEN NAME: HELEN HAND-BASKETTE, domestic virtuosoessa lesson – less of a moron if you take it. Three top cooking lessons. OVERseason. DRY THAT MEAT OUT. DRY IT! Use MORE seasoning than you think. COOK LESS than you think. Cook HOTTER than you think. Finally, dry that meat first.

Finding imaginary virtues in blacks is an American religion.

spurifies – the newsmedia make spurious

Depends where your ego lies. I’m not jealous of anyone’s possessions, though I like money, because money in large measure = freedom.

I’m jealous of people who think up lines that I didn’t. Or lines that are better than mine.

Example: ‘An anti-semite is someone jews hate.’ –Joe Sobran.

Another one I heard lately:

“Full of myself, but still hungry” –Eminem, in “Rap God”

damn good line.

You can’t buy talent. Stuff you can buy, and quibbling over it – that’s for the common folk, not for the elite.

But this view is the artistic view; the average person is materalistic because, well, he’s a philistine. Everyone can see the value of money. And the value of expensive things – in others’ eyes, even if one doesn’t fully grasp their quality oneself.

People who down-talk money are fools, but people who worry too much about stuff money can buy are foolish too.

I belong to the school ‘things own you.’ If you have any kind of impediment, this is trebly true. Getting rid of stuff is one of life’s great pleasures. Being a pack rat is a character defect I suffer from, and have tried to improve, only semi-successfully over decades. Have done a lot of reading on minimalism and organization – the general rule most of the ‘experts’ cite is that if you don’t use something at least once a year, get rid of it. Sell it, give it away, trash it. That sounds about right.

It’s always good to have lots of money, that’s for sure – particularly if you don’t want to spend it on something. The minute you start liking buying things, there’s no end to it. And you’ll never be satisfied because things are never as good as they seem once you actually get them.

But I really think people are born with the predisposition to really like shopping and buying things vs not caring. I look back over my decades, I don’t remember a single material thing I wanted at any point. I wanted a pet snake. I’ve wanted a lot of different books. Oh wait…I did want something. The only clothes I ever wanted – boa boots and a big leather winter jacket. I got both probably twenty years ago. The boots lived up to my expectations, I really liked how they looked. The jacket – it was nice but it was too heavy. Did nothing but subtract $300 from my account and sit in the closet.

Older I get, the more I get off on getting rid of stuff! It truly is liberating. The ideal I like is few things — and top quality things where that matters, low-priced things where it doesn’t — and as much money as you can save. That way you have maximum freedom – you can afford to travel, buy quality food, help the right people.

Ok…this is just a thought experiment. We’ve accomplished the revolution. We are sovereign – all muds and jews are vanguished, it’s just us whites. Now, I’m never been a fan of eugenics, as it’s particularly intrusive, when carried out by the state. Nevertheless, let’s say it’s a legitimate function to be carried out by The Guardians, the over-group responsible for providing the ultimate ‘shell’ of racial protection, and racial defense is defined so as to include a genetic screening and improvement component.

The reason I have thought about this is because every time I see something on here or traipsing around in public that makes my heart drop, I think, God, if we could just get rid of everybody below that level, I bet it would be like heaven on earth.

So what are your proxies for this-is-where-we-draw-the-line. Here are a few to get started. The idea is, everyone below the average IQ of people

Any chick with cascading star tattoos (I’m biting my tongue and not saying “anyone with a tattoo”)

yes. jews usually use neutral terms or positive terms or deceptive terms, or make them so through repetition. you can do that when you control the media, just as you can do the reverse to your opponents. for ten years i’ve watched about 80% of WN fail to understand this, as they always think moving to a new name will change the stink. well no. the stink doesnt come from the name but from the dung flingers.

the mainstream/vanguard thing is meaningless. i mean you can read theory about reformists/radicals but what really matters is what i have been pushing alone – the need to perceive that conservatives are not our friend, hence not to be praised and mingled with, but our enemies-competitors, and to be attacked as such. our cause must be like the old testament god – jealous. this is part of a greater problem – the inability to perceive the need to be principled in anything. which leads people to abandon positions they intellectually accept when they come across people they personally like who don’t hold them. vital mistake. ive railed about it for years. well my railing wont change anything. only leadership and resulting success will get the awakened to wake up.

as for orgs, our guy chuck pearson put it best years ago with his twist on m. stanton evans (70s conservative, probably still alive): any organization not explicitly excluding jews will in time be taken over by them. (evans said it about liberals). i assume an org is run by jews and pushing jewish agenda until i see proof otherwise.

canadians are known globally as the most submissive of people. sheeplike is the term one normally hears from outsiders who have lived among them.

They do not want to (or do not even know how to) stray from the herd, because to do so is a dangerous and inherently solitary adventure of the spirit. They would rather focus on maximizing the quality of their own lives within the perimeters of the status quo than reflecting and questioning the direction of the whole herd. Because if you set yourself apart from the herd, you risk social outsider status.

If we exterminate termites because they destroy the foundation of our houses, how much more lenient should we be in our treatment of the jews, who destroy the foundations of our society?

It is morbid Christianity and mass-media convention that bid us regard jews and blacks as fellow humans. Once they are properly classified as dangerous animals, all the political problems fade, and the solution to the problems they present becomes apparent.

Funny. I went to school with a distant relative of Romney’s. I published one of his letters mocking one of my opinions. I even recall a phrase, and it surely speaks to their clan’s mindset, which is the opposite of my own. The candidate should ‘not let himself be tied down with rolls of ideological toiletpaper.’

In a democracy, the Romney way works; my way does not. That’s because taking a position turns people against you; the art of democratic politics is attracting as many as you can, and alienating as few. This is mainly done by avoiding specifics, smiling a lot, and letting people read what they want in you. The system rewards the glib liar more than any other type, Bill Clinton being the perfect example. This is one reason why democracy is a terrible system: it rewards and produces a really shitty type of politician: lying, double-talking, no-responsibility taking scum.

prospecting for clients for class-action lawsuits against the makers of virtually every drug out there.

THERE IS NO SAFETY. JUST CALCULATED RISKS.

Because the average man cannot understand that, he falls for the lie that there is. And he pays a multiple of what he should every step of the medical way. In a free market, you could self-diagnose, self-prescribe. And many times this would lead to self-destruction, no doubt. But most times it would lead to a cheaper, better set of transactions than what we see today with socialist healthcare.

Y’all have missed the main point of the selection, which is that christianity is the source of the white man’s racial ills, both north _and_ south. Once you accept spiritual equality you are on the road to political equality. If God is the most important thing, and men are equal in his eyes…well, even the dullest among you can see how that is inevitably going to be used to push political equality. And so it
has. And look where we have ended up. Yet the Southern mind is still caught up in the same old crazy belief system, and that’s why the South is going the way of the Boer, who was also laid low by religious superstition.

Hotze’s words show that christianity is at the heart of why white men can’t come to grips with race and do what needs to be done: the morality they get from their popes and preachers is directly at odds with their visceral reaction to, say, the Jacksonville nigger mob. It doesn’t matter whether we’re northerners demanding immediate manumission of the farm tools, or we’re Southerners quoting the bible to prove
that we are loyally being our dusky brother’s best caretakers; either way the battle has already been lost.

It’s you all crazy Southerners who are keeping the church alive while it’s killing you. The church is already majority non-white. It can survive just fine without you. But can you survive carrying it? You cannot. It’s killing you, and you can’t even see it. Blame Yankees all day long; after the jew, they certainly deserve lots of criticism. It’s the church, though, that has locked you out of doing what needs to be done by calling it ‘immoral.’

new white society: white-man-ism. we are both individual and social beings.

buckley excluded anti-jews, birchers, objectivists, eventually racialists.

destroy public schooling and central banking. get the govt out of money.

just because you realize ZOG’s lying about race and jews doesn’t mean you realize it’s lying about everything else too.

Probably it’s just his insecurity that makes him resist factual correction, but it is certainly interesting that he has a hate on for the only school/man able to get large numbers of angry YOUNG white men into a bloc – Ron Paul.

Intellectual maturation is largely the process of realizing things are a lot more fixed than they seem.

Well i’m sure the poor iraqi slob trying to go to his daughter’s wedding is proud to play a part in upholding your ethnic traditions.

Johnson’s pretense he can separate his attempt to resuscitate fascism from discussions of WWII is parallel in ridiculousness to Jared Taylor’s pretense that he can separate the racial question from the jewish question.

leftist is someone who believes he’s better than everyone who came before him while refusing to recognize the implication, that he’s worse than everyone who comes after him

Let’s worry about muslims right after we stop mexicans. This stinks of a trial balloon. Jews would love to an invasion carveout for their second-worst enemy (and the only one actually fighting them), and it makes sense they’d use an all-American tool like ‘Ryan’ to heave trial balloons for them.

You cannot turn a bush nigger into a human by coaxing it into manpants and opening books at it.

Imagine a state reserved for Whites only. If ZOG created such a reservation, it would be swamped by whites of all persuasion, even if you located it in, say, Wyoming! Catholics, Protestantants, Southerners, Northerners would flock to it. Race is far more real than region or religion. It just burrs your vanity to admit that. Whiteness is the only potentially successful basis from which resistance to the System can be sustained. The System knows that, and that’s why anti-White oppression is legally encoded, whereas Southerners are merely laughed at. You can’t produce a single politician who will defend the Rebel flag in daylight.

The brains and ambition are in the north, not the south. Remember, you all don’t like working for the man, and stamping his time clock.

Such angry young whites as can be found today, and angry young is where the change comes from, are drawn to the principled politics of Paul, which call for the dismantling of Leviathan. He supports your cause indirectly, regardless of the shit he says about MLK and borders, which Romney and Obama and the rest are saying too. But you don’t support him. You Southern “men” draw your very subsistence from ZOG, even while bitching about it? And then you wonder why Southerners are looked down on as clown figures, and not taken seriously. A Northerner could give you the answer, but you wouldn’t listen to it.

You obviously can’t produce a Southern Nationalist movement on your own beyond a couple hundred jew-loving nonagenarians.

Becka Strumpfmeyer of Sheboygan, Wisconsin, is a third grade teacher who voted for ZOG. She is an evil Northerner.

Apu of the Hill People and his pal Stony Shirtlifter fight in wars for ZOG. They are good Southern men.

You see the difference?

Ask any non-white whether Whites exist. You know the answer.

Why not look at where the problem actually comes from, and start the solutions there.

We have a government that takes the side of non-citizens over citizens. That right there is a lot more serious of a thing than people seem to realize.

The left is changing the basic nature of the country in order to ensure a permanent majority. That means the US will become just another brown socialist shithole within a few decades. I think that’s a bad thing. I prefer a decent, law-abiding white middle-class country.

GENERAL NOTES FROM TIME OF BROKEN COMPUTER (WEE MONTHS OF 2012)
The guy who made up the joke was funny. No one after him who repeated it qualifies. At best he has taste / can recognize humor.

New idea: cyntry – not luxuriating in the sweetified sorrow, but straight up truth that the cynical view is right.

– “you’re better than the best, I’m lucky just to linger in your life.” — compare to Haggard.

– occurred to me watching Wayans on Nick at nite, nigs talking to teens – that would be dishonest. it has to be explained to nigs why stealing things is wrong, they aren’t on the White level. that’s why christ-idiots are anti-white and love nigs. not just their dogmatic universalism but because they can have it both ways. They can drag White betters down and lord it over nig inferiors.

– prayer = anorexia of the brain
– the problem with most comedy writing or humor is the writer is afraid to sweat, to try, to go for it. He stays restrained and understated. Mild is the effect produced. Mild, not unpleasant – not even so pronounced a flavor as, say, coffee ice cream.
– Omni wilson omnivorous or omnibus. carnie wilson carnivorous. shooting energy from fingers to ovaries.
– apex creditor
– eharmony irony – someone uniquely right for you, yet it only works for people in the middle of the bell curve
– if you must express yourself externally try this little thing called…clothes. tats are like clothes you can’t ever take off. christ, even chameleons shift gears. and clothes warm you too.

– best ever writer or diff between British and German culture
– the walking stick – fm god’s minimalist period
– live richly, that others may leach
– what would you call a physician who held out on you like that? played games? well, is a body-political disease any less important?
– Snoop Doggerel
– I’ll corruscate your cardboard, Stimpy
– better Adolf Hitler than a filthy Fox lickspittler
– saw Braveheart – better than Jebus, which was basically ‘heart by doubled recipe
– tv gives life: Festivus, dumb blonde evil blond
– a genuinely funny movie should produce inner delight bursts like mental equivalent of a squirt out of a filled candy — none of that w Chris Buckley, he’s the ultimate meh-he it’s all tee-hee stuff – very much the equivalent of Niles Crane writing fiction, you never get angry at how dumb it is as w so much media(?) stuff, it’s more like you’re disappointed you’re not disappionted, which is called resigned. It’s just monolevel shtick, and only a degree and sector different from crime fiction. if you like your humor funny, CFB’s not really your guy.
– ‘lubricious eyeing of slithery parts’ – guy in schlub-supermodel FIAT ad (he was convicted of)
– her entire idea of doing something right was avoiding doing something wrong
– Doestoy in “The Idiot” altho it moves better than others of his works does not repay your 600-page following with enough psych insight – unless you enjoy 19th-century lifetime-equivalent melodrama
– jews call christians cattle (goyim) Christians call themselves sheep. Both agree that christians are livestock.
– parallel to politics – in an article on wedding seating plans it says “separate people who do not get along.” simple, obvious, yet illegal when it comes to infinitely greater problem of racial incompatibility.
– “put family member with a history of squabbles on opposite sides of the dance floor — you’ll be happier for it.”
– “Again, don’t forget about people who don’t get along. If your two college buddies aren’t on speaking terms, now isn’t the time to try to patch things up by seating them at the same table.”
—> separation as key to social success is so important they mention it three times. “A Stress-Free Guide to Seating Plans” Yakima Business Journal (June 2006)

– ear rape – Ron White “no means no” great reusable concept
– how would you apportion the intellectual/political credit for overcoming the jew in Germany?
– diff between communism and capitalism: comm produces 45m dead from famine, capitalism produces 45 varieties of knockoff Mountain dew.
– Southerners remind me of bedraggled, poorly led restaurant staff in Restaurant: Impossible. They need leadership.
– What is being principled but intellectual loyalty. Is intellectual loyalty less important than personal loyalty.
– How did libs justify their case for integration? not by law. rather, they trotted out a sociologist who played with dolls. Contrast with WN. How do they do it? They document racial behavior and IQ differences in tomes with hundreds of footnotes.

– and on the eighth day, god created the nigger, to fill the world with violence and shortened lives, that humans might better appreciate the piquancy and evanescence of life. on the ninth day, god created jews, to sic niggers on humans. on the tenth day god created christians, to accept it all and make apologies for it and worship Him.

Nick Cage. You can’t tell what he’s doing. But you can tell he’s doing it badly.

If you put yourself in the mind of a resentful child, you’ll find where blacks are usually coming from. The tone that animates most of their utterances, particularly wherever something is in racial dispute.

‘racist’ – no one likes niggers, not clear why whites should get blamed for it.

The notion that a dope like you can treat with such profundities makes me spit with contempt Eastwoodian.

usedtobesheababylvUSputnik Penguin101L U
Let’s see if my comment can get out of the gray by answering you with it:

The problem with Girls isn’t that it isn’t written from my experience, or that it’s about a white girl and her white friends. It’s the ridiculous white-washing of Brooklyn. Even though I’m used to it since it’s a common thing to do (I’m looking at you, Friends), it is hella odd and hella telling that white people just write the non-white people who are all over New York – and yes, even in hipsterville Williamsburg (they were actually there first and new white money gave their landlords incentive to displace them) – out of the city. The people walking around New York do not look like the whitewashed fantasy that the people who make tv shows about New York seem to long for.

Yesterday 5:35pm

CatFiveHimmicaneUusedtobesheababylv1L U
so what? that’s your hangup. art doesn’t have to reflect demographics. get over yourself, anyway. whites are more complex and interesting than non-whites. they’re the red meat of the people world. Just now

Most people are too poorly articulated to be treated as individuals.

lolbituaries

Arnold Slantowitz’ directions for NFL/NCAA football camera coverage: when whites drop passes, let the camera linger on them. When they catch passes, particularly TDs, pull the camera off them quickly, back to the huddle or onto something else.

Like all good people, I hate hippies and cops.

Christianity – world’s most successful long con.

Alex Linder · Top Commenter · Pomona College
Wiggety, wiggety wack? Asparagus P is underground, annoying the moles. Vice writers are the kind of ‘men’ who frequent public restrooms with no purpose of micturation; rather they look to the walls in slurpy Michaelsesque anticipation of delicious lickings.

It’s not a matter of replacing christianity with anything. Christianity is something you simply drop, like a bad habit.

I mean, yeah, in a technical sense niggers do all the raping robbing and murdering, but we can’t let that obscure the fact that racists are the real danger.

We Removed Something You Posted: We removed this from Facebook because it violates our Community Standards:

Ridiculous. No one has to be taught to hate niggers, it’s the inevitable result of living around them, whether you’re Asian, White or even Mexican. Racial divisions are natural, and we all know the jews, who own the mass media, side with the blacks destroying our formerly nice, clean, quiet, safe white society.

…an all-encompassing psychological attack on our race to break it down into a mass of confused, scared individuals

UNDERSIMPLIFICATION IS ONE OF THE MAJOR INTELLECTUAL PROBLEMS OF OUR TIMES

LINES: I like musicals for their realism.

kooklaUDoug Barry
So, I was helping my mom do laundry one day and my brother’s girlfriend happened to have some of her stuff tossed in. My heart literally stopped when I pulled a Nickelback T-shirt out of the pile of clothes. I tried to have an intervention with him, but he’s madly in love. 56

minutes ago
CatFiveHimmicane
Man, that’s like the perfect definition of liberal: all-pervading fear of not being cooler than thou. Just now

Liberals sniff at everything common, especially common sense.

Democrats use redistricting by not enforcing borders.

She had the kind of voices that made you feel you were getting a guided personal tour of her sinuses.

christians use “answers” in the same irritating way politicians use “family”

TUNA & PEPPERS PARTY

A rugby scrum is the perfect visual representation of human society.

There’s no such thing as bad neighborhoods or good niggers.

It’s precisely their lack of imagination that leaves women vulnerable to big lies about patriarchy. They can’t see things. They can’t see, say, a stadium, and conceive the conceptions, imagination, and engineering that went into it. It’s just a natural part of things to them.

It was always there. Men had nothing to do with it, they just seized control.

breaking bad: we do things for reasons we dont cant admit to ourselves. good very short title sequence and recaps, much better than dexter, for example. primarily about loyalty. does loyalty mean telling people things – or not telling them? who to tell what – one of life’s greatest challenges.

Political Correctness is the mental form or equivalent of violent crime.

Yankee abolitionists wiped out slavery. Perhaps they can wipe out ZOG too.

If something aint working, you dont do more of it.

Most things you either can’t make out serious quality differences or else functional is good enough.

Three things where there really is a quality difference

– frozen pizza (which I like) vs real pizza
– fresh orange juice vs orange juice from concentrate (huge difference). I dont believe you can buy fresh orange juice in a grocery store, really
– Tempurpedic vs regular bed (only slept on one a couple times, but it was markedly superior to any other mattress I’ve slept on)

Where paying for QUALITY is worth it – this can be the case with clothes. You only pay the high price once, but you get the quality and durability forever. BUT I’m talking about quality and style, not just high prices and fashion. It is very, very easy to byy shoddy, high-priced fashionable goods, perhaps even thinking that you are buying something quality. Quality and price aren’t necessarily related, nor are fashionability and quality related.

People will always judge by the name. It’s the same with everything. They will judge writing by the name of the author, the suit by the name on the lapel

It just occurred to me – worship itself is the quintessentially unWhite form of mentation.

The judaized christians — to be redundant — learned over 1,000 years ago to argue like a jews. They say, always, in arguments against racialists, that if we don’t worship THEIR jebus, we worship OUR blood. But we don’t. No one outside perhaps Creators argues for making a religion out of our race. Our cause is the very opposite of religion,
it’s based on demonstrable, hell, obvious facts, and conclusions that flow to most people from them. Most, not all.

Worship in any form is unWhite. If Whites are identifiable with any position, it’s thinking. Clear thinking. Clear thinking created the world, not belief. Skepticism and daring, not faith. Every last Apricot and slant-eye and Doogieboo Dingman down by under on in the Grubeater tree fame has faith. But only the white race consistently produces individuals capable of clear and effective thought.

And they are envied and hated for it, as you can see daily on the Gawker ring.

Christianity is a delusional death cult that even now has far more non-white members than white members.

Let this cult die among us, the sooner the better.

What happened to German birth rates under a certain personage? They went up. Why? Because Germanic folk naturally gravitate toward the strong, healthy, hearty and virile. And Celtic folk are no different, really. Not in those regards.

Let us get back to producing strong, confident people. We can’t do this in our society with our sicko death cult that makes a fetish of weakness, where we’re always supposed to be apologizing and double-clutching our natural reaction.

We should hate jews. We should hate niggers.

Christianity is a cultural skunk. No one walks away from it without stinking for a couple more generations.

Anti-semitism means not treating jews like the gods they think they are.

The christian mental disturbance precludes the view men are divided into warring, hostile, permanently irreconcilable classes. It is a weary desire for a way out of the biological mess the creature they invented as ‘god’ created – a world in which competing subspecies do not all just get along, they fight until one is permanently driven out of the other’s territory.

It must be something close to the heart of liberalism, this instinctive tropism you cultists have away from blaming the personal actually responsible for the behavior.

The funny thing is, if some girl goes out and drinks 10 vodkas, passes out, and gets raped, you blame rape culture. You won’t hear a word about her putting herself in a bad situation. But this woman did nothing, but, uh, have guns inside her home. Yet you are quick to label her the guilty party.

Naw. The obsession over *finding* these slip-ups is the greatest evidence that the “issue” is driven by folks desperate to find demons, but only finding obscure verbal artefacts.

Well said. What about jerry-rigged? How many whites were murdered today by blacks? Divide 365 into 8500. Leftists, or cultists as they should be called, are more bothered by white words than black behavior.

No such thing as anti-semitism, let alone ‘new.’ Just same old shitty jewish behavior – and opposition to it.

Niggers: they’re called humans by liberals, but they’re more like the stuff that comes out of humans’ back end. FUCK YOU LIBERAL CULTISTS, YOU NATION-WRECKING CUNTS.

oleaginouser than fake butter

The middle of what’s wrong with feminism is the jewish Big Lie that men through the millennia have oppressed women rather than elevated them. The pervading attitude toward men here, and at every other feminist site, is whining ingratitude. Average women can see that the sex that invented the bra and Pap smear (and everything else) are the best thing that ever happened to them.

three things there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between: catholic church/enlightenment, reps and dems, english and irish

self-interview questions
http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=140889

sys subsidizes corn and soybeans. regulation prevents entry. skews landscape to big agra.

This violated Guy Kawasaki’s 10-20-30 rule: 10 slides, 20 minutes, 30-point font.

http://www.scpm.com/bullion.php

Organisation and automatism are the foundations for everything – only if you have that, will the individual quality of your players show in a positive way. I will never underestimate the value of individualism and inspiration – but without a solid system, improvisation is just anarchy. And anarchy can also sometimes bring you a result, sometimes even better than your established schemes, but it cannot be a
long-term solution.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2…view-euro-2012

“But when once raised to an equality, they would become the fast political associates of the North, and acting and voting with them on all questions, and by this political union between them, holding the white race at the south in complete subjection. The blacks, and the profligate whites that might unite with them, would become the principal recipients of federal offices and patronage, and would, in consequence, be raised above the whites of the South in the political and social scale. We would, in a word, change conditions with them – a degradation greater than has ever yet fallen to the lot of a free and enlightened people, and one from which we could not escape, should emancipation take place, (which it certainly will if not prevented), but by fleeing the homes of ourselves and our ancestors, and by abandoning our country to our former slaves, to become the permanent abode of disorder, anarchy, poverty, misery and wretchedness.

With such a prospect before us, the gravest and most solemn question that ever claimed the attention of a people is presented for your consideration: what is to be done to prevent it? It is a question belonging to you to decide.” –John Calhoun

“Religion is a disease born of fear which has been a source of untold misery to the human race.” – Bertrand Russell

You see that in Kevin MacDonald, for instance. On the one hand, wasps and protestants (go listen on VOR) are hyper individualistic, etc, etc… BUT THEN he’ll talk about jews saying they now have what wasps used to have in the u.s., in terms of social groups, etc. Lol, which is it— the evil wasps and all their “irish need not apply signs” and intense clubbiness (as if there are not many sub-groups of them, also,
which don’t agree)… OR they are hyper individualistic and non-communal by nature?) People always want it both ways— depending on what point they are making.

sandusky – having it both ways. fags push age of consent down. sandusky raping 14-year-olds.

This is my only criticism of an otherwise excellent book: the fact that the Supreme Court was able to intervene and outlaw restrictive covenants (and segregation and much else like “disparate impact”) in the first place only shows that John C. Calhoun was even more right than even Kersey has imagined.

This incorrect. If it was completed by judicial intervention, then there never was a voting alliance between Africans and Northern Whites.

In other words no one campaigned and was voted into public office on the promise of ending restrictive covenants, it was done by judicial interpretation and the evidence is very clear regarding who was driving this agenda.

There is an interesting story regarding the brief filed on behalf of the United States government. [Shelley v. Kraemer] It was written by four Jewish lawyers: Philip Elman, Oscar Davis, Hilbert Zarky, and Stanley Silverberg. However, the Solicitor General’s office chose to omit their names from the brief. The principal assistant to the Solicitor General, Arnold Raum, who was also Jewish, stated that it was “bad enough that Perlman’s name has to be there, to have one Jew’s name on it, but you have also put four more Jewish names on. That makes it look as if a bunch of Jewish lawyers in the Department of Justice put this out.”[2]

“Shelley v. Kraemer (334 U.S. 1 (1948)): This case, a landmark in civil rights litigation, established the right of all citizens to own property regardless of race and thereby invalidated the racially restrictive covenants that had historically prevented non-white people from living in certain areas. In its first amicus curiae brief ever, ADL successfully argued that restrictive covenants and the segregated communities they promoted were unconstitutional and violated the Fourteenth Amendment. ”

http://www.adl.org/civil_rights/ab/civil_L.asp

churchill on jews
http://www.mosaisk.com/revolution/Wi…Bolshevism.php

http://ex-army.blogspot.ie/2012/06/w…e-part-ii.html
hoppe on health insurance
http://media.mises.org/mp3/MU2009/MU…07-29-2009.mp3

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti…ath-squad.html

refuting out of africa
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperIn…?paperID=19566
WN AND CHRIST-INSANITY
True, but not the meaning most self-labeled “Christians” usually intend. The only true meaning of life, according to Christ’s teachings, is to serve God. Full stop. The only “collective needs” that a real Christian is commanded to subordinate their “selfish individual desires” for are Godly ones.

no college
http://www.cracked.com/article_19248…-world_p2.html

cleopatra
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-SaQyRxT9TQ…s-for-2011.jpg

http://www.cracked.com/article_19384…ontrol_p2.html

How bad do you wanna be a Delta? Would you walk on broken glass? Let the shards tear into your Achilles tendon…causing acute achondroplasia… which could lead to non-congenital dwarfism as you got older?

2. I believe the “organizational framework” we need requires what the National Democratic Party of Germany calls the “three tiers” of cultural, community, and political activism. I also believe that these forms of activism require a variety of organizational structures, which David Ronfeldt categorizes as tribes, institutions, markets, and networks, and that these structures should work with each other
rather than against each other.

Cultural, community, and political activism can support and interpenetrate each other in such a way as to create resilient and expansive networks.

“The jews belong to a dark and repulsive force. One knows not how numerous the clique is, how they stick together, and what power they exercise through their unions. They are a nation of rascals and deceivers”. –CICERO

MONEY OVER LOYALTY MEME (as seen on tv)

Ten lousy bucks can’t replace Jill.
How about twenty?
Jill who?

SITCOM SEMITIC CYNICISM: SEX AND MONEY DRIVES UNDERLIE ALL EXPRESSED MOTIVES
Surrogate won’t compromise her morals until offered an extra 10k. wont do it for 5k will for 10k.
I’d say it’s not going to work…for Sandra and Wayne! Congratulations, you’re having a baby!

PatrickUSamer Kalaf1L U
The problem with Clowney is he isn’t that intelligent. Nothing to do with him being black, but his grades and SAT test were way below admitting standards until he got tutors… In fact, he would have qualified for the special olympics. South Carolina had to dumb down their defensive schemes because Clowney couldn’t understand them and offenses around the SEC knew this.

IGotABlueberryForADaughterUSara Benincasa181L U
Was I the only one that thought the answer to the first question was a bit condescending? I don’t know anything about Reiki, & maybe it’s complete hooey, but it sounds like the one asking for help has found a personal benefit from their mentor. I don’t disagree with the point

– (she can hang out with whomever, but you don’t have to get along with all of her friends, etc.) but it just seemed judgmental. Then

again, I’ve had a rough day and it’s quite possible I read a tone into it that wasn’t there at all. Yesterday 7:24pm

wazza1UIGotABlueberryForADaughter91L U
I picked up on that as well and my day has been just fine. Yesterday 7:26pm

IGotABlueberryForADaughterUwazza111L U
Okay, glad to hear it wasn’t just me. The second question was so great about supporting the choices of the BFF in question, but the first one likened her choices to complete malarkey. Yesterday 7:28pm

Turns out, you get fewer offers when you sell the package as is, but the people who do make offers? Are pretty excited about it.

FlamesOnTheSideOfMyFaceUTom Scocca481L U
Thank you. I have a friend who was a day player on The Cosby Show playing a teenage friend of one of the kids. She told me firsthand how Bill Cosby made advances towards her, and how creepy he was onset. Apparently it was well known that he would go after the young female guest actors. I have always considered him a creep and have always been impressed by the swift efficiency of his PR machine. Tuesday 4:09pm

SimuLordUHobbesBattery1L U
I work in downtown Seattle and spend most of my off hours there. I sleep in Kent, mainly because the rent in Seattle is absurd.

The parts of 4th I specifically had in mind were the Westlake Center plaza (which was the subject of “Operation Happy Holidays” last November and which I’ve repeatedly been accosted in by people trying to sell me drugs and/or hit me up for drug money), the stretch in front of the library (where the homeless congregate, especially when it rains), and the shitshow between James St. and King St. Station (there’s a bridge there under which the homeless who can’t get into the Union Gospel Mission for the night end up sleeping. How do I know that? Back before I got most of my sense of compassion beaten out of me, I used to volunteer, helping out in and around Pioneer Square.)

Yeah, Third Avenue is far worse (and the less said about the neighborhood around 2nd and Pike, the better—-great teriyaki at Osaka, terrible fucking people outside.) The parade was on Fourth, so I chose to focus my attention on Fourth. You don’t hit an indisputably nice area at the north end of downtown until you get to Fifth.

(and as to my travel bona fides? I grew up in Boston and was actually homeless there for three months during the recession. In just the past two years I’ve lived in Boston, Knoxville, Lexington, Sacramento, and Seattle. I went to college in Reno, and I’ve spent more than my fair share of time in New York, Cleveland, and Chicago. Seattle’s homeless are a particularly nasty strain, emboldened by the “compassion” that allows them to outright shake people down with no fear of reprisal by either Florida-style street justice or Los Angeles-level police brutality. Only place I’ve ever been with a nastier underbelly is Washington, DC (my least favorite city on Earth.) Wednesday 9:47pm

Yeah. I lived on 2nd and Washington for three years. I walked around at night all the time and never felt afraid (i am a big guy, though). a lot of those people aren’t victims of capitalism, though some are victims of a failing VA. most are DRUG addicts who chose drugs. The difference is that “black men” of the NFL worked their fucking asses off to get into the NFL. Seattle doesn’t have an issue with “black men,” it has a problem with Eritrean gang violence and heroin addicts vomiting and pissing all over the street of what would be nice neighborhoods, otherwise. Wednesday 11:37pm

RooriaUkookla21L U
My husband brought home a shelter cat about 18mos. ago. A tabby. He was a kitten then but you could tell by the paws he was going to be a big guy and he is. Weighed in at 23lbs. last month when I took him to the vet. We sometimes have to wipe his butt for him, he needs his anal glands expressed regularly, and he has trouble bathing himself. We came home that day with a bag of diet food and instructions to feed him twice a day a specific amount and he’s now down to 21lbs. Hopefully, when he gets down to 15lbs. he’ll learn to manage his own hygiene.

Friday 5:22pm

Q: Jim Caldwell’s coaching resume.

2013 Ravens Offense: 29th in yards, 25th in scoring.

Record as college head coach: 26-63.

NFL Head Coaching Record without Peyton Manning: 2-14.

Pulse: questionable.

Ladies and Gentlemen, your 2014 Detroit Lions!!!
—Noah Kaufman, Kalamazoo, Michigan

SG: I mean … you could always gamble against Jim Caldwell, right?

s3rp3ntsUNeetzan Zimmerman171L U
Been there; done that.

Originally from Alabama, granddaughter of a family farmer… Me and granddad used to sit on the porch and watch the storms roll in. It amazes me to this day how many people just don’t know to get the hell in out of what is clearly an approaching lightning storm. You can smell it, for the love of all that’s holy.

That’s what got me moving during the Tibetan Freedom Concert: I could smell the storm coming. I was in an exit immediately prior to the young lady getting struck by lightning, yelling at my idiot friends who’d decided to stay. Literally in the middle of a sentence like, “Y’all ain’t gonna be satisfied til someone gets struck,” which was my grandmother’s famous last phrase before she’d leave me and Granddad on the porch, in the metal glider. Sure enough…

And nothing smells like a close-by lightning strike, either. Like… the cleanest, silvery-est air you’ve ever tasted. Tangy and sharp, like a stainless steel knife. Yesterday 1:50pm

“…The German Jews fed themselves on false hope, overlooked reality, dreamed of cosmopolitanism, of the time of Lessing and Mendelssohn.

And this expressed itself in two ways; either they became Liberals, or they became the standard-bearers of Socialism. Both fields of activity furnished new food to anti-Semitism. “In all good faith, to serve themselves and humanity, the Jews began to reach actively into the life of the German people. We trusted to the rights of democracy, and felt ouselves as equal citizens of the State, posed as censors, poured satire upon the Germans, considered ourselves as prophets, made revolutions, gave to the international proletariat a second Bible…The Jew Lasalle organized the masses. The Jew Edward Bernstein popularized the Marxian ideology; and the Jews Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg brought the Spartacist movement to life.

In Bavaria the Jew Kurt Eisner seized power. Against all this the German nation rebelled. She wanted to forge her own destiny and determine the future of her own children. Can we blame her?…” pg.189-190 EUROPEAN JUNGLE by Yeats-Brown.

“There is a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity, maybe it’s a kind of lack of generosity towards non-Jews. I mean, there’s always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere; even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason.”- Roald Dahl

Yockey (who died in 1960) had the essence of the American Empire already figured out in 1949:

http://www.counter-currents.com/2010…yockey-part-2/

The instruments of this assault and the weapons of propaganda, press, radio, cinema, stage, education. These weapons are controlled at this moment in Europe almost entirely by the forces of Culture-disease and social degeneration.

The “chief fount” is Hollywood, which “spews forth an endless series of perverted films to debase and degenerate the youth of Europe” after having successfully destroyed the youth of America.

The message of Hollywood is the total, significance of the isolated individual, stateless and rootless, outside of society and family, whose life is the pursuit of money and erotic pleasure. It is not the normal and healthy love of man and wife bound together by many children that Hollywood preaches, but a diseased erotic-for-its-own sake, the sexual love of two grains of human sand, superficial and impermanent. Before this highest of all Hollywood’s values everything else must stand aside: marriage, honor, duty, patriotism, sternness dedication to self to a higher aim. This ghastly distortion of sexual life has created the erotomaia that obsesses millions of victims in America, and which has now been brought to the Mother-soil of Europe by the American invasion.

Hollywood-feminism has created a woman who is no longer a woman but cannot be a man, and a man who is devirilized into an indeterminate thing. The name given to this process is “the setting from” of woman and it is done in the name of “happiness,” the magic word of the liberal-communist-democratic doctrine.

Just to the west of Palm Beach is the last American frontier: the Everglades. By 1900, this country’s wild west had been tamed. There were maps of the prairies, the mountains, and the rivers; the Indians had been either destroyed or shoved into reservations. In 1898, Florida’s “outback” was still unmapped; the Seminoles continued to raid the coastal settlements. (They did not sign a final peace treaty with the federal government until well into the twentieth century.) During the last years of the 1800s it was safe to travel anywhere in the United States with the exception of central South Florida… (“Cat Five, by Robert P. Davis, 1977)

You’re misreading that. They’re not “comfortable with themselves”. They’re too fucking stupid to realize what they’re doing is unhealthy.

These are the same people who’ll smoke a pack a day and leech off the disability system when they’re suffering from COPD and diabetes in their 40s.

These people are ignorant, mouth-breathing, inbred morons. This is the white Southern version of a minstrel show.

I live in Chesterfield and enjoy everything it has to offer.

lib mentality
You Mincing NinnyUTaylor Berman51L U
I used to be way more of a beer snob than I am now. Frankly it’s embarrassing to remember the way I used to be. I’d be drinking these super-dark, mega-flavored Euro-style microbrewery beers. Nevermind that I’d get a headache after the first one; I had *cred* darn it.

weddings/wedding mentality
msfriendlyUCallie Beusman51L U
The only thing more embarrassing than this Ani DiFranco thing is the fact that there are LOADS of event venues (in Georgia at least) that aren’t plantations, but they put “Plantation” in the name in order to get people to get married/host an event there. My cousin had an old barn and extra pond on his property and was hiring it out for weddings. No takers. He changed the name to _____ Plantation, and now people
come from all over the state for “plantation weddings.” The fact that this is a thing is HORRIFYING to me.

MysticlightsUSmarcus41L U
Warwick, East Providence, Johnston, Smithfield, East Greenwich, Cranston, Pawtucket … the worst provincial racist attitudes I’ve seen in New England. It’s like stepping back 30 years in time with lots of tanning, fake hair, fake nails, Juicy Couture sweatpants on anyone 16-60 and gold jewelry. And really, really bad accents.

RhodeIslandClamChowderUSmarcus21L U
It’s just like how CT and MA have weird, backwoods, extra-intolerant, extra-ignorant pockets, usually further away from cities/population centers. I think the further you get from the coast – especially in RI – the more likely you are to be disappointed by the people.

Electra Glide in Blue (1973) – robert blake. “incompetence is the worst form of corruption”

This screenplay follow the two best rules for writing believable dialogue: “People only want what they want” and “Nobody listens to each other”.

To glimpse Salon’s preoccupation with “calling out” white racism, google(site:salon.com racism) or (site:salon.com white males), where you can select from many fine titles such as :

[found on guardian]
A little story regarding this: I live in Germany and I wanted to take my four-year-old to an animal shelter to have him pet the cats there, since I am allergic and we can’t have one. It turned out you need to do a three day course to get a certificate for yourself and your kid before you are allowed to pet the animals.

propaganda offence (britain, frank ellis)

It certainly used to. According to Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Hannah Arendt once reportedly said something along the lines of, “One of the greatest advantages of the totalitarian elites of the twenties and thirties was to turn any statement of fact into a question of motive.”

Any public figure, particularly one in Hollywood, who reveals themselves to be a conservative or a conservative sympathizer should be ostracized and lose his or her livelihood. Vaughn is no exception. The notion of not punishing people because of their objectionable views (or tolerance of objectionable views) is malarkey. These people must be sniffed out and made to pay for their wrong-thinking beliefs.

my skeptic tank is overflowing with your bullshit!

JimP says:
July 28, 2012 at 1:39 am

“Why shouldn’t I hate the damnyankee?”

Because he pays your salary, by your own words. You “hate” the damnyankee so much you serve his war machine, voluntarily, and purely out of self-interest. You don’t even agree with what he’s doing! That makes you, by anyone’s definition, an unprincipled man, and, in common parlance, a sellout. You’re even worse than the Germans and Irish you whine about because many of them actually did believe they were doing the right thing. They weren’t just in it for money. But hey, what are the Iraqis’ rights to be left alone next to Stoney’s paycheck?

The damnyankee and his dogboy shirtlifter are doing exactly the same thing in Iraq/Afghanistan that Stonelifter cries endlessly about when it’s done to the South. What we know from his admitted behavior is that his complaints aren’t principled. His only objection to damnyankee moralistic-warmongering was that it was visited on his people. He has no problems with damnyankee doing same thing to other people. In
fact, he’s the first guy in line to sign up to help them.

This sort of head-twirling hypocrisy, which is pretty much ubiquitous in the “oh, we just like to fight; we’s fahtin’ men, we is” South that is one reason people outside the region find Southerners more than faintly ridiculous.

I apply the ancient criminal law maxim to politics, namely, that people intend the ordinary and probable consequences of their actions.

Saint Reagan signed MLK day into law and gave amnesty to over a million illegal Mexicans.

George Roland Wills Well, the Anglo-Saxon yankees can not stand the Celtic Southerners… and they never could. Celts are most hospitable, they scream when they go into battle, they are a slower, more deliberate type of people, and they enjoy quality over quantity… and they suffer from none of the ‘pelf’ of the Anglo-Saxon coupon clippers!

 

By Alex Linder

Immigrant Song is practically a WN anthem. From the land of ice and snow. That’s us, man. Hammer of the Gods, Alex. That’s what we were once, and can be again.

Yeah…I guess it’s my hatred of cold weather, that Viking shit depresses me. Christ, even April sucks now. I’ve quit worrying about it, and had a great winter getting-shit-done-wise, but still…my preference is entirely for light-warm-peppy summery stuff…not like the stuff we’re talking about isn’t deep or powerful or cold enough. I guess I also don’t see Vikings as all that great, as some do. They are a true representation of the white spirit, but I prefer its other forms.

Last night I was thinking about the spectrum of whites.

Without prejudice, our gross division’s into two poles:

– (Southern-Midwestern) (religious) conservatives…they don’t like change. They’re comfortable with who they are and how they live.

– (Northern-Coastal) (hipster) leftists…always concerned to be cooler-than-thou, always looking to be on the pushing edge of the next new things. They love change, they’re interested in ideas, they generate lots of new practices and thoughts.

Leftism mutates so often that it’s not inconceivable it becomes pro-white, if in part and in quiet. The jews are there to make sure that doesn’t happen on any major scale. But if the the cutting edge of northern bourgeois thinking is toward something like minimalism, it has to occur to some people to apply that mindset to politics, not just to personal life. And that leads where we are. They probably won’t act on this, most of them, but I bet plenty of them will have an epiphany in that direction.

You see how I’m thinking…on one hand you have the Southerners, who represent a base for our political pyramid. But they are comparatively few, comparatively inert/unintellectual. They are to do battle with people who are highly energetic and intellectual and numerically dominant. How must that work out?

So we need to get into the northern types, but get them thinking the way we do, or at least desiring the same ends. Because they won’t want to live like Southerners or religious conservatives – I certainly don’t. But if they can be brought to agree on ends, that’s enough. After all, many of their desiderata are more easily achieved in an all-white society than any other. As their actual living behavior clearly attests, since they clump in white San Francisco or whitest Portland. Perhaps they can be brought to see that whiteness is a necessary concomitant of their preferred lifestyles.

All-white society is:

– cleaner
– neater
– more interesting (LCD is higher)
– more intellectual
– quieter
– better for environment
– better for animals
– less taxing on resources (water, power, air)
– better for women
– better for the poor
– better for the entire left-half of the bell curve generally
– fewer unwanted children, fewer abortions, fewer people
– diversity – an extraordinarily advanced race isn’t blended back to mediocrity
– science – evolution is progressing faster than ever in history; racialism is thus on the right side of science and history

Whiteness is not the evil thing the left presents it as but a concomitant and cause of the very things illiberals claim to desire and want to protect. Whiteness is a proxy for pretty much their entire agenda. Even their anti-whitism can be seen as an unfortunate distortion of their desire to steward the natural world. Some of them have been driven insane by their unfortunate religion, so much so that they have taken leave of their sense organs in preference for a world that can only in their heads. They expend much energy in forcing the rest of us to comply with their impossible vision.

Just look at all the leftist stuff, and how compatible it is with our case! Yet you never see what in the software world are called drivers written for white nationalism to hook into leftist causes such as animal welfare. These drivers should be there! Connect leftist agenda items with the white racial cause in an explicit way. Write out the case more from the leftist starting point, with race seeming to be an afterthought – something the writer noticed without even intending it, so ‘organic’ and ‘natural’ was the connection. “Hey, didja ever notice that if you save this one species, then all this other good stuff comes along in train…?”

With conservatism, how can it not be based in blood? How can you be all about preserving traditions, but ignore the race that produced them? It makes no sense. It is why the jews are so hot to create false narratives of U.S. history and pass them as conservative, through the usual sellout channels. America was never a nation of open immigration from all points on the compass, though that is the Big Lie the jews try to sell through their tools like Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the Fox crowd. Racialists must attack these lies about race and immigration with a vengeance, savagely mocking them as not merely obvious lies, but pathetic and genocidally stupid ones. Even the dimbulbs who go to mass and worship and snake-shaking hour can see the leftists are maleficient. But they can’t make out that they are being lied to by the professional right. That is where racialists alone can supply the truth. The left, after all, has much to gain from a professional/misled right that has given in/doesn’t understand the necessary connection between conservatism and race. The professional right has successfully misled the average white conservative into believing that race-free individualism is a conservative policy rather than a wacky and extremely dangerous form of extremism. “All we want for whites in America is what jews demand for jews in Israel.” Harp on that theme, we should.

Conservatism severed from racialism makes no intellectual sense whatsoever. The People feel this, but they can’t articulate and defend it because they aren’t intellectual. And their leaders are purchased by jews. Read this article about the neoconning and anti-whiteism of a fresh clown appointed to lead the Virginia GOP, for a good example of where Republicans have been heading since 1975.

So that’s where the organized ‘conservative’ party is headed. It’s only a bad thing because there is no White Party to say “Awesome…more beer for us!” But the dopey religious, anti-intellectual, slow-witted, slow-moving Southerners/Midwesterners will simply go along with it.

Letists aren’t as dumb as religious conservatives, nor as easily cowed. Their cowardice level is much lower, and their knowledge of and interest in and ability to generate new ideas is much higher. They are mentally quicker and more flexible. They are also capable of much higher levels of fanaticism. That is important. They can be dedicated to minority positions and not yield them under great ridicule. That’s a valuable character trait. After all, they triumphed from a minority position.

Flesh queers may be disgusting and literally dangerous to species health, but they are spiritually tougher, today, than the spiritual queers who are the christians and the conservatives. So the little Buchanans can write about degeneracy in the West contrasted with Russia, but…from where I sit, these religious conservatives are spiritually degenerate. They won’t fight. They don’t think. Any fool can believe in the bible. It takes no brains or ability, it’s popular with lots of simpletons, so you have the safety of numbers. Where is the conservative who will go against social pressure? Show me him. All you ever get from conservatives is cringing and withdrawing. Cowardly Imnotsees, they are. Moral courage is unheard of among them. Conservatives fear negative media treatment, so they are afraid to walk around with big, goofy, scared smiles on their shifty-eyed mugs. They don’t get treated any better for their cowardly circumspection, but they make it another day without the media focusing the gotcha spotlight on their evil hidden racism, homophobia or whatever the witchery du jour the illibs are chasing. Conservatives are the beaten wives of the political system. They’re afraid to stand up for themselves, which in political terms would mean forthrightly acknowledging and defending white racial interests. Since they can’t do what would be of greatest benefit to their supporters because the media will destroy them for that particular advocacy, professional conservatives content themselves with tinkering with bloodless taxes and careerism. They tell themselves they are being realistic. Didn’t as august and undeniable a con as Russell Kirk preach prudence as the highest value? It’s ok then that their people and country be destroyed, so long as they have a good career and make lots of money and enjoy public respect.

Concern for animal welfare, eating locally, eating fresh healthy food, avoiding processed food, being careful about what goes in your body – these are more associated with left than right, though there’s no inherent reason for that. Being ethically responsible (even if you get it White-wrong, feeling that it is important to live ethically), living by rules for a purpose, actively considering every aspect of life – these ideas or ideals are stronger in the north than in the South. The Southerner feels no need for consistency. He acts one way Saturday night at the bar and another way Sunday morning in church, and thinks nothing of it. It’s not that the north is a lot better or different from the South, it’s that it’s marginally, somewhat better and different. It has more better men and better better men than the South, I would say.

Is it not self evident the north contains a larger pool of white men capable of fanatical, purpose-driven commitment, informed by comparatively high intellectual values and unwillingness to yield to social pressure? If so, then we should work harder on turning these into the service of the racial cause, and give up pipe dreams about creating serious political change out of the milieu of the Southern Baptists.

Eugenics came out of the left, or at least eugenics was early seized on by it. After all, what’s better for people than…better people? Pretty direct way of solving a lot of the problems in the seed rather than plucking the weeds.

Racialism is hardly at odds with the planned society and the purpose-driven life, in which everything the liver does is thought through. While selling our cause to all who listen, whitists should be adopting successful outlooks and practices from the left, as these — atheism, concern over food’s production values, environmentalism generally — aren’t inherently leftist, they’re just sensible or rational for all. Best practices/personal (minimalism) + best practices/political = healthy society. In many ways, racialism is personal minimalism on a societal scale.

Trying to sell our cause to people who are more or less cattle, like the Southern religious man, is useless. Those people will be with us, if we ever lead. Until then, they will continue to serve our enemy as cannon fodder. The best thing whitists can do for the midwestern/Southern religious conservatives is to encourage them to keep their children out of the military. Withholding consent is something passive yet effective which our cause has failed to do. Here again we see the danger in mixing with professional conservatism, which celebrates the brainless military fodder as ‘heroes,’ when in fact they should be derided as tools. Everywhere among overt racialists you find Southerners who think that “we’re fighting men” is a perfectly fine explanation for Southern proclivity to serve in the military of its enemy. It’s another example of the unfelt need for consistency characteristic of Southern mentation. Bitch about the yankees, but join their army. Get angry when this contradiction is pointed out. This is a real problem. But it is not felt to be a problem by Southerners themselves. They’re simply not in the game, except as tools. That must be taken into account by racialist leaders. The people who are in the game as more than tools, as real men, as agenda setters, are northerners. More focus on them might pay off for racialism.

And as for going after these northerners, it’s not a matter of respectability, as dimwitted Ph.D.s and other professionals always think. We want fanatics, not when-does-supper-start? how-my-stocks-doing philistines. Leftism is full of fanatics. Many of them smart. Many are active. Even if some of their activity tends to be sticking their dicks into other men, or liberating ferrets.

This is why I’ve posted/talked on the minimalists lately. If you read through their short essays at the link above, and observe their wholesale personal changes (body, mind and career), you see how rapidly leftists, or northern whites more generally, can switch course. Southerners don’t do this nearly as much, indeed they’re proud of their inflexibility-which-resembles-principledness-but-ain’t.

I think we do well as a cause not just to focus on the physical crime, but at same time emphasize how much cleaner, nicer, better organized Whiteland would be than neo-Nigeria we’re building here. We should focus on how fat and disgusting and dirty niggers are, not just their crime. Focus on them as a source of visual and aural as well as environmental pollution. Leftists hate pollution. Not saying we shouldn’t talk about hush crimes — we should and do emphasize them — I’m saying they should not be all we talk about.

Because WN has been led by intellectually limited religious conservatives, or, more accurately, by those appealing to them, it has never been able to get beyond the bugbear of respectability. But appealing to selfish bourgeois, no matter how smart or rich they are, doesn’t work. It’s not me saying this either, it’s men who’ve actually done it – Hitler and Michaloliakos, to name two. It’s not just Southerners who don’t understand this. MacDonald and Johnson don’t either.

The character traits of the men we need for our cause to win are the same in all times and places: they must be tough, mentally and physically, they must be fanatical and determined. Their respectability doesn’t matter, their loyalty does. Their being christian doesn’t matter (on the upside), their fanatical determination does.

All the South will ever do is take abuse while hoping and praying its enemies ease up or crack up. The South is congenitally incapable of initiating effective action. Hell, I’ve even lost interest in bashing it. The South just doesn’t figure in anything, except as a small pond. We should worry much more about the big pond.

We need to fish where the fish are, and they’re not in Southern Baptist pools. The only serious political effort we need re the South is a campaign to get Southern white men to stay out of the military. It is so classically Southern to complain about ZOG and damnyankees yet serve in their army. And it is equally classically Southern — anti-intellectual — to be bewildered when this contradiction is raised. I really believe the concept of living intentionally, and acting in line with chosen principles, is simply beyond Southerners. It’s all about manners and appearances, down there. Say the right thing in public, do the dirty thing in private. Ninety percent of Southerners are like that, compared with only about 80% of northerners.

Anyway, these are my thoughts. There I go again South-bashing, right? Maybe so. But just tell me where I’m wrong junior, cuz I don’t give a flying fuck about anything else.

The reason I got onto this theme was the music. It needs to back up what I’m saying above. That tired old draggy shit doesn’t cut it. Do you understand that our cause is not conservative? We need dynamism, not backward-looking lugubriousness. We need speed, power, fearlessness, principledness – yet tactical flexibility (think intellectual form of blitzkrieg), we need fanaticism, fanatical dedication, imperviousness to social pressure.

Anything that ties WN to conservatism is the opposite of what we need. Anything that smacks of that dreary lugubriousness one associate with the church of losers, no no no, a thousand times no. Maudlin, self-pitying, look-at-me-on-da-cross, that pathetic stuff has to go. High spirits. Confidence. Faith in purpose and mission. Dedication. Fearlessness. Highest intellectual and phsyical ability. In one word? Strength and commitment. Well, that’s two words. The music has to reflect good stuff – vibrancy, energy, power, sheer awesomeness. The dynamic change we need comes from the young – it’s their future. Old people live the same in any system, pretty much. It’s the young and trying who feel the brunt of the screwed future.

All these things need to be taken into consideration, just as jews do when they prepare propaganda for younger whites.

P.S. It’s not just that leftism can be compatible in many of its particular lifestyle ends, with white racialism, but that in practical terms, conservatism isn’t incompatible with anti-whiteism. The jews have given the preacher set incentive to promote race-mixing. The preachers, being catfish of god, rose to the stinkbait. The Southerners, being intellectually inert, evince no more than a vague discomfort, as a cow reacts to a man entering a field, that they’re being preached something racially destructive. They don’t leave the church. They keep putting money in its coffers. Parallel to the way they keep joining the military. That’s what they’ve always done. It hasn’t worked in the past, so they have every reason to expect it will keep on not working in the future. If it’s effective, it ain’t Southern. Losing is their tradition, and they’re nothing if not traditional. Need I spell out the dangers of this mindset to radical racial politics?

I mean, is this type not hopeless? Without outside leadership? I don’t see how you can conclude otherwise. The northern post-Puritan liberals are much harder to control because they’re smarter, more fanatical and quicker moving than the religious conservatives. They may be fewer in numbers, but they are dominant. Conservatives have no proven success strategy than to withdraw.

THEY CAN’T WIN WHEN THEY’RE THE NINETY PERCENT MAJORITY.

That should make your head explode, that we who want serious change are supposed to treat them and their ideas and politics with respect. They suffer endless abuse in the media, and pay heavy taxes for the small space of control they get – educating their kids at home, basically.

The bottom line here is that the character type we need to win is found with much greater frequency among puritanical liberals than religious conservatives. If I take one of the (two) minimalists and explain our cause to him, I know he will get it almost immediately. He won’t go along, of course. He’s got a good personal thing going, and doesn’t want to disrail it. He’s not going to make racial minimalism his bliss to pursue. But he will apprehend within seconds what I’m talking about, and indeed if he’s thought about politics at all has probably already concluded roughly the same as what I’ve outlined above himself. He might not join us, but he wouldn’t get in our way if we were taking power. And he might join us if we got something going. The NS had clubs for all sectors of society – sexes, occupations, hobbies, etc.

All whites should join the religious cause. The rightist religious types need to get past their fears of being immoral; the leftists need to get past their fears of being uncool.

If I talk to a religious man in flyover (not just in the South, but anywhere in the middle), unlike the minimalist he may even agree with me – but he is afraid to do anything immoral. He is, to use the correct word: hagridden. He can’t overcome the ghosts in mind set loose by priests. His biological inability to overcome his need to submit to authority is too strong.

These are thoughts about our white political situation, and I will spring fresh columns as fresh ideas occur to me, or as I come across instructive examples.//

By Alex Linder

Joe_Smith wrote:
Again, call me a commie all you want, but you’re the one who wants to eradicate a very relevant element of Western tradition and history. The irony is that East Germany was more homogenous, normal, community oriented, and moral under an ideology literally invented for the purpose of destroying the white race, than it is today under occupation from the combination of liberalism and Judaism called America. I can tell you this because I know East Germans who lived under both systems very well.

The jews established their dictatorship through terror, and their fearfulness kept that terror in place for decades. Which had the unintentioned consequence of not filling their lands with Third Worlders. Which turned out to be good for Whites, ironically. Yet no one points to East Germany or Russia as a success story. The latter, at least, no matter what WN falsely imagine, is full of abortions and drunkenness. Russia will have to work hard to overcome the Muslim demographics in the surrounding half-white nations. It’s not like it’s some great success story that we want to emulate, it’s mostly a failure and a tragedy. Russian’s unfortunate christian heritage left it unable to cope with a tiny revolutionary jewish minority which, after taking power, subjected the people to the worst terror in white history.

Like it or not, no matter what system you live in, someone’s going to be bossing everyone around. My view is to come to a consensus and decide who it will be, while yours is to leave it up to a Wheel Of Fortune spin.

That’s a misstatement of my proposed solution. Just be honest: you want to live not in a racial authoritarian state but in a racial totalitarian state, in which white men are treated like ants. I don’t.

So Jews can win over cultural marxist nuns to support abortion, homosexuality, etc that Francis recently cracked down on, yet we can’t work with factions like the St Pius X people?

Can you? In practice, no. Because the Greek Orthodox church is decentralized, you can find a few churchmen here and there who will work with you. I’m not against that – informally. The minute any kind of concession is made to church doctrine the racial stuff goes by the boards. That is a mistake.

The way to do it is make racialism strong. Since racialists favor social normality, any group that desires that normality will be forced to join racialists – if they are the only group that can provide it. It’s a political mistake to act like the church is capable of defending the society it wants; rather, racialists should be doing the opposite – pointing out just how weak it is. The church loses as a ninety-percent majority!
It’s wrong to cater to some institution you can’t compel to respect you, as Parrott and Heimbach should learn. White racialists should build up their forces until, like the jews, the church is forced to respect and afraid to go against them.

Like it or not, most whites have at least a respect for Jesus. I’d prefer these people read Mein Kampf or the Bhagavad Gita, but what are we going to do about it?

We take power. The question is whether we can do that working with or through the church. I say no. Once we have power, most of these christians will say they always privately respected Hitler and had their doubts about ‘the’ ‘holocaust’ and were sick of hearing about it. That’s how whites are. Not many heroes among them.

I have never advocated destroying christianity. I don’t believe it can be destroyed. I do suspect it can be superseded. We can help it die out by offering something better – which is a race-specific doctrine of strength, as embodied, by, say, Marines or SS or any other elite military unit, who are seen by the public and publicly acknoweledge themselves as serving their race. The idea that one’s kind is most important is what can and must replace race-free universalism. Is this not self-evident? What will not work is simply burning down churches or murdering priests, as the sicko cult of sadomasochism thrives on oppression. To defeat christianity, you simply treat it with scorn – with mocking and facts rather than physical abuse and legal discrimination. Just keep the church out of racial politics, point out its lies, continually mock it for its disgusting ideals – identify it as the Church of Weakness — and continually lay before average people something undeniably better – just as science did in the 19th century. Then you will have your victory, later or sooner.

Christian churches are simply a way for the left half of the bell curve to feel like it’s on a winning team. Race offers all whites a home, and a good one, not a spurious one. But never should race be used to drag down the strong and capable to the level of the EBT defectives, which is what christianity attempts to do. Race mustn’t subsidize genetic or behavioral defectives in any way, shape or form. A national community will mean something different in America than in Germany, where the people are more closely related, and that’s why my solution isn’t national socialism but white-man-ism. It’s tough where it needs to be tough – on race – and its flexible where it can be flexible – the individual stuff. But of course everything works in theory, and as one who grew up reading the conservatives, I know the inevitability and danger of unintended consequences. So I read what the smartest whites out there are saying about what is possible, and I study how they put it into practice. This thoughtful thinking comes at least as much from the folks you despise as libertarians as from racialists. I notice that where financial stuff is concerned, you prefer to avoid debate at the level of ideas, and stick to bandying categories. Yet money control is at least as important as media control in defining the conditions of white lives. The fact that a white controls the counterfeiting machine doesn’t mean it can’t be used to enslave whites, just as it is now. Simply calling someone like Rothbard a jew isn’t useful. If what he says about the Fed is accurate, and it is (that it’s the sole cause of inflation), and it’s relevant, then it must be taken into account.

It is clear that central government is outmoded. If the US central government fell apart overnight, in whose interest would it be to recreate it? No one’s save the classes who benefit from it: the jews, the EBT parasites, the defense contractors, the bureaucrats. Everyone else suffers from it. Most states are pretty well run, really, at least the white ones. The political problem whites face in the US are caused almost entirely by the central government, which is now trying to expand itself into a global dictatorship.

I agree completely about alienating evangelicals and most Protestants, who are lost causes, but declaring war on every person that has some belief in Jesus is not going to get you anywhere. Give them a comfortable alternative that will at least get them out of our way.

Catholicism is and always will be a big, dumb, oaf of a religion. But if you’re in prison with a bunch of niggers and that one big dumb oaf, would it be wise to alienate him completely?

Christianity can live with a racial government, but its universalism (I have to pause here to explain to dummies that universalism means the church accepts people of all races, and that this is its core doctrine and has been since it started) will be a latent danger to that government. That’s what WN are too anti-intellectual to understand. We need to worry about growing our strength, not about appealing to christians. Christians are mostly the willing tools of whomever’s in power. Right now, we Whitists are after the winter patriots – the people who can think against the grain because they have the qualities of mind and character not to be dissuaded by social pressure. The reason we attack christianity is to raise our own cause to public prominence. It’s the same reason we attack the conservatives. We must be a jealous cause. We have the answers. The church does not. The conservatives do not. Where has sucking up to the church got Parrott and Heimbach? Where has trying to work within the church gotten them? Where has submitting to universalist anti-white authority gotten them? Someone produce me a single priest who will speak out in favor of white racial views? A man or group that behaves like your enemy…is your enemy. The church, functionally and doctrinally, is our enemy, as it teaches our kind that concern for their own kind is immoral. It will continue to do that until we take power. Then it will shut its mouth, or even flip to our doctrine. Something that weak, blowing hot and cold with the political seasons, is hardly to be respected. It is characteristic of an institution unworthy of white men.

You have to understand what christianity is: an Alcoholics Anonymous for Losers.

Ah was addicted to losin’, until ah fahnd this hear church where ah can be uh winner in da nex lahf.

It’s not a pretty thing, this church. It’s pretty overtly an association of losers. A brotherhood in weakness. It’s for people without imagination or spirit. I speak not as a theoretician but as one who went to church for the better part of 20 years, and a church full of professionally successful people, not Baptist dirt eaters. I know very intimately what is wrong with it; I’ve observed it first-hand.

The christian cult isn’t worthy of the white race.

Well if you’re too emotionally tied to something to see it for what it is, then there’s not much to do. Southerners are the only people in America with an actual culture, do you see the correlation in that and white nationalism finding its highest support in this region?

It has higher levels of support for historical reasons, namely because the South imported levels of niggers, and had to find a way to cope with them physically and explain relations with them legally. It failed to do this, needless to say. Christianity is the reason the South adopted the position that niggers are our dusky little charges, whom we are to superintend, to steward, not as zookeepers but as loving elder brothers. This in fact was the mentality of the South at the very highest level – Lee and Davis. The supreme irony is that today The Illiteracy’s leaders are attacked as evil hateful racists when in fact they were benignly paternal to their negro property. They treated nigs reasonably and fairly, within their conception of the natures of and proper relations between the races. My point is that their conceptual framework concealed a latent danger, which time and shifting circumstances quite painfully brought out. The Southern conception of racial relations was and is demonstrably dangerous to whites, just as apartheid in South Africa was. We are not the brothers’ zookeeper is what whitists should be saying. The christians are one with the jew overlords and the democrats in saying we’re all in this together (or you’re, in the case of jews). We’re not. Christianity has always seen coloreds as natural members of its community. Not even the most fervent christian can deny that, it is historical fact. Yesterday coloreds were savages to be converted and civilized by christians – not cleared by white men. Today, same thing. That’s why the christians are always on the forefront, whether Lutheran protestant or Catholic, of the race-replacement scheme, helping (for profit) the State Department, for one example among hundreds, put 40,000 Somalis in a small town in Maine.

Someone who acts like your enemy is your enemy. Someone who preaches the opposite of what you preach isn’t on your side. White nationalists who refuse to take their own side in an argument becomes illiberals. Not to say fools. Why do white men continue to make excuses for a religious cult that never sticks up for us?

As I always and accurately say, Christainity is not a racial religion and cannot be made into one. It takes all comers. Always has. I don’t see what’s so difficult to grasp about this concept. . . . What, are we so free of tasks at hand that we can try to figure out how to turn brotherhood-of-man cult into a vehicle serving our race?

I’m even tired of insulting people who think like this. I mean, it’s not just that you’re fighting one of the very few core doctrines that has stood unchanged in the cult in all times and places, you’re fighting an organization long subverted by the enemy, and whose preachers, nearly to a one, support white-hostile ideology, and whose churches are a fully integrated part of the anti-white system. Who will deny that christianity is a fully plugged-in and functional part of the judeo-System for controlling white people? If a belief system or an institution isn’t overtly pro-white, then functionally it’s going to be anti-white, given the influence our enemy the jew is able to wield. So it is today, and so it has been for a long time. So it is inherently, to repeat, given the doctrinal racial universalism at the heart of the cult.

Golden Dawn has all these wonderful supporters in the Greek Orthodox church – has even one official state-employed metropolitan or other prelate attacked the government for throwing GD’s entire leadership in jail? If not, why not? If not, then why do you make excuses for them? If you’re not taking your side in an argument, and they’re siding with the enemy, then who the hell is on our side?

I love how we’re supposed to support the church and look after its interests, but when it doesn’t do the same for us, we’re supposed to make excuses for it. Let’s keep on playing the battered wife to this miserable cult. Yeah, that’s the way the winner would play it.

White nationalists who make excuses for the church are just like christians with God. He’s all powerful, but they won’t hold him responsible for anything.

Southernism, if we can call it that, goes way beyond the American constitution, and puts more emphasis on the myths of General Lee and Stonewall Jackson than it does on sterile enlightenment Jew-tools like Washington and Jefferson. The only good president America has ever had is Andrew Jackson. You can start with him if regionalism makes you uncomfortable and use him like Golden Dawn would use Metaxas.

Southerners correctly saw themselves as the true Americans because they were carrying on the genuine spirit of ’76, which means operating within the terms of the agreement reached by the several independent states, so your distinction fails. I’ve always maintained that the South were wrong to switch flags and go with the X, though it does hilariously symbolize their commitment to illiteracy. Wanting to live in an all-white society is the only thing that all white nationalists share – and the only thing they need to share. Race is that important. That’s our case. I maintain that even dimly observed social reality reflects this. The fact our enemy makes our self-segregation illegal, while carrying on same in his own country Israel, strengthens the argument. Racial separation and ultimately white sovereignty is good for Whites. It’s the only social arrangement he can thrive with. The enemy knows this. That’s why he forbids it.

We foolishly complicate matters when we drag in politics beyond race. There, we have no agreement, so we can’t unify. I can’t persuade you to be a man, and you can’t persuade me to be a socialist. So why worry about it? The entire point I’m making is that, race aside, there is no reason, in 2014, to force people to marry who want to live apart. . . . We have a continent. We don’t have to live in the same space. Or even live the same way in the same way. If the libertarians want to live in New Hampshire, and live the way they want – let them. And that was the Southern spirit. It was taken for granted that it only applied to white men, since blacks were obviously animals. It was hoped, by Jefferson and others, that one day blacks would graduate from animal school and become humans, but they haven’t. Whitism along reflects that bio-social reality and takes it into account — makes it the basis — of its politics.

The problem whitism has today is that our cause is tied to and confused with conservatism, which itself is tied to and confused with christianity. We can only solve those problems by cutting all the ties that bind us, and that means publicly attacking christianity with an eye toward creating in the mind of the average white the conceptions that

– 1) what christians are doing is hurting me, my family, and my community, and

– 2) there is another way – the racial way. The white nationalist way.

But we can’t do this when racialism is tied up with christian nonsense and historical baggage the way it is in the South. That’s why I always say, the solution will come from outside the South. It will come from disaffected northern bourgeois like me, or even from queers like you know who, before it ever comes from Southerners. But once we regain our racial sovereignty, underneath the new racial umbrella, the South will be free to live its own way, internally. It just won’t be able to have any niggers to make its losers feel like they’re not the bottom rung of the ladder. They’ll have to find some other way to feel superior to animals. This might encourage some of them to learn to read, or wear shoes. Who knows? The important thing is, they won’t be allowed to spoil things for the rest of us. “We control our niggers down here.” Southerners are mostly lazy jackasses. Without niggers to play with, they won’t cause better whites any problems. Without the confusions religious primatives cause our cause, we’ll be better positioned to take on the jews and their allied northern illiberal whiteskins.

You’re not going to be able to inspire a Norwegian-American in Minnesota and a Scots-Irish in Arkansas to fight and die on the basis of just being white and some abstract concepts on a piece of paper, you need to create a collective myth to bind them and tie them with something deeper, so that they can see destiny in one another.

Then by definition I and this forum should not exist, since I hate myths of all kinds and don’t need them. Mythology isn’t needed, that itself is a myth. Do snowboarders need a myth to try to achieve the world’s first 720, which might well result in their breaking their bones, or losing their lives? Hell, no. Does that Ukrainian kid troupe that dangles off buildings need a religious myth to undertake death-defying stunts?

Whites are distinguished by their comparative lack of faith, lack of religion, lack of belief. It’s always the lowest and dirtiest and most cowardly whites who are attracted by religions. Athesists always dominate religious folks despite inferior numbers, precisely because they aren’t scared and stupid.

And that something deeper is never going to be some tax-revolt by freemasons getting funded by Polish-Jew bankers.

You’re underrating an important secondary appeal of our cause, which is restoring to whites the chance to live as adults. You see people earning money and having it stolen from them by your buddies in government as business as usual, and no big deal. Whites enslaved to other whites is a big deal, and it’s a big deal to the most competent whites. National socialists must beware their socialism doesn’t turn whites into light-skinned EBT monkeys. Poor whites bring most of their economic troubles on themselves, that is the fact of the matter.

Hitler and Mussolini were right. Tom Payne and Jefferson were wrong.

Individualism and abstract concepts didn’t build up America, Aryans did.

Aryans who weren’t controlled by central government.

And America would today be 100 years ahead if they had coherence and a real ideology besides making money.

You still think like a progressive. Ahead of what? We’re not in a race. You just want to replace the jews as shepherd, but plenty of whites aren’t sheep, and those are the ones who must make a revolution. Sheep get what sheep get, we shouldn’t worry about them. If they want a say in their future, they must evolve.

Crediting some 300 year old enlightenment age garbage conjured up by elitist fags in powdered wigs for the technology and innovations of America would fail to explain any of the great Western civilizations before it.

Two are unrelated, except the Founders studied earlier civilizations and found much not to admire and not to repeat. And they did a good job devising a format for the new country, and it worked fairly well for a good period of time. Can’t judge them for not seeing what lay ahead, ie, the technical developments in mass communications and racial science that would obviate good portions of the Constitution.

Want to see what a social liberal, anti-Christian, individualist all (or mostly) white state looks like? Go to Portland.

Exactly. How is that not better than Alabama or Mississippi, even with lefty politics? Race is by far the most important. I can live under white Franco or white lefty in Portland, where the population is all white, far better than where the population is 50-50 with most of the whites agreeing with my racial views.

Get rid of the jews and the muds, the left will have to find something else to play with. But so will the religious right.

[ The above is from a forum thread posting. ]

Ride Hard and Put Away Wet: How White Nationalism Should Use Pat Buchanan: A Review of Where The Right Went Wrong (2004)

Part Two: Social Revolution by Means of Judiciary

By Alex Linder

 

[ The following is from a forum thread posting. ]

In part one we didn’t so much review Buchanan’s book as Buchanan. We looked at where he fits in the political scene, what he means to whites. We concluded, per our title, we should rape him of his valuable points and clever formulations and discard him alongside the road like a used hippy chick. If that seems cruel, consider that it’s exactly how he and his ilk treat us. No respect deserves repayment in the same coin.

In part two, we will analyze a portion of Buchanan’s book, How the Right Went Wrong (2004), looking for things we can use as white nationalists. The book is ten years old, I hear you saying. “What kind of a nimrod reviews a ten-year-old book.” Watch your mouth, pal. I want to say, in line with Dean Vernon, you’ll get the answer to that question this Saturday. But that’s not true. You’ll get it right now. The reason the book matters and date doesn’t is that the right has proceeded down same lines it was headed in 2004, which makes sense, given the same forces are in the same relation. The Republican Party leaders-slash-conservative-writers/talking heads/assorted opinionmongers are a bunch of no-good NYC kikes (or in line with them), and the party rank-and-file are the same usual religious mopes and patriotardical cannon fodder. Domestic revolution and democracy-crusading abroad continue apace, same as it ever were.

The book covers three areas: economic policy, foreign policy, and the role of the courts in effecting a social revolution. Jews, of course, pride themselves on being revolutionaries (outside of Israel, that is, in alien lands, white-man lands). Breaking barriers, they call it, when they destroy or revolutionize traditional and effective white intellectual categories, such as anthropology, or social traditions, such as sex being a private rather than a public matter. When jews enter a country, they buy up the media and move into academia and the law schools and teachers colleges, as these are the control positions. From them, jews can leverage their small numbers into great political power. They train the trainers, they teach the teachers, they write the lawbooks, they determine what goes in the textbooks, they select what stories to cover in the papers, they determine how their treatment. In a much shorter order than one might imagine, jews become the source of virtually every single idea that gets widely propagated. Of course, all the ideas they push advance their agenda and damage native whites. Once their control is broad enough, no one else can get an idea into the mainstream. Today, in the West, in 2014, their control, in virtually every nation from USA to Russia, is nearly complete. At least outside the internet, which, as a new communications technology, they have admitted caught them unaware.

We’ll leave aside the half the book that covers foreign policy, because we talk about that stuff all the time, and we understand what’s going on there: jews use American taxdollars to foment jew-useful wars and revolutions throughout the middle east and in Europe. Likewise, we’ll leave discussing Buchanan’s economic ideas for a different time. He styles himself an economic nationalist, and argues that the US grew great behind and because of a tariff wall. His ideas have been refuted by Tom Woods, among others.

The thing we want to focus on here is Buchanan’s analysis of the way the courts, the Supreme Court in particular, have carried out a domestic social revolution against the wishes of the white majority. What jews want goes, what whites want goes wanting. Buchanan is careful never to mention that it’s jews, their activists and judges and media, driving this social revolution carried out through the court. Punch pulling, after, is the heart of professional conservatism. Buchanan doesn’t talk about jews immigrating to America between 1880 and 1920; how they bought up the media like New York Times and Washington Post; nor how they moved into and took over the Ivy League academic institutions and top law schools. Rather, he sticks to decisions the Supreme Court and other courts have made, their basis in law, and their effects on American society. Good stuff as far as it goes. But as always with Buchanan, he doesn’t go far enough. The American political cover story about liberals doing battle with conservatives is good enough for him, and he doesn’t delve beneath the surface at all. We will. That delving is the point of this review.

* * *

The court story, the judicial story, predates the jews. It goes all the way back to the legal founding of the country in the Constitution. The entire thing can be summed up in

.

First, let’s make sure you understand the term arrogate. It means to seize something illegally. To usurp it. Easy to associate with arrogant. The main thing seized here, arrogated, is the right to be the final and ultimate authority in deciding what the Constitution means. And then inflicting that raw and awesome power on lesser courts and The People.

Arrogate

The Supreme Court arrogated the final say in determining the meaning of the Constitution. It simply declared, on the basis of no legal authority, that it has the final say in interpreting the Constitution. Yet, the Constitution doesn’t give anyone — any party or body or person — the power of being final authority, of final review, which means it’s up to the various groups or individuals involved to decide for themselves if other parties have gone beyond the bounds of constitutionality. Now, in point of fact, the powers that be have found it congenial to support the Supreme Court in its interpretive arrogation of the right of final review. So a tradition has built up that in fact, yes, the Supreme Court has the final say. But it’s merely tradition. It has no legal justification in the written words or intentions of the Founding Fathers. Thus, it can be disputed by any party with the balls to do so. It’s akin to Khadaffi’s “Line of Death” you may remember from decades ago; a line he arbitrarily drew in the Mediterranean sea and asserted authority on the Liberian side of. My international relations professor said of the LoD, it’s not legal, but if people observe it, it tends to become that way, even if just de facto. So it is with the arrogating usurpation of the right of judicial review, as it’s commonly known. But, again, nowhere in the words of the Founders is any right of the Supreme Court to be the final interpreter of what is constitutional and what isn’t. That is the key point you must take away from this review. Only you can keep the Supreme Court — or any court — within bounds (sticking to the law). If you are unwilling to do so, you may count on these courts becoming tyrannical, for that is the nature of men, and that is the nature of bureaucracy and political power.

Let’s go a little more in depth.

There are four things white nationalists, and others, need to understand.

– the intended role of the Supreme Court;
– the role it arrogated
– the historical skeleton that is formed by the Supreme Court’s (and certain other courts’) most important decisions over 200+ years; and, finally
– what we can do about the court today.

All WN should understand these four, just so they have the intellectual backing to explain where their opponents have have seized power illegally. That’s the main thing about courts – all of them, not just the Supreme. All courts are composed of men. And men don’t necessarily follow the law. And, — most important point here —

with the law should they choose to depart from it. Other men are the only true check on judicial power. Plain words on plain paper aren’t enough. If you don’t grasp that, you’re qualified only for patriotardism, waxing ineloquent about your love for a document that, like all of them, is neither self-interpreting nor self-enforcing, but must be interpreted and enforced through fallible, corrupt, scheming humans. Put not your faith in paper, white man. Put your faith in yourself and Team White. The only paper worthy of faith is toilet paper.

So that’s the bottom line with courts — all courts. All courts, all laws, all documents.

On the first point, the intended role of the court, the Constitutionally intended (expressly described and circumscribed) role of the Supreme court was for it to serve as the court of final review for disputes between the states. Disputes always arise. The states back then at the start were little or medium-sized independent countries, federated by the constitution, per signed agreement at the convention. The Constitution is probably better seen as a hammered-out compromise among mutually suspicious parties, and not two or three of them, but more than a dozen. The elegant wording shouldn’t confuse folks to this reality, but of course the stars-‘n’-stripey-eyed set can only see it as a hallowed parchment of fetish. They’re called patriotards for a reason. . . . The Supreme Court was the body created to resolve such disputes as should inevitably arise between the states. This is a different and distinct role from being the body created to settle the very meaning of the agreement/arrangement the independent states put together in the first place. There is no such body for that. The Supreme Court is not chartered to go above and beyond the Constitution, only to enforce it in relation to state disputes. But when you’re dealing with avaricious and dishonest men, this difference can easily be lost. In practice, unless the states are jealous of their power, they are going to lose it to prehensile courts and federal bureaucracies, which have the media and the army on their side.

But again, let’s go over it till it gets between your ears. Who is the ultimate arbiter of the meaning of the Constitution? The correct answer is: No one. Or. Anyone who feels another party is acting unconstitutionally. Or. Anyone strong enough. You see? It’s an open question. There can be no answer, as it’s essentially an axiomatic problem. It must fall to the powers who created the Constitution to decide whether some man or body is going outside them, acting unConsitutionally, and it must fall to these aggrieved parties to vindicate their rights. And not necessarily through the courts! Probably not through the courts, since the ultimate court is the problem! But this requires intelligence, imagination and pluck, again, since the authorities tend to congeal around the false notion the Supreme Court is the ultimate decider for everything, and the media tend to conceal the legal/historical truth while bashing any threat to centralized power.

This-all is the political and practical reality of the thing. Not to mention that, of course, like any bureaucratic or political body, the Supreme Court is going to tend to try to increase its power over time, and arrogating the right to be the final arbiter on all matters constitutional, though it have no charter for such, is the first thing the court would see when it looked around; the sweet, delicious, low-hanging fruit just waiting to be plucked and eaten. For after all, just in practical terms, it’s hard to raise up the manpower necessary to resist usurpations, once the dust has settled and the new federation is functioning, and the revolutionaries have gone back to their farms in the hinterlands. You see what I mean. In the heat of the revolution, everyone is jealous of his rights and his state’s prerogatives since they’ve just kicked Britain’s ass for trying to impose on them; but once the revolution is over, and things are settled and functioning under the new system, it’s harder to recall the passions, to gin up the physical forces necessary to counter some party overstepping his bounds. It’s just the way of things.

Nevertheless, no matter how dusty the desuetude into which the exercise of the right to reign in a rogue court may have become over 200 years, yet it remains there potent as it ever was, waiting for someone with the will to exercise it. If the Supreme Court acts outside the law, you are fully legally authorized to do whatever you feel it takes to reign it back in. If, say, the Supreme Court, ignores the constitution in order to force blacks into safe white schools, per the jew’s anti-white genocidal agenda of integration, whites are completely justified in lynching any Supreme Court justice who voted to approve that agenda. It is that serious. The Founders to a man agree with what I’m saying – they just fought a revolution over this stuff. No man can go outside the bounds of the written law without exposing himself to retribution. If the people are too cowardly or too cowed to reign this black-robed monarch in, then they will suffer such misery as he cares to inflict. But they have every right to do literally whatever they need to do to obtain justice. That’s not me saying that. That’s the Founders’ view. Of course the jew-owned and -operated media won’t tell you this – it represents a potential threat to their tyranny.

The Supreme Court arrogated this power of ultimate constitutional review early. Not in 1980, 1950, 1910, but in 1803. Yet, again, for the tenth time, that arrogation has no legal basis. Its sanction is purely time and power, and these are informal and customary, rather than legal. So long as the politicians and media agree with the direction of its decisions, its right to make them will be treated as given; as inevitable and necessary and good as the sun rising in the east. So long as the courts pursue a leftist agenda, the press and professors will back then. They’ll lie to their readers and students that this is how it’s supposed to be; this is good. They won’t tell you about your natural right to defend yourself and your neighborhood and your race from authorities who go beyond the law. They don’t want you to know that, or to defend yourself. They just want you to shut up and do what they say.

Leftists know how much conservatives and religious tools respect authority and custom and tradition. They don’t. But they know their opponents do. They have no trouble redefining or reinterpreting an old term or settled law to support their agenda. Once they succeed in that, then they’ve created a new tradition, and they gleefully remind conservatives of their bounden duty to support The Law (they’ve just subverted) in all its august glory. The left is very good at understanding its opposition and how to manipulate it. Thus you see illiberal judges making unConstitutional decisions that can only be enforced by conservative executives using conservative soldiers. Yet they do enforce it. Even when they know the court is misbehaving. And these conservative carriers-out, these executors of the unpopular will, shall we say, browbeat and gun-threaten the conservative population into going along with the new, unwanted, unvoted-for changes, because we must respect the law. One side cheats. One side doesn’t. The side that cheats wins. The side that plays fair loses. That’s reality. Until the honest men find some way of holding judges to their sworn duty, upholding the law, rather than rewriting it to their illiberal agenda, the judges will continue to misbehave. Continue to act like kings, foisting their minority agenda, their anti-white agenda, on the unwilling white public. In the old days, do you know what Americans did to judges who didn’t follow the law? First, they threatened them. If they refused to comply, then they lynched them.

One more time: There is no law saying the Supreme Court has the right to determine what’s Constitutional and what isn’t. And when that Court starts making anti-white decisions at the level of forcing whites to race-mix with niggers, it is far beyond its bounds. But only white men with guns can force it back into line. That takes gumption. Gumption has been lacking in America for a long time.

In political life as in personal life, you get what you tolerate. That’s the ultimate message to white nationalists here. If we, like christians, are willing to tolerate a tiny, anti-white majority, let’s call them, I don’t know, jews make the decisions that determine the conditions of our personal and body-political life, they surely will. History proves that. The geist and conditions of outdoor life at the time of this writing, in 2014, are completely determined by white-hating jews. The Constitution, written by white men, confirms free association in the Bill of Rights. Yet that same Constitution, interpreted by jew or leftist lawyers, somehow is interpreted to mean precisely the opposite! The judeocracy can dictate to you whom you employ, the conditions of that employ, whom you rent to, whom your bakery must bake cakes for. The words of the Constitution haven’t been changed (remember Garet Garrett’s revolution within the form which came up in part one), but the interpretation has done a 180. Today, you have “free association” as a guaranteed, gen-u-wine, Constitutional right, on paper,…but in practice you have forced…what? whatever the powers that be want to force you to do – race-mixing, deviant-sexual-behavior servicing, etc. Freedom remains in the words, but force is the reality. It’s better for the ruling jews not to change the words; sitting there, they fool people – the type commonly called patriotards. People too dumb to see that the mere fact that something is written on paper doesn’t mean it will be understood or enforced. This same type loves to yammer about ‘God-given’ rights, without ever noticing that God never defends those rights. Rights on paper don’t matter if we can’t exercise them in reality.

Just as under their jewish bolshevism in the USSR and Eastern Europe — their vile, anti-white, hundred-million-dead jewish-communism — in AmeriKwa 2014, only your private thoughts are free. It’s one multiply-divided nation under ZOG. In the week preceding my writing this, the head of a large and important company was forced to step down because he disapproved of homosexual marriage. In that position, he was on the same side as the majority of voters. Yet he was forced to resign! Judges around the country, at this time, were simply ignoring what the majority of their state’s voters wanted, even in the most illiberal states such as Massachusetts, and simply imposing their preferred morality, which is one that elevates sodomitic buddies to the legal level of a husband and wife. The courts thwart the democratic will of the people with diktats. The media back them. The people complain. But the decisions carry. Until people start treating judge and their anti-democratic dictates less respectfully, shall we say, this state of affairs will continue.

It’s a straight-up test of manliness, really, how much society is willing to tolerate jew-controlled judges acting like kings. An effeminized society will tolerate anything courts do. They are Authority, the people are informed via tv and in top newspapers by duly licensed and degreed Experts. The talking nodding heads on tv assure us they have our best interests in mind, we adult children. In earlier centuries, we didn’t think like this, we laughed at these clowns-with-airs, we threatened or lynched them when they went outside their bounds. Today, the very thought is unthinkable. Democracy is voting for Pepsi or Coke, not lynching judges! Everyone knows that! But that’s wrong. Republican government means nothing if not the people seeing — by any means — that majority rule prevails. If it doesn’t, then you have a king. Whether the king is a judge, a casino mogul, a media magnate, a president acting like an emperor – anything or anyone extralegally nixing the popular will in favor of a private minority agenda.

Judges are given special protection in today’s society. Some of them are arrogant, thinking they are untouchable. Others are aware of their class and its usurpations, and the consequences these could bring. Most feel pretty sure they can’t be gotten to because people are generally passive these days, consumers of junk food and sports and pornography, and they don’t think or write or read or act much, and seldom in unapproved ways. If they perceive any particular threat, law-unabiding judges can always call for extra police and security, and they usually get it. The media are always on their side, so long as the judges are going outside the law to push the leftist agenda. It’s a pretty cushy life, really, for these judges. They’re doing something that takes no particular skill, after all. Anyone who can read plain law and is disposed to follow it can make the right decisions. A programmed computer could do what any judge does, and do it quicker and more impartially, which is to say better. Programmed computers can beat any chess player in the world, and chess is a situation that is far looser, in terms of options to be considered, than law-interpretation.

The Framers devised the Constitution to be clear. They gave the feds certain powers. They reserved the rest to the states, which were sovereign, except, again, for the ceded, enumerated, carefully defined powers.

That quoted block is the spirit of the constitution, which, again, is a compromise worked out between sovereign, jealous and mutually hostile/suspicious states. It is a not a charter for a massive centralized state and global empire, as we have now.

Any man disposed to follow the Constitution as written would have little problem doing so. But that’s the rub. Men aren’t disposed to follow written law, far too often, no matter how clear the meaning. Flesh trumps paper. This is what the Constitution lovers, who tend to be religious simpletons, can’t understand, or can’t accept. Anyone clever with words, like lawyers, can rationalize darn near any desired policy as a legitimate interpretation of any words. Throw in the media on your side, that’s all you need. Yeah…it really is like that. That’s not ever going to change, either. Put your faith in paper, you’re going to get burned. The only one who can guarantee that your rights are respected, or vindicated, is you. Is us. Is we. No matter how eloquently and clearly those rights are laid down on the august scroll, if we don’t force our enemy to respect them, he won’t. Remember – the majority isn’t on his side. He has no legitimate democratic option for taking power. He must cheat. It’s a lot easier to capture the courts than fake election results.

* * *

The best and most useful chapter in Where The Right Went Wrong is the ninth: “The Abdication of Congress and the Rise of Judicial Dicatatorship.” We know from our research at VNN, by Craig Cobb and I years ago, although unfortunately later lost due to faulty wiring, that jews absolutely dominate law schools, particularly the top tier. Of course, Buchanan will call them leftists, which they are, but that’s not the main thing. The main thing is you have jews with a strangehold over the key judge positions, and you have other jews making apologies for them in the mass media jews control. Jews are always at the pressure points in any society so that any view they don’t like can be demonized, and its main carriers defamed and discredited and destroyed. You don’t even have to be against them overtly, you can simply be honest, and it’s a threat. Honesty is anti-semitic. See Robert Bork, and how the jewsmedia destroyed him when he came up for a Supreme Court appointment.

If some tradition jews don’t like has a long history, they chip away at it. They’re patient. They think long term, not short. They may not be able to reverse cultural views of loose sex and deviant sex like homosexual behavior overnight, but they can over a decade or two. And they’re getting better at social-engineering this goy-reversal through law and media and schools as they gain experience with new technologies. The campaign to legitimize homosexuals, as we saw in another thread, was accomplished in one decade, the nineties. That’s pretty remarkable, when you think about it. Even as I write, the last day or two, fresh judges are simply issuing Diktats to their state legislatures to force them to legally acknowledge queer marriage, even if the majority don’t support it. That’s dictatorship. There’s no other word for it. Judges operating outside the law are praised in the jew-controlled media. Far from receiving censure, professional or press, they receive praise. That can only exert a ratchet effect over time. I’ve mentioned before going to a law-school graduation ceremony and hearing the main speaker, the head of the state supreme court, tell graduating students almost in so many words that if they felt the law was wrong in their heart, they should simply ignore it.

I’ve said a million times, and will repeat a million more,

. That means that, as a tiny-minority position, jews must control the sense organs of society (the mass media) to have any hope of getting their agenda across. They understand this. It’s why they move immediately to take over the media when they enter a non-jew society, whether the White west or the latest sliver of Muslim territory they’re invading. Drench the locals in sex talk, in open porn, in masturbation and lesbians garbage, and soon they’ll forget all about politics. That is what jews believe. That is what their experts (the Nazi-exiled academics of the Frankfurt School) say will work. That is the course they always follow. Hitler complained of it in Mein Kampf – the filthy jews polluting Vienna with their sex-dreck; his epiphany that every form of social corruption and morals pollution traced ultimately to the jew. At the same time jews mudwash the brains of the locals with sex, they throw open the borders to race-replace the natives they hate. Again, this is not new, this has been going on wherever jews have political control. Hitler, again, complained of this in Mein Kampf. The jews controlling France were sticking Francophone nigger troops into the Ruhr, with the aim of racially debasing the German stock. Same thing today in America. We know from Kevin MacDonald’s research that jews alone (the alone is the part many dishonest pseudo-WN leave out) are responsible for the USA’s reversed — anti-White/anti-European — immigration policy. The deliberate aim was to destroy the white racial basis of the most powerful country on earth because jews hated and felt threatened by a unified white nation. Look around you. Does it look like jews are succeeding? And again, they control the media that interepret everything for you. And the average person takes newspapers and tv and the mass media as legitimate authority, and finds it difficult for biological reasons to oppose it. Again, something jews well know. They are experts in knowing their racial enemies, how they think, and how they can be manipulated.

So let’s see what Buchanan says about kritarchy – a word he doesn’t use, but some do, which means rule by judges (as opposed to rule by legislature, or by written law).

He begins by quoting John Randolph to the effect that whoever interprets the laws — without appeal — is the sovereign. That is, if California votes not to give benefits to illegal aliens, and some jew/leftist judge simply throws the vote out, then that judge is the king, and the citizens are his subjects. And of course we’ve seen this pattern a thousand times – in pretty much every case where white votes succeeded in thwarting a judeo-leftist agenda item. Wherever by proxy the white majority stands up for itself in the ballot box, its legitimate, democratic vote will be denounced in the controlled mass media and soon enough reversed or thrown out by leftist federal judges. That is how things have operated in the US for decades now. Centralized leftist control of the US exists. It is anti-white, and the mass media wholly support and justify it.

The Gutlessness of Congress

Let’s step aside for a brief excursus into the gutlessness of Congress these past few decades.

Buchanan’s points:

– Congress has abandoned decision to war to executive, since Truman
– Congress has totally “surrender[ed]” its constitutional authority over trade. International bodies can and do now fine the US and repeal her laws. Binding us into a global world order is the intent and danger.

Buchanan says that all Congressmen care about is being reelected, because it’s such a cushy job. Being reelcted means not offending people. It’s better to give certain powers away to other branches than to make the (hard) decisions Congress is supposed to do per the Constitution. Let the executive puzzle out the details on trade treaties and budget bills, so long as the incumbent can escape responsibility for cutting anything some voter relies on. Let the judges make the tough decisions on abortion, or other matters where the voters are split. Then the Congressman can support or whine about the result – but either way, he’s not responsible for what the executive or the judge does, and that’s what matters most to him, since taking an actual stance costs votes where people are divided.

– the power to coin money was transferred to the Fed. We all know where this has led: private banks owned by jews get to counterfeit money legally, and pass on the new bills to their billionaire buddies at Goldman Sachs. This keeps jews in control while white earners’ purchasing power is diluted through the inflation-theft the jews always practice. And justify in their mass media. As in other sectors, white adults are treated as children in a nursery school requiring jewish kindergarten teachers to manage them. We aren’t smart enough to manage money, we need some thick-lipped Golub to take care of that for us.

Getting back to the courts, Buchanan says the ‘imperial judiciary’ revolution began in 1954 with Brown vs. Board of Education.

“In the name of equal rights, the Warren court had effected an historic coup d’etat. It had usurped power over state schools never granted to courts either in federal law or the Constitution.”

So, the feds have no legal right to control local schools. They simply took it at gunpoint. That is a good WN talking point. The judeo-System broke its own law to push its agenda. That makes it illegitimate. That makes it a dictatorship.

Segregation was legal under the 14th amendment. But certain people didn’t like it, and wanted to end it. They did this by illegal judicial dictate. Eisenhower went along with the illegal usurpation. Of course, the media went along. The Southerners who resisted were demonized and crushed. All 100% illegally. The message, again, is that men will not be bound by what’s written on paper, no matter how clear or eloquent. Men with will and weapons are the only guarantee, ultimately, that written law passed by democratically elected legislatures will be followed.

The left, as a congenital minority position, must of needs be all about power, getting it by any means it can, and then, when it does get it, forcing its minority agenda on others at gunpoint. This is the eternal political reality: the timid majority versus the fanatical minority.

We see today in Greece the same mindset at work: a pro-white nationalist party draws a mere 7% of the vote, and the System throws its legally elected MPs in jail. It simply decides Golden Dawn’s majority-views should be illegal, and calls the party a criminal organization. The media back it up. How do whites react when the media, the judges and the entire System are run by people who hate whites? That’s the question for our times.

Ok…so we know what people can do about judges – lynch them if they go outside the law. That’s what has always been called our ‘natural’ right. We know how the Supreme Court was intended to function – to settle disputes between states. And we know that the SC has no legal basis for arrogating final review of Constitutionality. The only thing left to do is the spine: lay out the historical court cases that when taken together amount to a genuine revolution in law and society.

Buchanan does this laying out very nicely, in the ninth chapter, as mentioned above. Let’s hit the cases. The important thing here, white man, is to know these cases so you can explain to people you talk to how this nasty society we see around us today was facilitated by a queered court system. We know the bigger picture, but it’s good to have a handle on the specific court cases. There are not even a dozen over 200+ years, so it’s pretty easy to learn them all and keep them in mind for political use. As we end this review, I will bullet good points Buchanan makes; points you should remember as you will find them useful in understanding how our country was broken apart by hostile powers.

– Congress is the dominant branch, by express intent of the Founders and understanding of the men at the Constitutional convention. it dominated before WWII; since then it has “colluded in its own dispossession” (p. 208). Why? I told you why, asshole, pay attention. Because making tough choices alienates people. Alienated people don’t vote for you. Not voting for you equals losing office equals loss of access to delicious interns with perky nipples and pliant bottoms and the White House underground bowling alley and sweat-free gym and suchmore and suchlike and suchon. Let judges who can’t be diselected make the hard decisions. Who cares if they have an anti-white agenda? You can shake your fist at them on your campaign stops. Then you’ll have your intern and eat her too. Are you starting to grok the psychological situation that obtains these days, water brothers?

– neocons (jews) are “presidential supremacists and compulsive interventionists, impatient with any restrictions or restraints, constitutional or otherwise, on the commander in chief’s authority to take us into war”

– GATT treaty puts USA under World Trade Organization (WTO), and grants it power to “authorize fines” on the US, and to “demand the appeal of American laws. This it has repeatedly done.”

– power to coin money was transferred in 1913 to jew-owned Federal Reserve private bank. This is Congress yieldings its constitutional authority and responsibility to coin money itself. Rich private jews are allowed to legally counterfeit money, which comes out of the purchasing power of the earning white man’s honestly acquired money.

– “On the issues of religion, race, morality, and culture that define us as a people, Congress has, for half a century, been surrendering its law-making power to judges and justices. The Supreme Court first seized these powers in a bloodless coup. It marched in and occupied the terrain because Congress did not defend it and would not fight for it.” (p. 211) And of course the jew-controlled networks and newspapers backed the anti-white coup.

– members of Congress prefer the perception of power to the reality – let the unelected bureaucrat or judge take the heat for the tough decision. Leftists generally aren’t pussies like conservatives. They like power and aren’t afraid to use it to enforce their will. Even if a majority is against them. They know the majority are cowards, and won’t do anything about it.

– the right is the numerical majority, but the judeo-left is the courage majority

– 1954: Brown vs Board of Education – Supreme Court “usurped power over state schools never granted to courts either in federal law or the Constitution.” “That the 14th Amendment did not outlaw segregation was obvious.” Segregation is just an anti-white, illiberal term for one of the social choices resulting from free association – whites using their freedom to exclude dangerous, violent, feral, disgusting blacks from their private worlds. Segregation was legal, but the Supreme Court simply abandoned — went outside — the law to declare it illegal, because it wanted to force whites to live the way it told them, rather than the way they wanted and had the democratic and Constitutional right to. It would have been perfectly legitimate for anyone to lynch the Supreme Court members for going outside the law to impose their dictatorship on an unwilling public.

– the lack of effective resistance to the SC’s coup emboldened it to enact a social revolution in the decades after Brown

– illegal usurpations (hence subject to the natural right of lynch law), to name a few, per area rather than specific cases: redefining pornography as free speech; creating new rights for criminals; imposing limits on state and local prosecutors; outlawing the death penalty (later reversed); declaring abortion a constitutional right; ordering both houses of all state legislatures reapportioned on basis of population alone (attempt to give browns/leftists more power); ordered VMI and Citadel to discard traditions it didn’t like; abolished term limits on Congress; forbade Arizona to make English the official language for state business; ordered California to restore welfare benefits to illegal aliens even though 60% had voted to end them; approved racial discrimination against whtie students to advance “compelling state interest” of “diversity” in college; declared homosexual sodomy a constitutional right; declared the First Amendment protects the right of adults to burn the American flag, but prohibits children from reciting the pledge of allegiance to that flag

– the main case we discussed at great length above was:

– 1803: Marbury vs Madison. This is the case in which the Supreme Court illegally usurped power by claiming the ultimate right of Constitutional review. The chief justice John Marshall “asserted a right of review of all laws enacted by Congress to ensure they conformed to the Constitution.” (p. 217) The truth remains there is nothing in the constitution that gives the SC the claimed power, it simply took it. It can be taken back. The moral and legal basis for it is unimpeachable.

– 1854: Dred Scott. This was the first time the SC used the claimed power of judicial review of Congressional acts per their compliance with constitution. The judge found the slave, Scott, had no standing to sue in federal court. This destroyed the Missouri Compromise worked out between and over free/slave states. This was essentially a 20th-century decision rendered in a 19th-century context, i.e., when men were less willing to be dictated to. You had a split country, divided over extending slavery to the new states being made out of portion of the Louisiana Purchase. The court enforcing a one-size-fits-all decree did not suit one of the two parties in the dispute. “[W]ith Taney declaring the entire Union safe for slavery, the Missouri Compromise was dead.” Lincoln simply refused to obey it. Says Buchanan: “…Lincoln challenged John Marshall’s doctrine of judicial supremacy as a mortal threat to democracy itself:

The point is not the particular decision, it’s that the Supreme Court, in 1854, was trying to enforce a view on the entire country, on a significant matter in which the states and public were deeply divided. That’s dictatorship. Democracy means they fight it out through representatives in Congress. And if that fails, through arms in the street. Judicial review is kind of like a referee determining dictating a game’s outcome by micromanagement rather than simply calling fouls. The court is there to interpret laws, not create them, and though law professors and other charlatans of the tongue may insist these are these are the same, in practice it’s pretty clear when the court is going over the line and into the territory that belongs to the people through their legislature.

– the standing temptation of the sharp minds that go into law must be to use their power to dictate their ideology. Particularly as their fear of being recalled by vote or rope recedes into mere theory. As judges lost their natural fear of man, their increasingly leftist views came to the fore. They began to impose their jew-trained anti-white ideology on the natives, with full media backing. This began with Earl Warren, says Buchanan. He was the leaders of the robed rogues who concocted 1954’s Brown vs Board decision, and flipped America the bird by locating its basis in cant from an anti-white sociologist’s doll studies, of all things. The decision was a way of saying to the majority public, we can do whatever the fuck we want, for whatever reason, and you’re just going to shut up and like it. And if you don’t, and you protest, we’ll sic the national guard on you. And that’s what happened.

We train judges how to act. They’re people like the rest of us. If we let them get away with stuff, they get emboldened. If they receive praise and awards for usurpations, they’re going to stay up past midnight thinking up new aggressions. Isn’t this self-evident? “We teach people how to treat us,” says Oprah or someone, and that fits here perfectly. Leftist judges who cross the line need to be roped in, by some means, or they will continue transgressing against white rights and white society. They’ve gone so long without experiencing any justice that most of them probably don’t even conceive it as a possibility.

– the legal precedent the Supreme Court overthrew, quite illegally, in BvB, had stood for 58 years. Now that is genuine revolutionary activity. That is genuine usurpation of the legislative prerogative, indeed overt and stated responsibility. If the people don’t want segregation, segregated public schools, they can instruct their legislators to do that. It’s not illegal under the Constitution. The Supreme Court simply decided to take the law into its own hands, and issue an edict, like a king would. And then send men with guns to shoot anyone who democratically resisted. Thus America devolved into a tyranny. There was resistance, but it was overcome by physical coercion combined with media moralizing. An uncountable number of miseries have resulted from this anti-democratic, illegal Court ruling-usurpation. But you’ll never read a single article about them because the people owning and writing the papers are on the side of the anti-white court.

In the 19th century, men were not afraid to tell the courts, even the Supreme Court, to go fuck itself. The most famous example of this came from Andrew Jackson, who famously said: “John Marshall has made his decision. Let him enforce it.” Eisenhower could have said the same thing to his hand-picked Warren after the Brown decision. He chose to do nothing, even though he disagreed. This was probably the point at which the Supreme Court began being treated as gods on earth. Again, the part Buchanan leaves out here is that by this time, mid-50s, you’ve got anti-white jews controlling the mass media – all three (and only three) television networks, and the two main papers, the New York Times and Washington Post. So long as the court makes anti-white decisions, the jew-controlled mass media will support it and defend those decisions, no matter how illegal, ridiculous and anti-white they are. Hell, Jackson took violent umbrage at something comparatively minor, given that Brown involved turning the school careers of white children into playthings for jewish social engineers. If anything, whites should have been angrier than Jackson was. And this first violation of their racial rights would be followed by more and worse discriminations and usurpations.

– “Seeing the Warren court seize such powers, lower courts began to push the envelope,” says Buchanan on page 221.

– 1967: Judge Skelly Wright outlaws (desegregated) D.C.’s ‘track system’ for students, leading white students to leave D.C. almost entirely by 1970;

– 1968: Green vs New Kent County (Virginia): Warren court goes beyond “desegregation” to outlaw a “freedom of choice” plan that lets students decide which of two high schools to attend. “Where Brown had prohibited the assignment of students by race, Green commanded it.” White students become pawns in the hands of anti-white social engineers. White students have their status reduced by the Supreme Court to the level of teaching aids for black children. The media back this. You can find thousands of articles about the educational needs of black kids, but nary a one about the educational needs of white kids. Again, this is judicial usurpation at the most egregious and offensive level, and whites would be perfectly justified in exercising their natural rights to self and familial defense in correcting matters.

– 1971: Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education (North Carolina): ordered the busing of white students out of their own neighborhoods to comply with some social-engineer’s racial scheme. Again: white children are nothing but tools of social engineers, who may distribute and arrange them as they see fit to provide learning aids for negros. Whites are not independent agents and citizens, they are human resources to be used by anti-white illiberals. Green, like Skelly ruling, led to whites moving out of the zone in question.

– Buchanan makes the point that people hate being dictated to by judges, whereas they will tolerate decisions made by Congress. They can get at Congressmen by voting them out (altho elsewhere he points out this never happens) but judges aren’t easily gotten to by strictly legal methods.

– 1978: California Regents v. Bakke: Supreme Court upholds UC-Davis’ policy of discriminating racially against white medical school applicants. Justice Blackmun’s quote: “In order to get beyond racism we must first take account of race. In order to treat some people equally, we must treat them differently.” Any form of anti-white hostility or legal discrimination will be justified in similar manner, as subsequent decades were to show. Whites, of course, are under no legal or other obligation to tolerate such treatment.

– 1979: United Steelworker v. Weber: Weber was a white discriminated against by a quota in a training program. He sued. He won on trial and appeal, then the Supreme Court decided against him. The 1964 Civil Rights law outlawed racial discrimination…except against whites. You see? The same thing is illegal when whites do it and mandatory when anti-whites do it. So says the court. Precisely what illiberal Humphrey said he would “eat his hat” over if it ever came to play, very similar to Kennedy’s saying, around the same time, there would never be more than a few thousand coloreds involved if we race-reversed our immigration policy. When leftists and anti-whites, jews and ideologues, discriminate racially against whites, it’s called equality. If whites discriminate in favor of whites, it’s called racism, hate, discrimination, and it’s illegal, save on private grounds in certain circumstances. Whites must endure this so long as they put up with it. Our country as currently instantiated exists to privilege jews and blacks and other non-whites over whites.

– 2003: The Supreme Court approves anti-white discrimination at Michigan Law School, for at least 25 more years. If the country exists then, demographics are likely to have shifted against the white majority, and it is unlikely this racial discrimination against whites will cease, it is likelier it will be strengthened.

Says Buchanan very aptly:

That will wrap it up. No branch of the government has the right to say what is or isn’t constitutional – they all do. And so do the people who elect them. You get all the shit you’re willing to take. That’s the bottom line. So long as whites are too intimidated to stand up to the criminal usurpers, they will have to content themselves with being discriminated against by courts and government offices, brownbeaten in the papers, and beaten down in the streets to barely even bothering to raise a hand to shield its laughing approval. END
__________________________

P.S. This is a 20-minute interview with Tom Woods I came across the other day, it touches on the usurped right of judicial review, as discussed above. Well worth listening to.

Ride Hard and Put Away Wet: How White Nationalism Should Use Pat Buchanan: A Review of Where The Right Went Wrong (2004)

Part One: Placing Buchanan and (Professional) Conservatism in Context

By Alex Linder

 

[ The following is from a forum thread posting. ]

Overview

First, my thumbnail from our “What are you reading” thread?

That’s a good summary what needs to be said about Pat Buchanan and his arguments in relation to our cause, but it’s worthing expanding into the details and pulling out the specific arguments and historical facts Buchanan uses to make his case, pretty much all of which can be used by white nationalists – and made stronger, because we anchor them in the true context: our racial interest and the ongoing racial war jews conduct against whites…globally.

Before the details, let’s get the full context. We’re dealing with an intellectual, professional conservative. We remember Buchanan’s dead buddy Joe Sobran, and what he said about professional conservatism: [it] was all a game; a way of making a living. We can’t ever assume anything any professional says comes from any place but self-interest. We know that Buchanan is first and last a Catholic and a Republican. He is loyal to those institutions. We know that Buchanan disparaged the most successful democratic-small-d politician of the post-war period, David Duke. He told the Republicans to steal such of Duke’s points as they could in order to undercut his appeal (his opposition to affirmative action, for example). When he ran for president himself, Buchanan, history records, selected a female black running mate. Buchanan knows the facts of demographic change in the U.S., yet Buchanan is not a racialist. Buchanan is a Catholic who believes, with the pope’s backing, that racialism, that white nationalism, is immoral. Buchanan, therefore, is our political enemy. We should do to him precisely what he advised his Republican Party to do to David Duke: use him for Friday night fun: date rape him for his arguments, but never bring him home to meet the parents. He’s too declasse for that. People without self-respect, like Pat Buchanan and professional conservatives and the sheep they cater to, only respect those who abuse them. That’s why they fawn over jews. For those who treat them with respect, as white nationalists foolishly do, they have nothing but contempt. They are the weak, and they respect the strong. If you respect them, they lose respect for you. Because they know what they are, and they know that they aren’t worthy of respect. They are natural-born grovelers, dupes and conformists. Don’t give them respect they don’t deserve. The jews don’t, thus they are successfully able to mold and lead these white-skinned christian tools. White nationalists should take tips from winners, not losers. The conservatives are losers. The jews are winners.

To put it slightly differently, you get treated the way you allow yourself to be treated. This is as true in politics as in personal life.

There’s an iron law of psychology at work here, it has nothing to do with politics, and it’s not going to be any less powerful and effective because we don’t observe it. It is sad that so few understand what I’m saying.

White nationalists have self-respect. They don’t mix with conservatives. They don’t fawn over them. They attack them, as despicable weaklings. They take their lunch money – which is any good points, arguments or terms the weaklings come up with. But never, even do they treat with respect a group that can’t exercise power when it represents the large majority of the body politics. Religious conservatism and white racialism, white nationalism, are competitors. Not buddies. Not partners. Competitors – for manshare, for mindshare, for moneyshare. Do you understand that? If you don’t, then don’t read any further. Go away from your computer and think about what I’m saying until you grasp it. It’s that important. The conservatives are not our friends. They are our enemies. We are in competition for the same set of people. You don’t party with and placate your competition, you defeat it. Ours must be an intolerant and jealous cause, if we would take leadership of our race and do battle with the ruling jews. Get your head straight, white man. When you mix our cause with conservatism you destroy it.

. This cannot be done by mixing with conservatives, that only produces confusion. When conservatives are attractive and eloquent men, saying some of the same things we are – why then do we need white nationalism?

Can you not see how that confusion would be produced in the mind of Average Joe when some of our top WN thinkers and writers treat conservatives as movie stars rather than enemies and competitors?

White nationalists should be greedy for glory, hungry for leadership, for spotlight, for limelight, for dais space and face time.

(You can explore this argument at length in my Attack the Conservatives.)

Read that, white man. Take it to heart. Get less stupid. Get more aggressive. Get sharper. Get angrier. Get more sophisticated. Get more effective.

Our cause must be a jealous cause. Our cause must polarize the public between the white solution and the jewish final solution for whites.

This, in turn, is due to our insufficient regard for ideas. We believe, like most Americans, that ideas don’t really matter. If conservatives kinda sorta sound like us, that’s good enough. They seem like ok people, so we can just act like they’re on our side. Personalities and getting along matter, not ideas, is the de facto assumption underlying white nationalist behavior to date. It is the assumption so strong it never rises to the level of conscious consideration – which is why I pulled it out and examined it in the essay above. We are proven wrong (in putting personalities ahead of principles) in this around the clock, but we never learn. Well, we should learn.

So now we know what Buchanan is, and we know in which relation he stands to ourself: he’s a professional conservative looking to rob of us of any good arguments we have, but completely unwilling to show us public respect, let alone identify himself with us. Buchanan is precisely analogous, then, to a dirty cad who will use our beautiful white body (of arguments) but never bring us home to meet the parents. We are dirty girls. Party girls. Fun…but that’s all. Certainly not for marriage. Why do we allow him and other conservative cads to treat us this way? For only one reason: we don’t have enough self-respect. The analogy to the party girl is perfect.

If we don’t respect ourselves, our own cause and positions enough to reflect them in our advocacy and behavior, then we can’t expect even cowardly little bogtrotters like Buchanan to respect us.

Do you understand what I’m saying? Do you? Do you see how important it is?

I will pound this into the ground until every last cretin in white nationalism gets it. It’s that important. It truly is fundamental. We must distinguish and elevate our cause from conservatism, and I’m showing you how we can do that. Learn the lesson. In short, we must be a jealous cause, not a friendly, tolerant, doormat/doorknob cause. Rising movements, Pat Buchanan himself has observed many times, are intolerant. Not tolerant. They believe their own bullshit. And act on it. See the left. See queers! Would that white nationalists had the brains and gumption and fanaticism of organized sex deviants! White man, know this: Conservatism has nothing for our race. It’s fine to be conservative in your ordinary personal life; I am, and most of us are. But politically – conservatism is simply cowardice, organized…and made useful to jews. Who do have self-respect. And do aggressively stick to their agenda. And never yield or give in, or apologize or make excuses. And consequently enjoy power, while we, the vast majority, get nothing and like it. Figure it out, white man. Conservatives are losers. Wouldn’t you like to win? Just for sheer variety? Then quit fawning after losers and start emulating winners. Jews can and have been defeated. But not by men who thought or acted like conservatives.

White nationalism alone, acting in the way I describe, can lead worthwhile whites where we want and need and must go. White nationalism that is nothing but a racial veneer on conservative cowardice and religious anti-intellectualism will lead where it always has: nowhere. You know…where we are now.

Now that we understand the man, and his relation to us, let’s get down to the book.

Nope. Still not done yet. One last thing to notice. Who is the first person Buchanan mentions in his Acknowledgements?

Buchanan’s agent is a jew out of New York City. Do you think this has any influence on whether he tells the whole and full truth about jews? Do you think he, like his boss Richard Nixon, says to himself, in his private mind, that there are things you can know (about jews) but mustn’t ever say publicly?

Of course, that’s how it is. But Roman Catholics don’t rock the boat, they are trained from diapers up to be obedient to authority. Who in the USA is a greater authority than jews?

Billy Graham said that the jews have a strangehold over the media that must be broken or the country’s going down the drain. President Richard Nixon, hirer and employer of Patrick Buchanan, agreed.

Yet none of these men would ever mention this jewish stranglehold, or the need to break it, publicly – where it matters. That’s the level of character we’re dealing with here – little men. All conservatives are men of small soul – little men. Content to live inside the jewish box, and tell themselves nothing more was possible. They are good little puppies. Content to live in their kennel. On whatever scraps the jews allows them.

We need heroes, our cause, not men afraid to speak about what really matters in public. . . .

It really ought to grate in our gut, or at least rasp our brains into observation, that jews, our enemy, always go after their opponents by name. Yet our side fears to call them jews. Always preferring, as Buchanan does, to call them neocons or liberals or leftists or communists or whatever mask they’re under, which hardly matters becaus they have ten more in their stage trunk. As Goebbels knew, the only name they fear is jew. Well then why aren’t we calling them what they are? We should and must — and at VNN, we always have. Euphemism is a despicable effeminancy beloved of political eunuchs. Hence, conservatives’ near-sexual attraction to it.

* * *

This book is ten years old. But that doesn’t really matter, the material Buchanan deals with is evergreen, at least so long as the neocon kikes are running things. The book is a nice 250-page jog, with your standard 25-page chapters, ten of them, divided into three general subject areas.

– Foreign policy occupies half the book; the rest is split between a discussion of
– economic policy/history and
–Constitutional culture – specifically, the rise of the executive and judicial branches, and the social revolution the courts have imposed; also and related to, the quailing retreat and “abdication” of Congress.

Let’s start at the end. That’s often the best place to start. See how realistic the author is in his suggestions for fixing things. Most authors aren’t realistic at all, and their recommendations are fruity pipe dreams and the weakest part of their books.

Buchanan calls his solutions chapter “The Way Back Home.” Typical of the reactionary mindset, that figure. Speaking generally, rightists see current times as a decline from an earlier golden age, while leftists see the golden age ahead of us in the future. The fact of the matter is things are always bad and getting worse due to entropy, yet clearances can be made, both in understanding and in physical space.

Buchanan bemoans our American Empire. He can cite Founders about the dangers that lie abroad. He’s right and useful in that regard. We all know the quotes. Conservatives have been citing Adams’ and Washington’s warnings for decades now. Nothing new here.

Same on the home front: culture wars, etc. “[N]eocons captured the foundations, think tanks and opinion journals of the Right and were allowed to redefine conservatism. Their agenda — open borders, amnesty for illegal aliens, free trade, an orderly retreat in the culture wars, “Big Government Conservatism,” and Wilsonian interventions to reshape the world in America’s image — was embraced by Republican leaders as the new conservative agenda.”

Accurate and elegant. You will think it’s great stuff if you’ve never come across a serious White Nationalist argument, say from William Pierce. If you have, then you can see Buchanan’s stuff for what it is: eloquent but racially-neutered feckless remonstrating. Look at that passive “were allowed.” Jews don’t need to be allowed. They just take over. They know who they are: a racing team. They know what they’re doing – pushing their racial agenda.

How can they possibly be opposed — successfully — except by a racing team just as racially conscious and racially driven? The answer is, they can’t. And this has happened one place and time in history, and that was Nazi Germany. Do you think Pat Buchanan, like his boss Richard Nixon, doesn’t know this? Of course he does. But he won’t say it. Because he accepts in his heart that racial resistance to jews is immoral. After all, that’s what his papenfuhrer tells him. Pope Meatball says racism and discrimination are wrong and immoral, so who is little bogtrotter Buchanan to say otherwise. Jews come in an take take over, and all Buchanan has is this wimpy “were allowed.” Who allowed them, Pat? Christians allowed them. Christians.

Why can’t non-jews form a team that doesn’t allow jews to take over?

Because they refuse to organize on the basis of race – since jews won’t allow that?

 

 

Yet we good little moral christian white conservatives sit passively by and allow our politics to be dictated to us by jews, just as if they were kings. Hell, half our people literally believe that jews were chosen by God! If so, how can it possibly be moral to resist them? Even if what they’re doing seems so wrong? We resolve this by severing the intellectual connection between jews-chosen-by-god and jews-spreading-nasty-social-revolution-in-America. Because…you know…ideas don’t matter. We can worship jews as the apple of God’s eye while denouncing the social manifestations of their liberalism. Contradictions? What are those? They’re so much spinach to the adult mental children called conservatives.

No one’s allowed to do anything except what jews permit?

What kind of men stand for this?

Roman Catholics.

That kind of man.

This is political fact number one. Fact number two doesn’t matter.

Remember – we are not dealing with the low end here. Pat Buchanan is the best mind the professional right has to offer. The best mind it can produce, we must assume.

Yet this mind willingly grovels before the jews. It’s not in what he says, of course. It’s in what he doesn’t say. What he fears to say. What he doesn’t dare to say. What his boss, Dick Nixon, would only whisper behind closed doors.

Is this good enough?

Of course it isn’t.

But if we don’t demand better, fellow white men, we won’t get better.

The (jewish) neocon policies Pat Buchanan describes are murdering our nation. We are supposed to stand by and offer this wimpy, neutered, race-nonspecific description of what’s going on, and come up with a wimpy, neutered, race-free cure?

That’s ridiculous. As well as impossible. Buchanan knows this. He is responsible for what he’s putting out. If he were naming the jews, and calling out this neocon foreign and domestic revolutionary activity for what it is — the jewish neocommunist takeover and remaking-amounting-to-murder of the US of A, I would be praising him in the highest terms, and raising his banner, and filling his coffers. He won’t do that, so I’m sure as heck not going to sit here like a gelded gerbil and scritch-scritch about how elegant and intelligent his carefully race-syncopated, personally-profitable arguments are, the way most WN do. They don’t get it. They don’t grasp what’s at stake when they do something like praise Buchanan.

Pat Buchanan…isn’t good enough.

That’s the bottom line with him.

If you, as a white man, are satisfied with what Pat Buchanan offers, then politics is nothing more than a form of entertainment to you, whether you realize it or not. A stylized form of whining. It never leads anywhere, nor is it intended to. Rather, it’s intended to extract money and applause from people who know something’s wrong, but aren’t shrewd enough to get to the root of the problem or strong enough to raise ax on that root if they do find it. Well, Buchanan has been in the system for more than fifty — FIFTY — years. He knows the root of the problem in the USA is that our politics and journalism and academy are completely dominated by white-hostile jews. But he will no more speak that truth in public than his boss Nixon would.

Is that good enough for you? It shouldn’t be.

If you think it’s immoral to name and resist the jew, then you belong in church, bleating hosannas and eating Jesus, just like all the squat brown monsters in South America. You’re not worthy of calling yourself a white man, because you’re not a man, you’re a christian. By your own decision.

What use has a white man for Buchanan? As a political leader, none. His entire use, to the white cause, is as a data miner. He comes up with quotes, historical facts, and occasionally arguments which can be repurposed — re-chassis-ed, might be a better way of putting it — by white nationalism – a political cause that, unlike professional conservatism, has the potential to win.

Steal anything good Buchanan unearths, but pay him no public respect – rather attack him. That is what is good for Whites, and what is good for Whites should be every white nationalist’s first and last concern. When Buchanan starts defending the white race, by name, in public, and starts attacking its #1 enemy, by name, in public – then and only then we’ll reclassify him. Then and only then is he worthy of public respect. I shouldn’t have to tell you that day will never come. Buchanan’s gelded timidity has made him millions; he has no issue to worry about; he’s too old and set, in any case, to do what’s right. So let’s not worry about him coming around, which he won’t, let’s focus on what we can accomplish using our enemy Catholic Republican Respectable Pat, proud member of the Establishment/loyal opposition sector: gleaning his words for quotes, data, even sometimes arguments, we can use for our winning cause.

Pat does us, for our money? No. We do Pat, for his data.

Hey, Patsy Decline. How do you like being rode hard and put up wet? Not so fun, is it? But it’s what you deserve.

You’re done using us, Pattycakes. We use you.

Pat Buchanan makes cogent arguments in his final chapter – namely, that jews he calls neocons have taken over the right and redefined conservative to mean endless global warmongering abroad in the name of democracy, in order to impose the same kind of cultural revolution around the world these jews have been effecting here at home in America since the ’60s. The jews follow a two-prong campaign: they ceaselessly hector and instruct the public in the need to change their evil old traditional racist ways, even as they open the borders to make over the American people genetically through race replacement. It’s a racial war on whites, it is, using weapons of immigration policy and media control to remake us racially and remake what we think about ourselves. That’s Occam’s way of summing it up – that it’s a race war fought by jews against passive whites. But Buchanan won’t say that because, per his Catholic moral training, that would be immoral, to single jews out like that. You can’t treat men as a group, only as individuals. Even if they’re working as a team. Catholicism is in fact a suicide pact for white men, if they embrace its raceless individualist universalism and accept the moral teachings promulgated by its doctrines and preached publicly by its popes.

We who retain our heads can see this racial war on whites by jews clearly enough, and if we retain our guts and our bearings, we can speak about it publicly as well as see it.

Buchanan laments the GOP becoming a Big Government party, chasing the votes of invading brown-squatty hordes and abandoning its conservative white base. I think he should have at least paused to observe that white men are the only race among which even a subset favors small government. Every other race wants the welfare state, as it can’t provide for itself. If it could, it wouldn’t come here.

It has been clear since the first aliens began pouring in after the 1965 immigration-policy reversal (to let in third worlders rather than Europeans) and Buchanan’s boss Nixon’s institutionalization of the anti-white discrimination euphemized as affirmative action that in a very short time, the GOP must choose between being a white man’s party or a me-too brown-man’s big-government party – a second Democratic Party, albeit with a preference for guns over butter. Hell, I wrote about this in 1997 in Blackout. The leaders of the GOP chose…both. They hinted and winked at white racial sentiment with their Southern strategy, even as they happily hopped on board the coming of the Great Multicultural (Anti-White) Empire. This began under Nixon. We see how it has evolved in 2014: the US military has bases in nearly every country in the world, and a ‘defense’ budget as big as the rest of the world combined. The GOP happily supports anti-white discrimination, while making racial appeals to every single group out there except the one most of its customers belong to. Theoretically, this cannot be explained without some X factor. We know what that X factor is: jews. They control the media. They defame anyone who attempts to speak up for whites. The GOP cravenly accepts this.

White Nationalists do not.

There simply isn’t any way out of the box the jews have put us in except going after the jews by name and as a racial team.

Whites need to form a racial team, with a racial party; – a racial vehicle that defends their interest and speaks in the name of their race. Not in codes, but openly, deliberately, and unflinchingly.

Buchanan’s words are pretty, but in the end, one simply says “No kidding, Pat.” We’ve known all this for decades. Yet nothing ever changes. Why? Partly because the enemy is good at smashing genuine resistance. But also, and this is the part we control, because we are satisfied with the tepid resistance mock-defenders like Buchanan put out.

We shouldn’t be.

I maintain as ever, to twist the detergent commercial: only race gets out race. You don’t show up at a gunfight with a really sword dagger your great-great grandpa carried in the Civil War. Only Team White can defeat Team Jew. Is that not simple? Obvious? True? Of course it is.

Our whiteness — our race — is the only potentially successful basis we have for opposing jews. Not our region, our cultural practices, our religion – our race. Jews attack none of those things, they just mock them. Whereas they do everything to prevent by law or by illegal action our identifying and organizing on the basis of our race. Racial nationalists jews destroy. Christians – they give tax credits to. Think about that. Why it is. Think until you get it, you who thinks that jews really hate and fear christianity. Think until you figure out that jews see christianity as despicable but useful, whereas they see nationalism like NS or Golden Dawn or white nationalism in the US as threatening.

Jews know better than anyone else on earth that racial identification among whites is the one and only place that successful opposition to their (genocidal) plans can hatch. Absurd, reactionary, passive religious quietists don’t threaten them – active, happy, grinning, singing, roisterouts, boisterous white men organizing to defeat them as whites is where the danger lies. Not in some sad slob on his knees blowing jesus and drinking his juice. Those are losers, and jews have been dominating them for 2,000 years and counting. Hell, they’ve perfected it.

We whites should and must organize racially if we are to have a racial future. Not deny race, pretend it doesn’t exist or matter, as cowardly christian conservatives do. And do in part because they’re trained by men like Buchanan and their christian preachers that racial identification is immoral.

So be it. More beer for us. That’s the attitude we take toward little men who can be talked out of using their eyes and brains in the name of morality and nonexistent higher powers. They are unworthy of our race; then let them mix out of existence per their disgusting doctrines.

Our watchword and guiding star will be this:

 

There is glory to be won, my fellow white men.

I interrupt my repetitions with refrains, but you will pardon me because you know it’s necessary. Everything I say reinforces, providing intellectual coherence, backing and stability. This is because I don’t just want you to see, but to see, taste, hear, smell, sense and relish this stuff – really feel its essential nature, like you’re rubbing it in your fingers or molesting it with your tongue or pronging it with your people-producer. . . .

The rest of Buchanan’s solutions amount to jack squat. Just stay the course, in that ungrammatical Reagan-era expression. Don’t ever name the opposing team and try to form one of your own to take it on. Just find the right candidate for the next election, just whine to the nearest powerful liberal media source about unfairness, just appoint the right lawyer to the Supreme Court. It’s just silliness. Just keep on being the same dopey, religious anti-intellectual Americans you have been, and somehow things will work out this time. For the current situation is unsustainable (leitmotiv of solutions chapter) on every front: immigration! trade deficit! global warmongering! social spending! Well, Pat, that’s what we hear, from conservatives and libertarians alike. And you do make plausible arguments. But remember, this book was written in 2004. I’m writing this review in 2014. Everything you said a decade ago today, would be just as accurate, and just as plausible, just as true, if you’d wrote it today. Yet somehow the jews keep the circus running. Somehow they kick the can down the road. Time appears to be on their side, not ours, and if that’s true, we need more aggressive action than your solutions suggest.

Ultimately empires do fall apart; that is historically undeniable. But what remains of the white race when America turns its hooknose to the heavens? That’s my question. We’d best get on with building a racial team and not worry overly about when precisely the Big Jew Machine running the AmeriKwan Empire will seize up for lack of quality blood and money and excess of troublemakers and fleas.

Buchanan is pretty much out of ideas – since he eschews open racial warfare in favor of the usual religious-conservative pabulum. We need to go back to bein’ a god-fearin’ folk. A limited government folk. Back to a time when a man could stand with hat in hand, sandwich in pocket, speaking plain words to noddin’ neighbors. These don’t help, as the mass public never left these positions, rather a new elite called jews moved in and redefined everything. If you won’t name this team, how can you possibly fight it? You just maunder on lugubriously about the floor getting wet while the tap is still running. Christianity does seem to be a white suicide pact. Christian whiteskins are committed to worrying about the morality and justice of their treatment of a race that is trying to wipe their kind out! It is astonishing. Or would be astonishing, if we weren’t aware of parallels in the animal world. Jews are like an insect that has learned to dominate others by taking over their sense organs, or spraying false chemical signals. They get us to do their bidding, and we can’t even see it. Even though we’re humans, and supposedly able to think rationally and communicate.

Christianity is a blinkered way of looking at the world, and it’s an extremely dangerous one for white men. It gives people of limited intellectual ability the false idea they can understand the world with its simpleton principles. It encourages the dullest among us to think they are good because they refuse to use their brains to make indicated and necessary generalizations – say, about the propensity of blacks for violence. “Evil has no color” these priest-trained idiots like to say, thinking it reflects both love and wisdom. These christians often complain about this or that manifestations of jew-illiberalism (pornography or abortion) but refuse to identify the villain responsible for spreading the poison in the first place.Christians thereby show themselves men of weak minds and weak character. Jews, of course, are hugely contemptuous of christians, and looking at things from their perspective, it makes sense. They abuse these christian curs around the clock in their media, yet the curs always coming cringing back to them, licking and mewling like all little dogs who must placate a superior force. No one respects christians because they aren’t worthy of respect. They feel this way about themselves, in fact. If you treat them with respect, it will cause them to disrespect you. Many people don’t realize that because they don’t perceive the psychology at work.

Christianity is a very great social danger to any white nation in an age of instant communications and quick travel. Even intelligent white men have been confused about the nature of christianity because historically it doesn’t seem to be at odds with functional white societies. But the truth about the inherently anti-white nature of the jesus superstition was revealed in the 20th century: the only reason the cult hadn’t until then proved racially pernicious to our people was that the enemy lacked the communications and transportation technology to exploit the dangers in its moral universalism. The anti-white dangers inseparable from christian doctrine were latent until the 20th-century’s technological advances allowed them to be activated by hostiles (jews and coloreds). Today, the enemy has the necessary techology, and it uses them to fill our lands with colored defectives and, just as important, to justify this to our people/suppress all resistance. Our churches, the only places our people have that address the big questions, can’t resist the jew onslaught because christianity is, as it was on day one, a universalist doctrine. Every single human flea has an immortal and Hugely Precious Soul. We can never ever lump god’s hominids into different camps, they are glorious and valuable beings in His eyes, and so must be to us, too. We are our discolored brothers’ zookeepers!

Christianity recognizes only two classes of men: followers of Jesus and those who need conversion. There are no races-doing-battle in christianity; it’s all about the soul of the individual, no matter his physical makeup. He could be an olinguito, it’s all the same to the pope and pilgrims. Race is a matter of no significance, according to christian doctrine. If you disagree, prepare to be called evil and immoral by the pope – God’s vicar on earth, to the believers. Christian doctrine amounts to God forbidding the white man from defending himself, to put it in plain English. After all, his own son allowed them to kill Him; so how can we mere mortals not copy that, and allow the evil jews to do us in too?

That’s the psychology at work.

That’s why mixing white nationalism and christianity doesn’t work. They’re two radically opposed worldviews. If you don’t think so, you’re not thinking at all. You haven’t bothered to think because you don’t think thinking is important. Contradictions don’t matter.

But they do. That’s what I’m telling you. Consistency and contradictions do matter, and you’d best sit down and puzzle your way through things, and figure out where you stand.

White nationalists have figured it out: we’re for our race, and christianity is our people’s enemy – because it prevents us from defending ourselves by insisting that we are immoral for wanting to do so.

Ironically, in light of these arguments, it’s not just the US the jews have remade. Their agents pulled off Garett’s revolution-within-the-form in Vatican II, back in 1964. Not even the top catholic intellectual E. Michael Jones can see that his cohort’s failure to identify the jew as a hostile biological agent has perhaps fatally undermined his institution. He just insists, purely dogmatically, that a jew is simply a christian who hasn’t been dunked in a bottle of holy water yet. None are so pathetic as those who cut out their eyes and will not see. That is the only verdict we can have for the Joneses of this world.

Getting back to America and racial politics, I’ll tell you what Pat Buchanan won’t: what made America great was two things: white men + absence of central government. The root cause of everything that Pat Buchanan and conservatives generally wish to preserve is racial. There’s no getting around that. But even if they can understand that intellectually, they won’t speak it, because their religion tells them it’s immoral, and their highest temporal value, prudence, (a third-rate virtue trumpeted to the stars by every conservative intellectual from Kirk to Burke on down), tells them it would be bad for their career. Where self-interest and cowardice collude, very few men indeed can resist the blandishments. Physical safety! Financial security! What matter truth and honesty — simple accuracy — next to these? Very little…unless one has pride. And what do religious guppies denounce as the worst sin of all? Yep. Exactly. Pride. Christianity is indeed a slave religion for the cowardly masses. Sharpers like Buchanan are there to mulct them. That’s all that’s going on.

What’s left then, if we accept these conservatives as leaders? Complaining-as-entertainment, for us, and self-interested careerism for our thought-leaders. You can’t get fired for demanding low taxes! You won’t get them, you’ll just get hated for being a racist – since the left considers white man and racist the same thing – but it’s safe. No one gets fired from his job for yelping for lower taxes. Being safe is what matters to the individual American conservative more than anything else. If you team up with little fish and swim around in a great big ball, most of you won’t be eaten by the terrifying Jewwacuda.

Isn’t that pathetic and unmanly?

Yes, it is. It’s also why these knucklers under are so little-dog yappy about flags and eagles and freedom. It helps hide their guilty conscience. “Do you know what you are? You do, don’t you?” — Jim Rockford’s line applies. Even someone as unself-aware as Sarah Palin knows deep in her heart that by putting Israel ahead of the US she is doing a shameful thing. Nevertheless, like a good christian girl, she does it. That’s how that type is.

Our race is capable of better.

Yeah verily I say unto you:

We should demand better. We must demand better. In both politics and in the area religion covers – questions of ultimate context. You know how I feel about context.

We white men require a world in which we can live among our own kind, without any interloping jews or the non-whites they bring in to destroy our societies. We’re sick of and reject their jewish lies, starting with the universalist lies in the christian bible, and ending with their genocidal lies about multiculturalism and diversity.

We white men reject the jesus cult and the jewish mindset that produced it.

There is never, ever anything respectable about ignoring what our sense organs report to us about the existing world, or refusing to modify our thinking and behavior based on the patterns our brains identify. Any school that says there is — as christianity does — is unWhite and anti-White, and we reject it.

Racism is a dirty term for a clean thing. Educated white men know it was deliberately coined to destroy white society by the communist jew Trotsky, back in the 1920s. Today, even the pope promotes the malicious cause behind the most successful slur in human history. Read here. White nationalists vehemently reject the jesus cult and the jews who use it, as they use everything they can get their hands on, to murder our people.

A mongrelized world in which there are no whites is not a problem for Catholics. Not theoretically, not practically. Catholicism and christianity are majority-nonwhite already – a point most white christian apologist fail to realize or remember. You’ll often hear the jackass reactionaries cite Hilaire Belloc’s “Europe is the faith, and the faith is Europe,” but the 20th century proved this was a lie. The white race existed before the church, and god willing, unwilling or chilling, it will exist after the church – at least, after the church has relocated entirely to the third-world, which is exactly what’s been happening the last few decades.

Limits to Imagination Often Affect Smart Men the Way IQ Limits Hamper Dummies

Now I’m going to explain something to you that few realize. Buchanan…and Joe Sobran…and Sam Francis…weren’t very smart. They were intellectually limited. Not for the usual reason – stupidity (i.e., a genetic ceiling). But for the other reasons: fear, lack of imagination, social conformity. They were professionally deformed by their decades of working within the system, as well as deformed by their professional training – Buchanan’s in journalism school, and Sobran’s and Francis’ in their Ph.D. programs. These deformations prevented them from even considerings ideas they needed to entertain in order to make intellectual progress. (I may say parenthetically that Greg Johnson is the only Ph.D. I’ve ever come across who is comparatively free of this professional deformation; but only comparatively, as he is still a Sunday school teacher in fact and at heart.) These limitations kept these notable minds at a level. A high level, undeniably, but not as high as they could have achieved had they been more, uh, robust in their characters and inquisitiveness.

To be specific:

– Only at the very end of his career/life did it begin to dawn on Sam Francis, that, yeah, if you’re serious about this stuff, the Nazi political solution is pretty much where you have to head. If you actually want to take on and defeat jews. If you want to wink and talk in codes and play games and make money, then yeah, Anglo-American conservatism will serve just fine. It took him his entire life to figure this out, and in fact he never fully got there. Yet he still got farther than the other two. Raised up in the American academy, studying matters American, Francis shared the usual clownish American bias against things German in favor of things British-American. These clowns think they’re looking down when actually they’re looking up when they contrast things German with things Anglo-American. Only at the very end of his life, as I say, did an inkling arise in the kopf of the rotund asexual. Think of the Grinch realizing that Christmas isn’t something you buy in a store. But that was a genuine epiphany, and I don’t think even Sam Francis’s dawning awareness rose to that level; more that he experienced a growing awakening to a pulsing suspicion that what…no…hm…really…as these things can often be in us, because our pride is involved. No one likes being wrong for a long time. Most very intelligent people, realizing they are wrong, will attempt to shade into their new position, and make it appear as an organic evolution where they know it is flat reversal. Smart people have their dirty ways and coverups too, imperceptible to the lower elevations.

– Joe Sobran had a tone and mindset similar to Peanuts’ Linus; he saw the church as pulchritudinous, first and last, rather than sepulchral, as it actually is. Once a man enters the mindset of a pervert like Belloc or Chesterton, two of his favorites, there seems no escape. They are to their cult as many are to nature: they simply disregard the parts their rational mind rejects as ugly or irrational and define their institution as the parts they do like. If they like something or find it beautiful, then its flaws disappear, their minds shutter, and they will hear no logic, admit no evidence. Sobran was fired for applying conservative principles to America’s relationship with Israel while working at National Review. His analysis in this direction threatened the late Bill Buckley’s social standing among the jews he catered to, fawned over and flat feared, so Billfer fired him – after publicly abusing his character in magazine and book. Resulting in one of the greatest pieces ever composed by human brain: “How I Was Fired by Bill Buckley.” Read it here. His firing from National Review put him on the downward path, financially and I believe physically, after reading the hardships he endured in this article by Patrick Casey. Yet like a good christian — indeed, explicitly for that reason — he refused to hate the neocon jews who hated him, who brought him down, who damaged his very family.

So if you wonder why I hate and denounce christianity – it’s because of what it does to men like Joe Sobran: it damages their otherwise highly functional minds. If you can’t hate your own enemies, there is something wrong with you. The idea that you shouldn’t hate your enemies is the radically dangerous contribution of guess who? The jews who created the fictional character Jesus. Not surprisingly, this concept redounds to their benefit. Hate is too good for the common goy – just like racism/national socialism, borders, sexual continence and the rest. It’s just right for jews, though.

White men should hate their enemies. Sobran was wrong and, worse than wrong, pathetic and weak, in crying over the death of Irving Kristol, the creator of the neocons. My opinion of Joe Sobran was lowered when I read that article, and that alone makes me near-sick, because Sobran was one of my favorites. He was one of the few Ph.D.s who could actually turn a phrase on a level with me. Christianity disfigured Joe Sobran mentally, and so it has disfigured our race’s character and very genetic future. Not to hate, whatz?

We are not all brothers. We are not one with blacks and browns. We are our own people. We will crush any who get in our way. We demand absolutely sovereignty, and we will mock and insult and destroy any who get between us and the conditions we require to flourish. We will regain our independence, first mentally, then physically. No christian or jew will stop us.

It took Joe Sobran by his own admission over twenty years for it to occur to him to apply conservative principles to America’s relationship with Israel. When he did, being honest, he wrote what he found. And got fired for it. My point is that intelligence is not everything – imagination is much. Flexibility is much. Not having blinders on is much. One of the reasons jews are able to dominate whites is they have a trained and perhaps ingrained or natural ability to look at things from all angles – a middleman’s sensibility turned to politics. They don’t have the ego-blindness most Aryans do; they are raised up to split hairs and see things from different perspectives, which serves them as well in politics as in handel.

Even as Sobran’s life spiraled thanks to jews he refused to place them at the center of his writing, even though he was foremost a political analyst. Nor had he ever any particular interest in race. He will have seen this as being principled. To me, it just looks weak. In the last few years of his career, Sobran came to realize that men can’t be bound by paper – the very idea of limiting government is defective. I believe, but could be wrong, he got this from Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s Democracy, The God That Failed. In any case, it was an interesting evolution of his views. That it took him so long is testament to his having matured before the internet, and undergone formal academic training, which may sharpen the mind but tends to channel it away from certain types of observations. Scholars hate wit. They fear and despise anything they can’t categorize; anything they can’t see coming from a mile away. Sobran was a very rare type: a linemaker. There are many good analysts, but there are comparatively few who can regularly come up with insights and phrase them memorably enough they could become epigrams if we lived in a reading age.

As his words were clearly unmotivated by personal malice, they were that much stronger, perhaps, than your normal attempted lacerations might be. Sobran’s achieved the ends of snark, without needing or using the today-ubiquitous means (a cheap snarling tone); his always seemed an observational, disinterested analysis, a response to something someone else brought up – which only amplified the power of his observations, as his jew targets well knew. He didn’t care enough about the jews to put them center stage, even though they destroyed his life; and you know that boiled their oil. Actually, he did, but he was as artist genius enough to make it look like he wasn’t trying – which in this case means he gave the appearance he wasn’t focusing on them when he was.

But still, I wish he had formally and openly gone after the jews who went after him, and I think he owed it to his own race — his own family, literally — to have done so; to have tried to destroy them for trying to destroy him. But the only duties he observed were to his church and its peculiar and anti-white morality. Nevertheless, he left us with more valid and crystalline observations of jewish power and behavior than any other conservative – and for that, we owe him if not precisely respect, then heartfelt intellectual appreciation. He was wrong, but he wasn’t a punk. He was led into pathetic and self- and racially-destructive behavior by his goofy cult. Just because a man is smart, and can avoid intellectual pitfalls, doesn’t mean he’s not susceptible to emotional or aesthetic traps. Thus it was noble Joe fell into the christian quicksand.

– as for Patsy Decline, as I like to call him, he has said, although I haven’t the link to hand, that he was raised up in the Roman Catholic, and never doubted it. I see no reason to doubt what he says; his entire history and all his writings confirm. He’s intelligent. He’s astute. He is not particularly imaginative or, contrary to his reputation, pugnacious. He’s, more than anything, loyal. Just not to his race. Blame it on his father and his father’s religion, that’s where it comes from.

END PART ONE OF TWO