Friday, December 28, 2012

Ideological Colonialism...




Radical Liberalism has haunted the land of the living for a long, long time. But in the 20th Century it finally came into its own, conquering continents and enshrining its precepts into a new creed-like religion.

How did it do this?

Either consciously or not, the demigods of the extremist left simply adopted the tactic of the colonialism of the 17th and 18th centuries. 

In North America and Western Europe extremist leftism was presented as the one, true faith and culture to which all men must bow before.

In North America the model for this ideological imperialism was New England Puritanism.

This might seem strange to some, but it is a point of fact that the Puritans were the quintessential left-wing zealots of their day.

How so?

Simple,

At its core, liberalism is the belief that an ideal existence for man cannot only be achieved, but can be achieved through social engineering.

For the Puritans this was expressed as the “Shinning City on a Hill”. They believed that with the right religion, the right legislation, the right social codes and the right leadership, mankind could build a better, more prosperous, society.

Them and their descendants (genetic and ideological) pursued this ideal with ruthless aplomb. First among their neighbors in the north and then later towards their neighbors in the south. Today this Shinning City mandate is the ideological justification for America’s military conquest of planet earth.

It is beyond irony that many on the right fear the United Nations or radical Islamic expansionism when both are equally subservient to, and dependent upon, the American Empire.

Like their pre-20th century predecessors, the radical left of today believes that the “right” ideas, legislation and leadership can and will build a better, more prosperous, tomorrow. And that, to that end, all the world must needs be brought under one, and only one, faith, government and culture.

Thus, they have set out to colonize the whole world with their ideology.

The traditional opposition to this (from ancient times right up to today) is the belief that there never has been and, most importantly, never will be, an ideal form of society; let alone one that can and must envelope the entire planet.

Conservatism, once upon a time, generally meant being cautious and contemplative and reflective. It meant humbly admitting to your self the powerlessness all men have in the face of this wild and uncontrollable wilderness of a world.

Even the mightiest and wisest of kings and sages never believed or sought after an ideal world because they knew it was folly, for “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”.

It is arrogant and hubristic and, ultimately, ignorant to seek after a “better world”.

The world is as it is.
And mankind is as it is.

 Neither has changed in thousands of years and neither will change till one or the other has, at long last, come to its natural end.


In his poem “If”, Rudyard Kipling, seen by many as the poet laureate for imperialism, referred to both Triumph and Disaster as impostors.

What he meant was that the world was running its course long before we came along and will still be running that same course long after we are gone. Our personal (and collective) joys and sorrows are short lived and fade away like a vapor on a breezy summer night.

To believe that we can “build a better tomorrow” is quite literally insane, and from a cosmic point of view, rather humorous.

...


Tuesday, December 11, 2012

A Society Divided?...





The battle between Christianity and Communism is a civil war.

It is a house divided against its self, as both side’s worldviews overlap 99.9% of the time.

From Moses to Marx and from Jesus to Engels, there is a pervasive and poisonous insistence on one, and only one, system of truth and morality.

Of course, this is obviously false as there is no universal morality as there is no “universal man”.

All history testifies to this.

Mountains of literature, archaeology, anthropology, sociology, biology, DNA studies, multi-generational cross cultural research, and personal everyday observation and experience provide absolute proof that there is no one system, governmental or theological, that is applicable to all people.

There are different races upon this planet, each with its own sense of self, morality, justice and truth (and right and wrong).

And each and every one is legitimate.



So this Christmas Season, as we hear more decrying of the Culture War, keep in mind that it is a civil war within a single camp and beneath the same banner. 



...

Monday, November 12, 2012

The Vote Conspiracy Theory...


There are still those on the right who are clinging desperately to a fantasy of the United States, in which the majority of its citizens are perfect projections of themselves.

These deluded people just will not accept the fact that the 2012 election truly represented the new America.

In a desperate bid to hold on to their fantasy world, they’ve deduced that some sort of vote fraud or similar conspiracy must have taken place.

But these sorts of positivist postulations and rationalizations are nothing new.

For decades conservatives have asserted (and believed) that the cultural Marxists who have been marching triumphantly across the land were merely foolish, silly, ill-informed or (most likely) misled in their own beliefs and would come to see the light once presented with the sacred truth.

These conservatives have grasped at any explanation save the most obvious, which is that the Leftists are neither naïve or un-informed.

Quite the opposite, the Left is well informed, well organized and know precisely what they are doing and believe in it and will defend it intellectually and militantly.
And to that end they have been enacting their principles into law and enshrining their ideology into the culture with military (conquest) like maneuvers…the likes of which would make Alexander the Great bow in awe.

Conservatives have been in full re-treat since post-WWII. It’s been, at times, an organized retreat, but a retreat none-the-less.

Sure, they lost a significant battle with suffrage early in the 20th century, but it wasn’t until after WWII that the left went for the jugular and the right began to see the world with a subsequent bloody rosy tint. 

The “civil rights” movement was an open assault upon American society (particularly upon the freedom of association) and Western Civilization in general, and yet conservatives today honor it and its’ outcome –which led directly to the 2012 election.

Martin Luther King Jr. was an unabashed cultural Marxist whose stated purpose was to tear down American society and yet today’s conservatives honor him with great reverence, even though King’s ascendancy leads directly to the throwing down of the conservative’s beloved Founding Fathers.

The list is endless. But the point is salient.

The right has been in a full blown political and cultural retreat for the past six decades.

For the past twenty years it has been the denial of racial differences that has been conservative’s Achilles heel.

Despite mountains of scientific, historical, archaeological, anthropological, sociological and personal anecdotal evidence to the contrary, many on the right have acquiesced to the Left’s dictate that race is a social construct and malleable.

And this mandate, which was the one of the key ideological foundation stones of the Soviet Union, has been enforced into every aspect of Western Society. The indoctrination is on full display in the media, in the schools, in government and even (in the past couple decades) in the churches –just as it was in the Soviet Union.


And yet White Americans are just flummoxed and baffled as to how a candidate who is physically and ideologically right out of a third world banana republic could be chosen by an electorate which is increasingly physically and ideologically directly (genetically) out of the third world.



Basically, it comes down to an arrogance that was bred by circumstance and isolation. Far too many White Americans have hubristically projected themselves onto all and sundry. They have ignorantly assumed and presumed that the rest of the world wants to be just like them –to have what they have in culture, government, society, law, etc.

But the truth (which is now smacking White Americans in the face) is that not everyone wants what they want. That not everyone desires or esteems the cultural and political traditions that Americans of European descent hold dear.

Race is not a social construct. Rather, societies are racial constructs. And each race will construct an environment that is endemic to its nature.

Europeans came to the new world and re-created there the environment which fit their nature. Africans did likewise (which is why Haiti, or any other black majority location, looks like a piece of Africa which broke off from the continent and floated away). The same goes for Asians, Arabs and the rest.

Which is not an inherently bad thing. Different peoples will have different worldviews, moral concepts of law and order, different temperaments and different social standards. Each people must be allowed to live in a society which reflects their nature.
When they mix, tragedy ensues and one side will overpower the other.

So as Whites diminish demographically in a republic founded by Whites, that Republic will cease to exist and a third world style Marxist ghetto will take its place –its already happening apace.

So the question is, as Whites are pushed back further towards the cliff, how much longer will they continue to retreat, looking for politically correct excuses for the demise of all that they hold dear?

No, it wasn’t vote fraud or rigged machines or voodoo or anything else that resulted in the 2012 election. It was the cold hard reality of racial difference. A fact which the cultural icons of the MSM are ecstatically celebrating, even as sheepish Whites confusedly squeak, “but I thought race didn’t matter?”



Thursday, November 8, 2012

What Went Wrong...

What is truly amazing post-election 2012 is the sudden shock which many traditional Americans are, apparently, just now feeling at the state of American society. Hypothetically, if Romney had been elected these same people would now be feeling what...relief?

Really?

The "shock" some are apparently in seems misplaced by about 4 or 5 decades.

"What went wrong" went wrong generations ago. From the end of WWII onwards America has been leading the western world speedily to its present situation.


The following was written and posted here years ago, but it is today more relevant (for some) than ever.

Below is the answer to "what went wrong"?
...




If there is one overriding notion in the concept of, "Just", in a Justice system, it is that the accused have the right to a defense.

A prosecution without a defense is generally considered, obscene.

For the past 60+ years Western Civilization has been on trial without a general defense being presented. Accusations, slurs and innuendos have gone unchallenged as Western Man has accepted, without investigation, the acridity of the claims.

Imperialism, Colonialism, Racism, Intolerance, Prejudice etc....

Where is the defense?

Where is the Western Apologetic?

It was recently asked here if Christianity could be used to defend The West.
But is it possible that this question is backwards?

The ideological Left began marshaling its troops a century ago, and as they've inched ever closer to seeming victory in The West, we have to ask, where did they attack?

Most Christians claim that they directly assaulted Christianity, but did they?

Christianity has no doubt lost ground even as Christian Apologetic books and sites have become a dime a dozen.

So what happened?

Today's Christian leaders have acquiesced to the claims by the Left upon Western History. They nod in agreement with the Left's denouncements of everything from The Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition to Colonialism and Southern history. And they do so deferring to the scholarship of the Left's own propagandists.

These Christian leaders have made no attempt at an Apologetic in defense of The West; crusades, slavery, colonialism, racism etc...

You see, the Left did not attack Christianity to undermine Western Civilization.
They attacked Western Civilization to undermine Christianity.

And it worked!

The Ideology of the Left is based unabashedly upon ever morphing hypocrisy. And they do this best in verbal and emotional appeals.

For example, they might proclaim, "We decree that everyone has an inalienable right to their own opinion. And anyone who disagrees with this is a tyrant!"
It's called double-speak.

And in a truly Machiavellian stroke of genius, they lured the Right into this mode of thought. And in so doing they have made the Christian a hypocrite.

The Leftist asserts that the slave owners, crusaders, conquistadors, heretic hunters etc.. to be evil.
The thoughtless Christian, intent upon showing his "reasonableness" agrees with the assertion.
The Leftist then points out that all of the above were Christians.
The Christian attempts a defense by claiming the accused were not "true Christians".
But the Leftist is already ahead of his opponent here because he has, in another context, accused the Christian of being "Judgmental".
And the "reasonable" Christian can appeal to no Biblical standard lest he be forced to call a host of other modern behaviors a "sin".
The Christian has now become a glaring hypocrite because he gleefully nods at Southern Slavery being called evil, yet now chokes on calling homosexuality or abortion evil.

The result: the Christian today scourers the Bible to find ways of reinforcing the Left's attacks upon the very people who have historically espoused the Christian faith!

Had the Christian halted the proceedings at the first accusation against the Crusader or Slave owner and challenged the claim by developing an apologetic on their behalf, he would have, in essence, stood his post at the Western Gates and pushed his enemy into retreat.
Instead, he left his post, dropped his armor and aided the sworn enemy of all that he holds dear in despoiling his Civilization, Country, City, Home and Family.
He has become a traitor.

And as his enemy stands unaccosted in the village square shouting endless profanities and slanders against his countryman's forefathers, he wonders why his sons have become apathetic, if not hostile, to those forefather's faith, culture and traditions.


... 

Wednesday, October 3, 2012

Re-Up (What Is A Nation)...

We often (very often) hear the jingoism “take America back” by all and sundry on both sides of the political/social divide.  Particularly on the conservative side we see the notion put forward that The America is somehow far adrift from her foundational roots, as laid down by the Founding Fathers.  But is this really the case?  Is modern Americanism fundamentally different from 18th century revolutionary Americanism?  What would the Founding Fathers think of The America today?

In addressing that, we must first consider what The America is and what The America is not.  What The America is not, is a nation.  What The America is, essentially, is a religion/empire, with much akin to a Marxist state.  And one of the “gifts” which both Marxism and Americanism have bequeathed to the world is the ability to re-define words and even reality itself.

One example of that is the definition of nation. Since the advent of Americanism/Marxism the definition has been completely re-written to the point that it now actually means the complete opposite of what it meant for thousands of years.

As stated, The America is not a nation, which makes such linguistic concoctions as “a nation of immigrants” one of the more profound examples of an oxymoron and generally reflects the intellectual apathy found amongst the populace.

A nation is NOT a placeA nation is NOT an ideology or creed or form of government or philosophy.

What is a nation?

In the simplest terms, nation is another word for ethnic Group.

A nation is a race or stock of people.  The English are a nation.  The Irish are a nation.  They need not be gathered in the same locale, share a common faith or reside under a similar form of government to be a nation.

Let me say this again.  Nation is another word for Ethnic Group.  A nation is a biological unit, an extended family, aka a tribe.
From the Etymology Dictionary:

Nation
c.1300, from O.Fr. nacion, from L. nationem (nom. natio) “nation, stock,
race,” lit. “that which has been born,” from natus, pp. of nasci “be born”
The origin of nations is ancient, and the knowledge of it should be embedded in our culture.  Its lack leads to all kinds of problems and comedy, such as the (inherently American) Evangelical interpretation of “prophesy” in regard to Israel becoming a nation again in the 1940s and how that “sign” points to the end of days.  The irony there is that if they believe modern jews are the Israel of the bible, then they didn’t “become a nation “again in 1948 as they never stopped being a nation (ie, an ethnic group) in the first place.

Again, a nation need not have government, leaders or even a land of their own to be a nation.  It is blood that makes a nation, not forms of government.  Thus there is no American nation.

Can nations mix to form a new one?  No.

Small admixtures from cousin-nations can be absorbed, such as Danish into English, but the former is inevitably lost into the latter. There are no new nations.

So what The America is, is a proto-Marxist religion/empire.  Nothing more.  And in that, Americanism naturally shares more than a little in common with conventional Marxism.  This is why The America and the former Soviet Union look so much alike.  Both were artificially fabricated political constructs, rather than being natural, organic living-societies.  (And, not surprisingly, both found themselves dominated by a nation who very much considers themselves a nation, separate from the empires they ruled.)
Take for example this excerpt from a letterfrom Karl Marx to Abe Lincoln:
We congratulate the American people upon your re-election by a large
majority.  If resistance to the Slave Power was the reserved watchword of your first election, the triumphant war cry of your re-election is Death to Slavery.

From the commencement of the titanic American strife the workingmen of Europe felt instinctively that the star-spangled banner carried the destiny of their class. The contest for the territories which opened the dire epopee, was it not to decide whether the virgin soil of immense tracts should be wedded to the labor of the emigrant or prostituted by the tramp of the slave driver?
When an oligarchy of 300,000 slaveholders dared to inscribe, for the first time in the annals of the world, “slavery” on the banner of Armed Revolt, when on the very spots where hardly a century ago *the idea of one great Democratic Republic* had first sprung up, whence the first Declaration of the Rights of Man was issued …
And in ambassador Adams’ reply (at the same link), we find the following,
Nations do not exist for themselves alone, but to promote the welfare and happiness of mankind by benevolent intercourse and example.
Adams, in a round about way, agrees with Marx (see the full quote at the link).
His father John Adams, a “Founding Father”, first vice-President and second President of the United States, wrote the following, concurring with the theme:
If the empire of superstition and hypocrisy should be overthrown, happy indeed will it be for the world; but if all religion and all morality should be over-thrown with it, what advantage will be gained? The doctrine of human equality is founded entirely in the Christian doctrine that we are all children of the same Father, all accountable to Him for our conduct to one another, all equally bound to respect each other’s self love.
-page 619, ‘John Adams’ by David McCullough
Such is not the sentiments of a man residing (physically or otherwise) in the warring ghettos of the real world amongst his kin.  No, that is the pompous affirmation of a man safely ensconced in an ivory tower, from whose lofty perch even Sao Paolo must look lovely at midnight when its dim and dirty lights glow luminously, masking the chaos, disease and death in the streets below. From such a distance joy and sorrow are indistinguishable and all peoples look alike … and they tend to look like ants.

Such sentiments, as express by Marx and Adams are echoed in our own time by Bill Gates, George Soros and the like; Businessman, Mercenary Merchants, ‘Power to the People-preachers’, “Citizens of the World” and so on.  CEO’s with a corporate management mindset that believes social engineering cannot only reap ever-increasing profits but “better-off” the little people as well.  A man-made rearranging of the elements to better suit the perceived “greater good”.

Thus Marxism and Americanism consummate their relationship through their shared denouncement of family, tradition and identity.  Their offspring is the atomized consumeristic blank-slate.  For tradition is the enemy of America.

And so we have, from our beginning, a hypocritical elite who bemoans the existence of an elite. A Merchant-Pirate class who bemoans piracy and class, and the rich and powerful piously denouncing riches and power.  And with one voice they ask of the masses, “will you not give up your pursuit of power, riches and identity for the greater good?”  (We can see this today with rich and influential celebrities using the soap box their multi-million dollar lifestyles afforded them to denounce both the bigotry of the people they openly and collectively loathe and the “greedy excesses” of people who earn less than $50,000 a year.)

Powerless people cannot give up power anymore than poor people can “enter a life of poverty”. Thus it is rare (if ever) that “people’s revolutions” occur from the bottom up. Marxist-minded social engineers are either of the elite or end up as the elite.  And for them all things are malleable….for and by them.

“We the people” were neither consulted nor present when “They the rulers” applied our consent to their overthrow of history.  So what the Founding Fathers instituted was the notion that nations are man-made creatures (akin to Frankenstein’s patched-together-monster) rather than natural outgrowths of the family/tribe. And that is a critical point, considering trends today. For if the family is the bedrock of a nation, then how we define a nation will effect how we think of the family.

If a nation is merely an agreed upon social arrangement, voluntarily entered into and agreed by individuals (as in a creed), then so is the family. We should not then be surprised at the existence of the Franken-family, wherein are found every conceivable arrangement (from two “mommies” raising donated sperm to single parents and their revolving-door one night stands to the adopted multi-rainbow mockery) redefined into constituting a legitimate family.

Indeed, the Founding Fathers’ action in creating The America was akin to a vacationing wife who writes back to her husband to inform him she is leaving him, taking the kids and moving into a commune where everybody is husband and wife to everybody else, and the kids now have 27 dads and as many moms.  A “melting pot”, in other words.

In point of fact The Declaration of Independence was a divorce paper, wherein George and Tom and Benjamin and the rest announced their intention of severing ties with kith and kin. Their actions in creating The America was not only the breaking up of a home, it was a direct assault upon the sacred nature of the family in and of itself.

So in answer to the question, no, the Founding Fathers would not be surprised or upset at The America’s present state.  They would be pleased with the progress.  After a (well, very) little soul searching they would embrace a Marxist colored president, if not outright bow down before him, and promptly denounce any who oppose him as un-American.  Even Jefferson, who wrote about the perpetually low mental and spiritual qualities of the negro would come around quickly.  After all, a democratically elected Marxist Negro is the final embodiment of everything the “founding fathers” strived for in their rejection of an un-elected White Monarch.

Again, tradition is the enemy of America.

Besides, it should be rather telling, that as The America ascended to world supremacy post-WWII the world has become increasingly radically liberal and leftist in outlook and ideology. And debauched culturally and racially.

Europe is a good example of that. Western Europe has been under the American dominion for 60+ years, and in that time has rapidly slid into the gutter culturally, socially and demographically. It is frequently described today as a dying continent.

The America is a multi-headed Beast, seeking out whom it may devour.  Americanism is a trumped up religion to sell a poisoned product.  In times past that religion was euphemistically called Babylon. Through democracy and universalism via assimilation it has created an image of Global Governance, wherein people from all tribes reside under one government, with “justice for all” at the point of a PC litigated riffle.

And it calls upon the whole world to bow down before that image.  Those who do not bow down can neither buy nor sell on the world stage. They are derided, attacked and denied the right to the preservation of their distinct nations (peoples) and ways.

Just look at the White nations residing in The America ...  What’s left of them.

...

Friday, August 31, 2012

Great Time For A History Book...

The Decline and Fall Of The Roman Empire was written quite a few years after the occurrence, which naturally detracts from the authors vision and interpretation of the events.

Now, however, would be a perfect time for a new look at Rome's decline and fall as America is in that very situation in the 21st century.


The only problem is that rarely do major social upheavals register at the time. The precise moment when a society begins to decline is never marked by the society itself. It's usually assigned by future historians with the benefit of hindsight.

Never-the-less, American and European writers are in a unique position to knowingly describe and articulate the worldview held at the twilight of a civilization's existence.

Sad, but true.

...



Iconic Moments...

The GOP, aka The Society For The Preservation Of Change, looks increasingly bizarre in its yearning to look as bland (read non-offensive) as possible.

And already it has, by virtue of Clint Eastwood, provided the culture an iconic moment that will come to represent the Republicans for the next four years.

Which is to say, a stuttering old man talking to an empty chair.

That will make for quite a logo.



But that is the problem. In spite of having the most divisive political personality to ever ascend the Cherry Blossom Throne, the GOP is unable to articulate exactly how it is any different.

Mainly because it isn't.


In fact when you think about it that image actually does represent the Republicans and the Democrats in the 21st century,

A doddering old man and an empty chair.


...

Tuesday, July 31, 2012

The New Superstition...

One of the more overt forms of Western de-evolving rational is the use of the phrase "wrong time and the wrong place" to describe a tragedy which has befallen an individual or group.

It's hardly a use of deductive reasoning is it? Deductive reasoning being a traditional line of thought which generally retraces a course of events to ascertain their genesis (or cause).

If an airplane crashes we don't say the passengers were merely in the wrong place at the wrong time. No, we investigate and determine the cause, be it mechanical malfunction or weather related. 



Another such phrase is "random act of violence".

Is there really such a thing?

At the most extreme example of excuse, if someone is mentally disturbed and commits an egregious act, that act's genesis (or cause) can thus be traced to that person's mental state.

There is always a cause.

Even lightning strikes can be understood and explained.

Yet today, due to the harmful ideologies of political correctness, equality and diversity, certain crimes must needs be attributed to almost supernatural influences which defy explanation, let alone investigation.

In other words,

to describe a crime as "random" is the same as saying elves did it.







...

Equal In The Cult...

There is today probably not a more destructive presumption, even faith, than the notion of Equality. For its sheer baselessness and capacity to harm, and be it racial, cultural, societal, gender, etc, the modern notion of intrinsic or inherent “equal-ness” among human beings resides in a historical class by itself. From a racial perspective, pondering why Whites and non-Whites are not civilizationally, morally or temperamentally equal or why there is a socio-economical gap between the races, is about as necessary (and forced) as asking why dogs make better household pets than Grizzly bears.

All about us we see inequality as a natural condition and reality. Within sets and subsets, disparity in quality and ability is the norm. Be it among men or animals, fowl or fish, we see systems where this normative condition is nature’s engineering, and obviously not the outcome of prejudice or bigotry.
Of course, when we look at groupings of distinct classes of Man, animal or plant we can instantly recognize similar qualities distinct to each group or sub-group. We observe, for example, that fish swim and birds, by and large, fly. We can test this for the validity of labelling them by their distinctiveness. Yet not all fish are the same or equal, nor are birds without a variety of differences.

Even when similarities are more relevant (yet still greatly divergent in degrees), differences in quality, ability, adaptiveness and so on, are undeniable … such as, for instance, the fact that flight is a quality common to both butterflies and eagles. Yet the ultimate and distinguishable inequality between the two, in any given circumstance they may happen to share, is self-evident to all but the wilfully blind.
And so we come to the unnecessary predicament that the wilfully blind Equalitarians create with their presumption for Equality and their grievous vexation by the lack of it. If the races are equal, then it is unfair that some live in squalor while others live in skyscrapers. If men and women are equal, then it is unfair that women do not hold as many positions of power as men. If all men are equal, then it is unfair that some live longer, healthier lives than others.

And, of course, since the Equalitarians presume for equality and find everywhere a superabundant absence of it (to coin a phrase), then they must concoct some reason to explain it. This they achieve through the assertion of prejudice and bigotry on the part of the “more equal”. But it is a tactic that is as unscientific as it is comical. Is it bigotry and prejudice on the part of birds that explains why cats can’t fly, and “institutional prejudice” on the part of pine trees that explains why maples cannot stay green all year round?

Or maybe it is the “racist act” of excluding different groups from your own. Maybe one group has kept another from assimilating into its own matrix as a way to discriminate against them and “keep them down”.
But this assimilation canard is just as comical and preposterous. Four hundred years of close contact with Whites in America has not helped blacks to assimilate towards White standards of civilization. And why should it? Why on Earth should we believe that different races must or can assimilate to one another’s innate (genetic) societal tendencies?

This is why the reality of racial groupings and their varying genetic dissimilarities is so important. Because if you take the Occam’s Razor route and eliminate the most convoluted theories in regards to the ongoing civilizational disparity of the races, then you will be left with the most logical explanation for those disparities ... the races are simply different. Add to this the fact that these different groups of peoples diverged tens of thousands of years ago and continued to evolve in wildly varying environments and circumstances (that will never be repeated), and the notion of “equality among the races” is, on its face, ridiculously unscientific, illogical and wholly unnecessary in its presumption.

Put it this way.

Imagine dropping off a group of alligators in the North Pole, then blaming the “deep rooted prejudice” of the Polar Bears for the alligators’ inability to assimilate and prosper. It’s an absurd assertion, but when you assume a notion without regard to observable facts, then you are compelled to twist those facts and invent others to accommodate that assumption.

In regards to “race relations” the same obviously holds true. Remove the silly and baseless notion of universal standards of intelligence, morality and civilizational ability among the various races, and it will take about a month to solve the “race relations” problems.
How? Because there is no universal standard of Intelligence, morality or even what constitutes a civilization.

Each race has its own definition of these things and each definition is valid to that race. Thus, what is civilization to us, is not civilization to them. What is moral for us, is not necessarily so for them. What is poverty for us, is not poverty for them. What is Quality of Life for us, is not the same for them. And so on.

But when races are mixed in societies that assume “Equality” as a prerequisite for behavior then (falsely) perceived injustices and inequality ensue, and chaos soon reigns. Not to mention the fact that the pursuit of equality in a world that is naturally unequal is simply a waste of valuable and (often) unrecoverable time and resources. How much money has been thrown at programs intended to close racial gaps in education, that essentially just went down a black hole? How many neighborhoods have been irrevocably disturbed or destroyed through efforts to integrate races into communities once prosperous and peaceful due to their homogeneity? How much death and destruction has been unleashed by those who (believing in equality) changed laws to criminalize Freedom of Association?

And don’t forget that the presumption of equality is now used as the current justification for America’s war on terror. By assuming “we’re all the same” we can find ample justification for “bringing democracy to the oppressed throughout the world” in the form of unending invasions and occupations!
Ultimately the belief in equality (like every other notion embraced by modern liberalism) is a destructive force. One which tears down without leaving anything (better or worse -the worse is left by default-) in its place. It simply creates an infinite vacuum of contempt and disdain for the natural state of things.

Worse still, the desire for, or pursuit of , “equality” is the proverbial two-edged sword; those who pick it up to wield it against others are often wounded by it themselves. For if you embrace “Equality”, then you must reject, increasingly, all forms of difference. If you embrace the notion that race is a social construct, you will in turn embrace the notion that gender is a social construct as well. If you endorse interracial marriage today, then you WILL endorse homosexual marriage tomorrow ... and on it goes.

Once you except, partially or wholly, the notion of Equality, you have immersed yourself in a world of lies. And the more lies you tell yourself, and the more lies you allow yourself to believe in, the more detached you become from reality, until it gets to the point that reality itself become the enemy.
Already today we can see segments of our society which, by embracing Equality, have plunged into such a state of mental anarchy that they can no longer (as in, are willing to) distinguish between black people and White people, male and female, humans and plants, tress and animals, terrorism and civility, history and propaganda, (in art) beauty and ugliness, Christianity and Islam, science and dogma, good and bad, Truth and Lies ...

The cult of Equality strips people of their ‘soul’ because it engenders an apathy (and eventually a hostility) towards the ability to place value and assess worth. It rips the very heart out of such truths as Nation, Community, Family, Father, Mother, Brother, Sister, Child and Friend, because it denies the very nature of their distinctiveness. And in the end it destroys such “divisive” concepts as Devotion, Loyalty and Love, because those are three things that you can never apply equally to all places, things and people.

That is why today, as our depraved society plumbs the depths of “Equality”, we see anarchy, nihilism and violence escalating by a factor of ten from one year to the next. Unless and until we all learn to live within the limitations of Truth, and to forego the pleasure of those warm but ultimately empty fuzzy feelings, we are going to continue driving our long-fought-for civilization down to the third level of societal hell.

The belief in Equality is a faith whose unnecessary premise is currently working hard to rival Judaism, Christianity and Islam (all together) as a civilizational wrecking ball. Tragically for the West, it is only Whites who are pursuing Equality - and doing so out of a contempt for their own natural state in the world which formed their distinctive attributes to begin with. We are like birds who, having had a false sense of guilt engendered in them for their ability to soar through the heavens, sever their own wings and plunge to the earth to make those that walk or crawl upon the land feel better about their own (distinct) natural state.

Thus the pursuit of equality is really just a pathological contempt for self rather than a reverence for the other. It is the face of hate locked in an asylum of mirrors desperately in search of a conformational “Amen” that it will never find.

To sum up succinctly, the unnecessary presumption of Equality casts yet another stumbling block before a great civilization, and its nations and peoples, that has already strayed far off course and is in danger of falling.

...

The New Norm...

Once upon a time, most Americans had never even heard of "flash mob robberies" or "organized looting".  Now they are considered to be a part of normal life in America.
...
 The sad truth is that the streets of America are changing.  They are becoming a lot more hostile and a lot more dangerous.
-source

The linked article contains other examples of the rapidly deteriorating situation in America (it's the same in the rest of the Western World).

Of course the writer of that article is perplexed as to the cause of it all, finding fault in the moral shortcomings of "today's young people". Which, if you've followed these types of disturbing stories for very long, is code for non-Whites.

The problem is that once you accepts the premise of diversity and equality you must lower the standards all around to accommodate the "change". There can no longer be a standard, in fact, as standards are racist.

So long as the ideology of equality is embraced the Western world will continue to spiral into an ever deepening abyss.



...

Decline And Fall

George Miller’s 1981 post-apocalyptic film The Road Warrior envisioned an impoverished world of the future. Tribal groups fought over what remained of a destroyed Western world of law, technology, and mass production. Survival went to the fittest — or at least those who could best scrounge together the artifacts of a long gone society somewhat resembling the present West.
In the case of the Australian film, the culprit for the detribalization of the Outback was some sort of global war or perhaps nuclear holocaust that had destroyed the social fabric. Survivors were left with a memory of modern appetites but without the ability to reproduce the means to satisfy them:  in short, a sort of Procopius’s description of Gothic Italy circa AD 540.
...
 
Our culprit out here was not the Bomb (and remember, Hiroshima looks a lot better today than does Detroit, despite the inverse in 1945). The condition is instead brought on by a perfect storm of events that have shred the veneer of sophisticated civilization. Add up the causes. One was the destruction of the California rural middle class. Manufacturing jobs, small family farms, and new businesses disappeared due to globalization, high taxes, and new regulations. A pyramidal society followed of a few absentee land barons and corporate grandees, and a mass of those on entitlements or working for government or employed at low-skilled service jobs. The guy with a viable 60 acres of almonds ceased to exist.
Illegal immigration did its share. No society can successfully absorb some 6-7 million illegal aliens, in less than two decades, the vast majority without English, legality, or education from the poorer provinces of Mexico, the arrivals subsidized by state entitlements while sending billions in remittances back to Mexico — all in a politicized climate where dissent is demonized as racism. This state of affairs is especially true when the host has given up on assimilation, integration, the melting pot, and basic requirements of lawful citizenship.

-source 


It's been stated here before that eventually travel will become more and more difficult due to "diversity". It is inevitable.
However, in many places, such as parts of California and Texas, daily travel has already been restricted for many people so as to avoid dangerous places.

The Decline And Fall is now completely underway.

...

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Civil Rights Wins Again...

The following was first posted here in May of 2011


Everyone I know is fuming over the “unconstitutional” health-care bill that was “un-democratically” shoved down our throats. I have to keep explaining to such people that compared to legislation passed in the 1960’s Obamacare is a minor triviality.

It’s amazing (yet sadly not unexpected) that so many seem to gloss over the rather draconian and spirit-crushing bits of legislation commonly refereed to as “civil rights”. Many seem to prefer to ignore or forget that among the “civil rights” accomplishments have been: legalizing abortion, promoting homosexuality, exalting feminism, attacking and attempting to destroy the family, de-constructing communities, rewriting history, and other equally civilization-crushing acts.

And these were done under the notion of “equality”. And to bring about “equality” our society had to destroy, in theory and in fact, freedom of association.

Since the “civil rights” legislation went into effect, Americans have been told (under threat of government force) who they must live among, who they can do business with, who they can vacation with, who their children must attend school with, and in what company they can congregate. All done to criminalize discrimination. Yet the most fundamental freedom that can be had (either collectively or individually) is the right to discriminate. Take away that right and freedom is instantly dead.

And the critical aspect of this is that prejudices and the discriminations they encourage are generally based on collective historical experience. They are an expression of a society’s hard fought for wisdom, enduring and solidifying down through countless ages of toil and struggle. They are not mere attitudes, but rather moral and social guidelines that define and defend a people.

Demonize the concept (of discrimination) in a society and that society WILL hand over all power over every aspect of its life to exterior (alien and hostile) forces. Because discrimination, at its very root, is the freedom and will of a people to say yes or no: to make an informed choice that is also reflective of a natural, collective instinct. Without it there is neither ability nor will to differentiate between what is good or evil, true or false, beauty or ugliness, hope or despair, man or woman, black or White, up or down and so on.

Most critical of all, without the willingness and encouragement to discriminate, a people will be defenseless against attacks both physical and philosophical. The entire premise of “equality” is the certain erosion of sanity. Thus we have to discriminate or society will collapse into chaos, which, not surprisingly, it has been doing since the 1960’s.

So picking nationalized healthcare as the battlefront at this point is kind of like trying to swat the mosquito on the back of the Grizzly bear that’s cornered you in your own home because you’ve heard they’re disease carriers.

As to differentiating the historical understanding of freedom from the modern concept of “Personal freedom”, it is actually a fairly modern concept without much real historical reality. It doesn’t exist and never has.
It can’t.

“Personal freedom” is anathema to a functioning society. And this we can clearly see before us today, as “freedom” is the rallying cry of the far-left demagogues who seek to take control of every aspect of our lives, even as they wreck them. The “personal freedom” slogans are hung next to the myriad of street cameras watching our every move.

A century of “self-liberating” psychology has resulted in a civilization demoralized through indoctrination of self-hate and strung out on mood-altering anti-depressants and increasingly banal whistle and bells distractions commonly known as entertainment.

It’s such a “free country” we can only move about here and there with the assistance of social engineers, government mandates on minority employment and corporate job placement programs, never forming permanent and historical roots to land and family. Thus we end up alienated, paranoid and securely locked away in our houses behind “security systems” and barred windows.

As our “personal liberty” has increased over the past half a century our society has rapidly descended into chaos.

Families are broken and torn apart. As mom and dad trasmute into the base metal mm and step dad or two daddies or two mommies or whatever the Frankenfamily arrangement du jour is, getting their fixes on anti-depressants, the kids have taken to mutilating themselves physically (tattoos, increasingly bizarre piercings, and “cutting”) to mirror their mutilated spirits, which have been crushed by womb-to-tomb propaganda that engenders self-hate and atomization from their people and identity past and present.

The streets are riddled with trash and gangs roam at will. Corruption in politics is a given, and the media’s complicity in it is shrugged off with a “that’s just the way it is” attitude. In the end, this modern notion of freedom (aka, personal liberty) has left a bitter taste in mouths of Western people, even if they’re not quite ready to articulate it.

As to real, historical freedom, we are born bound and obliged to a thousand infringements upon our “personal liberty”. Freedom, in the historical since, was the ability to carry out the obligations of the station in life which the web of history had placed upon you; obligations to parents, wives, children, friends, clan and so on.

Slavery and bondage, on the other hand, often “liberated” individuals personally from their responsibilities to their people. It limited their obligations to physical, daily, duties that asked nothing more of them than to complete an assigned task.

Being “the captain of your own ship” or “master of your own destiny” are slogans appealing to the selfishness of those “weighed down” with obligations to wives, children, parents, siblings, clan, friends, community, ancestors and posterity. And true enough, in that sense (the true sense of the notion) death or slavery are the surest ways to “personal liberty”. Because life is obligation. To breathe is to find limitations on your “personal liberty”.

Thus death (of the nature of tribal/ethnic history and collective and personal identity) and slavery (to political correctness, government enforced social engineering, etc) are similar in that both prevent you from fulfilling your obligations to your people.

But in that sense they both liberate you from those obligations as well.

Those now fretting over government mandated “death panels” should relax, as it represents the apex of everything America has fought for over the past 40+ years. After all, Death is not only the surest way to “personal freedom” it’s also the state most assuredly conducive to equality among all peoples.

...

Saturday, June 16, 2012

What Is A Nation?...

We often (very often) hear the jingoism “take America back” by all and sundry on both sides of the political/social divide.  Particularly on the conservative side we see the notion put forward that The America is somehow far adrift from her foundational roots, as laid down by the Founding Fathers.  But is this really the case?  Is modern Americanism fundamentally different from 18th century revolutionary Americanism?  What would the Founding Fathers think of The America today?

In addressing that, we must first consider what The America is and what The America is not.  What The America is not, is a nation.  What The America is, essentially, is a religion/empire, with much akin to a Marxist state.  And one of the “gifts” which both Marxism and Americanism have bequeathed to the world is the ability to re-define words and even reality itself.

One example of that is the definition of nation. Since the advent of Americanism/Marxism the definition has been completely re-written to the point that it now actually means the complete opposite of what it meant for thousands of years.

As stated, The America is not a nation, which makes such linguistic concoctions as “a nation of immigrants” one of the more profound examples of an oxymoron and generally reflects the intellectual apathy found amongst the populace.

A nation is NOT a placeA nation is NOT an ideology or creed or form of government or philosophy. 

What is a nation? 

In the simplest terms, nation is another word for ethnic Group

A nation is a race or stock of people.  The English are a nation.  The Irish are a nation.  They need not be gathered in the same locale, share a common faith or reside under a similar form of government to be a nation.

Let me say this again.  Nation is another word for Ethnic Group.  A nation is a biological unit, an extended family, aka a tribe.
From the Etymology Dictionary:
Nation
c.1300, from O.Fr. nacion, from L. nationem (nom. natio) “nation, stock,
race,” lit. “that which has been born,” from natus, pp. of nasci “be born”
The origin of nations is ancient, and the knowledge of it should be embedded in our culture.  Its lack leads to all kinds of problems and comedy, such as the (inherently American) Evangelical interpretation of “prophesy” in regard to Israel becoming a nation again in the 1940s and how that “sign” points to the end of days.  The irony there is that if they believe modern jews are the Israel of the bible, then they didn’t “become a nation “again in 1948 as they never stopped being a nation (ie, an ethnic group) in the first place.

Again, a nation need not have government, leaders or even a land of their own to be a nation.  It is blood that makes a nation, not forms of government.  Thus there is no American nation.

Can nations mix to form a new one?  No. 

Small admixtures from cousin-nations can be absorbed, such as Danish into English, but the former is inevitably lost into the latter. There are no new nations.

So what The America is, is a proto-Marxist religion/empire.  Nothing more.  And in that, Americanism naturally shares more than a little in common with conventional Marxism.  This is why The America and the former Soviet Union look so much alike.  Both were artificially fabricated political constructs, rather than being natural, organic living-societies.  (And, not surprisingly, both found themselves dominated by a nation who very much considers themselves a nation, separate from the empires they ruled.)
Take for example this excerpt from a letterfrom Karl Marx to Abe Lincoln:
We congratulate the American people upon your re-election by a large
majority.  If resistance to the Slave Power was the reserved watchword of your first election, the triumphant war cry of your re-election is Death to Slavery.

From the commencement of the titanic American strife the workingmen of Europe felt instinctively that the star-spangled banner carried the destiny of their class. The contest for the territories which opened the dire epopee, was it not to decide whether the virgin soil of immense tracts should be wedded to the labor of the emigrant or prostituted by the tramp of the slave driver?
When an oligarchy of 300,000 slaveholders dared to inscribe, for the first time in the annals of the world, “slavery” on the banner of Armed Revolt, when on the very spots where hardly a century ago *the idea of one great Democratic Republic* had first sprung up, whence the first Declaration of the Rights of Man was issued …
And in ambassador Adams’ reply (at the same link), we find the following,
Nations do not exist for themselves alone, but to promote the welfare and happiness of mankind by benevolent intercourse and example.
Adams, in a round about way, agrees with Marx (see the full quote at the link).
His father John Adams, a “Founding Father”, first vice-President and second President of the United States, wrote the following, concurring with the theme:
If the empire of superstition and hypocrisy should be overthrown, happy indeed will it be for the world; but if all religion and all morality should be over-thrown with it, what advantage will be gained? The doctrine of human equality is founded entirely in the Christian doctrine that we are all children of the same Father, all accountable to Him for our conduct to one another, all equally bound to respect each other’s self love.
-page 619, ‘John Adams’ by David McCullough
Such is not the sentiments of a man residing (physically or otherwise) in the warring ghettos of the real world amongst his kin.  No, that is the pompous affirmation of a man safely ensconced in an ivory tower, from whose lofty perch even Sao Paolo must look lovely at midnight when its dim and dirty lights glow luminously, masking the chaos, disease and death in the streets below. From such a distance joy and sorrow are indistinguishable and all peoples look alike … and they tend to look like ants.

Such sentiments, as express by Marx and Adams are echoed in our own time by Bill Gates, George Soros and the like; Businessman, Mercenary Merchants, ‘Power to the People-preachers’, “Citizens of the World” and so on.  CEO’s with a corporate management mindset that believes social engineering cannot only reap ever-increasing profits but “better-off” the little people as well.  A man-made rearranging of the elements to better suit the perceived “greater good”.

Thus Marxism and Americanism consummate their relationship through their shared denouncement of family, tradition and identity.  Their offspring is the atomized consumeristic blank-slate.  For tradition is the enemy of America.

And so we have, from our beginning, a hypocritical elite who bemoans the existence of an elite. A Merchant-Pirate class who bemoans piracy and class, and the rich and powerful piously denouncing riches and power.  And with one voice they ask of the masses, “will you not give up your pursuit of power, riches and identity for the greater good?”  (We can see this today with rich and influential celebrities using the soap box their multi-million dollar lifestyles afforded them to denounce both the bigotry of the people they openly and collectively loathe and the “greedy excesses” of people who earn less than $50,000 a year.)

Powerless people cannot give up power anymore than poor people can “enter a life of poverty”. Thus it is rare (if ever) that “people’s revolutions” occur from the bottom up. Marxist-minded social engineers are either of the elite or end up as the elite.  And for them all things are malleable….for and by them.

“We the people” were neither consulted nor present when “They the rulers” applied our consent to their overthrow of history.  So what the Founding Fathers instituted was the notion that nations are man-made creatures (akin to Frankenstein’s patched-together-monster) rather than natural outgrowths of the family/tribe. And that is a critical point, considering trends today. For if the family is the bedrock of a nation, then how we define a nation will effect how we think of the family.

If a nation is merely an agreed upon social arrangement, voluntarily entered into and agreed by individuals (as in a creed), then so is the family. We should not then be surprised at the existence of the Franken-family, wherein are found every conceivable arrangement (from two “mommies” raising donated sperm to single parents and their revolving-door one night stands to the adopted multi-rainbow mockery) redefined into constituting a legitimate family.

Indeed, the Founding Fathers’ action in creating The America was akin to a vacationing wife who writes back to her husband to inform him she is leaving him, taking the kids and moving into a commune where everybody is husband and wife to everybody else, and the kids now have 27 dads and as many moms.  A “melting pot”, in other words.

In point of fact The Declaration of Independence was a divorce paper, wherein George and Tom and Benjamin and the rest announced their intention of severing ties with kith and kin. Their actions in creating The America was not only the breaking up of a home, it was a direct assault upon the sacred nature of the family in and of itself.

So in answer to the question, no, the Founding Fathers would not be surprised or upset at The America’s present state.  They would be pleased with the progress.  After a (well, very) little soul searching they would embrace a Marxist colored president, if not outright bow down before him, and promptly denounce any who oppose him as un-American.  Even Jefferson, who wrote about the perpetually low mental and spiritual qualities of the negro would come around quickly.  After all, a democratically elected Marxist Negro is the final embodiment of everything the “founding fathers” strived for in their rejection of an un-elected White Monarch. 

Again, tradition is the enemy of America.

Besides, it should be rather telling, that as The America ascended to world supremacy post-WWII the world has become increasingly radically liberal and leftist in outlook and ideology. And debauched culturally and racially.

Europe is a good example of that. Western Europe has been under the American dominion for 60+ years, and in that time has rapidly slid into the gutter culturally, socially and demographically. It is frequently described today as a dying continent.

The America is a multi-headed Beast, seeking out whom it may devour.  Americanism is a trumped up religion to sell a poisoned product.  In times past that religion was euphemistically called Babylon. Through democracy and universalism via assimilation it has created an image of Global Governance, wherein people from all tribes reside under one government, with “justice for all” at the point of a PC litigated riffle. 

And it calls upon the whole world to bow down before that image.  Those who do not bow down can neither buy nor sell on the world stage. They are derided, attacked and denied the right to the preservation of their distinct nations (peoples) and ways.

Just look at the White nations residing in The America ...  What’s left of them.

...

Monday, June 11, 2012

Where is the Western Apologetic?...

If there is one overriding notion in the concept of "Just", in a Justice system, it is that the accused have the right to a defense.

A prosecution without a defense is generally considered, obscene.

For the past 60+ years Western Civilization has been on trial without a general defense being presented. Accusations, slurs and innuendos have gone unchallenged as Western Man has accepted, without investigation, the acridity of the claims.

Imperialism, Colonialism, Racism, Intolerance, Prejudice etc....

Where is the defense?

Where is the Western Apologetic?

It was recently asked here if Christianity could be used to defend The West.
But is it possible that this question is backwards?

The ideological Left began marshaling its troops a century ago, and as they've inched ever closer to seeming victory in The West, we have to ask, where did they attack?

Most Christians claim that they directly assaulted Christianity, but did they?

Christianity has no doubt lost ground even as Christian Apologetic books and sites have become a dime a dozen.

So what happened?

Today's Christian leaders have acquiesced to the claims by the Left upon Western History. They nod in agreement with the Left's denouncements of everything from The Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition to Colonialism and Southern history. And they do so deferring to the scholarship of the Left's own propagandists.

These Christian leaders have made no attempt at an Apologetic in defense of The West; crusades, slavery, colonialism, racism etc...

You see, the Left did not attack Christianity to undermine Western Civilization.
They attacked Western Civilization to undermine Christianity.

And it worked!

The Ideology of the Left is based unabashedly upon ever morphing hypocrisy. And they do this best in verbal and emotional appeals.

For example, they might proclaim, "We decree that everyone has an inalienable right to their own opinion. And anyone who disagrees with this is a tyrant!"
It's called double-speak.

And in a truly Machiavellian stroke of genius, they lured the Right into this mode of thought. And in so doing they have made the Christian a hypocrite.

The Leftist asserts that the slave owners, crusaders, conquistadors, heretic hunters etc.. to be evil.
The thoughtless Christian, intent upon showing his "reasonableness" agrees with the assertion.
The Leftist then points out that all of the above were Christians.
The Christian attempts a defense by claiming the accused were not "true Christians".
But the Leftist is already ahead of his opponent here because he has, in another context, accused the Christian of being "Judgmental".
And the "reasonable" Christian can appeal to no Biblical standard lest he be forced to call a host of other modern behaviors a "sin".
The Christian has now become a glaring hypocrite because he gleefully nods at Southern Slavery being called evil, yet now chokes on calling homosexuality or abortion evil.

The result: the Christian today scourers the Bible to find ways of reinforcing the Left's attacks upon the very people who have historically espoused the Christian faith!

Had the Christian halted the proceedings at the first accusation against the Crusader or Slave owner and challenged the claim by developing an apologetic on their behalf, he would have, in essence, stood his post at the Western Gates and pushed his enemy into retreat.
Instead, he left his post, dropped his armor and aided the sworn enemy of all that he holds dear in despoiling his Civilization, Country, City, Home and Family.
He has become a traitor.

And as his enemy stands unaccosted in the village square shouting endless profanities and slanders against his countryman's forefathers, he wonders why his sons have become apathetic, if not hostile, to those forefather's faith.


...

Friday, May 25, 2012

The Altruistic-Narcissist...


The  line between altruism and narcissism is thin. Or perhaps the two things are simply overlapping. Thus we could coin the term ‘altruistic-narcissist’.

The altruistic-narcissist can be found in both conservative and liberal sides. As well as in both atheist and theist camps as well.

In fact the altruistic-narcissist is the rule, rather the exception in the modern, dying, Western world.

“Social Justice”, for example, is not altruism at all, but truly altruistic-narcissism….at best. At worst it is the vindictive pursuit to throw down one group and exalt another.


The reason this is so it that the altruistic-narcissist must operate from the presumptive, subjective, point of view that his ideal ought to be everyone’s ideal.

He projects his own vision of a utopia into the hearts and minds of all and sundry, then sets about imposing that vision.

To this end authoritarianism is embraced by the altruist to enforce what he or she thinks everyone else ought to want and need.

The problem, naturally, is that not everyone wants or needs the same things. This we can see for ourselves today as divergent groups within multi-racial America act and react to a variety of issues and circumstances differently, to say the least.

It will lead to either a society-as-prison-yard reality, or to the break up of society along ethnic and racial lines.

…..

Friday, May 18, 2012

"Me, Not Us"...

Reading Tom Wolfe’s The Me Decade and the Third Great Awakening circa 2010 doesn’t’ evoke nostalgia because it isn’t really dated. From asinine New Age psychotherapy to asinine New Age psychobabble, little has changed over the past 30 plus years. (The part about “communication” in that article is particularly contemporary, as well as spot-on.)

Of course that’s not surprising. Thirty years isn’t really that long ago and the twenty-something post-hippie, seeking “crystal healing”, adults of thirty years ago are now the middle-aged scholars and politicians informing much of social thought in America today. Still, there is a certain unexpectedness in how far we haven’t come in general attitudes and experience since then.

That can extend back even further though. Reading Charles Dickens or G K Chesterton describing America in their respective times is, in many ways, no different than reading a modern “stuck up” European article on America today. America then, as now, is painted as a country full of potential and problems, seemingly to perpetually reside on the precipice of calamity and comedy even as she continues to survive and thrive.
It is from that that I suspect the philosophical Me People are born.

Which is to say, it is not consumerism that creates the philosophical Me People (as opposed to the materialist ‘Average Joe’ Me People), it is the discovery that the universe does not revolve around you and the age in which you live. It is not that they believe themselves to be the center of the universe. No, they simply believe they have found the perch from which the universe can be objectively observed in all its silly innateness.

And from there they observe all the little human ants marching this way and that, foolishly believing that their little lives have meaning or individual purpose within the “greater scope of history”.

You see, the philosophical Me People, having tasted of the knowledge of good and evil (the understanding –through the reading of history and international travel- that the world does not begin or end with the individual, nor is sustained by single nations, peoples, empires or eras), no longer view life in the particulars but rather in the abstract or broader context. They see the forest but consider the individual trees that comprise it as irrelevant.

From that point of view race, ethnicity, family, nation, religion etc. may all be real, but they are irrelevant within the context of the greater history of mankind. After all, the Babylonians are no more. Rome, expired. The Aztecs? Gone with the wind. Empires rise and fall, Kings and paupers alike end up six feet under and night follows day, time and time again.

That’s not to say they are the ‘live for the moment- die young and leave a beautiful corpse’ types. Having discovered “the truth” they wish to shout it out. But to whom will they shout it? After all, the little people won’t understand as they are still wrapped up in their insignificant lives.

The philosophical Me People’s peers are always and only hypothetical intellectuals of a time not their own, aka “future generations.” When these elite Me People speak of how “future generations” will judge us, they are speaking of the as-yet-to-be-born philosophical Me People sitting aloft, and outside of, their own present world and time. That’s why they so blatantly ignore the opinions and desires of those presently alive who create and sustain culture, art, law and order and so on.

For instance, they aren’t worried about the 80% presently opposed to amnesty for illegal immigrants, they are worried what the “future generations” will say if they appear to be concerned with present-particular political or social constructs.

Essentially, they want it known to all the philosophical Me People of future generations that they know “the truth”. And “the truth” is the knowledge that nothing particular really matters. And the best way to demonstrate that you know that is to act and function as though, well, nothing particular really matters; not nations, races, ethnicities, religions, languages, cultures or even politics (which explains why the two party system acts as though it’s one).

For them, the understanding that history runs in cycles and everything has a beginning and an end is the great “secret knowledge” of the ages. To acknowledge that particulars have form and function which follows divergent threads of history is the anti-knowledge. The Un-Truth!

Naturally, as White people have the habit of keeping detailed historical records reflecting the egregious un-truth of particularism, Western Civilization becomes ground zero from which the Me People derive (the Me People elite is an exclusively White club). Thus to make their declarations of “the truth” echo through the eternities, they systematically attack (and/or deny) those particulars that make The West, The West. This is seen most clearly in their adoration and veneration of historical figures (fictional and real) who ignored concerns grounded in race, ethnicity, class, etc. and instead worked for the “common cause” and “greater good”.

The Me People are a recent phenomena though. They like to imagine that they are in the company of past philosophical Me People yet their club is, from a historical perspective, about as old as last years Oak leaves. Their brief season is coming to an end because they were dependent upon a system that existed at a particular point in time under particular social and economic conditions. An irony completely lost on them.

They are adrift in the artificial (and superficial) cosmos of their own design, without connection or ties to the real world past, present or future. Yet even they can sense some sort of end approaching.

Mr. Wolfe’s 1977 article goes more into the world of the materialist ‘Average Joe’ Me people than to their elite. Basically what such commentaries demonstrate (in the non-elite realm) is how little basic social attitudes and fads have changed or deviated from their projected paths over the past few decades. There is, in a sense, a certain inevitability to where we are today. Maybe that’s because we’ve moved so little in recent times (a point for those who talk of “progress” to consider).

In other words, our society, culturally, has stagnated. When trends, attitudes, fashions, art etc. remain in a relatively fixed and predictable position, forward movement has ceased.
And of course a part of that stagnation includes original thought. Once that has stagnated, critical thinking crumbles as well. The all-important “Perspective” goes next.

You see, whereas the philosophical Me People view the understanding of the scope of history as liberating them from present particulars, the Average Joe Me People view the particulars as liberating them from the scope of history.

Such “sins” as colonialism, “racism”, segregation etc. were done “before my time” and by “other people”. Those helpless 19th century bigots were, “products of THEIR time.” Of course “we” know better today (for the Average Joe Me People there is a We but never an Us).

And then there is The South (not we), the British (not we), South Africans (not we), Nazis (not we) and so on. For the Average Joe Me People the particulars allow for the separation of themselves from past and present social, biological, political, geographic, philosophical and religious groups. For them, even their great-great Grandpa was not part of the present We and can thus be relegated to the extreme periphery of their own present existence.

Yes, it’s plain old-fashioned selfishness, but its current manifestation can only be truly understood when seen as part of a particular order which engenders a sense of individualism so intense that it makes everyman, not just a God, but the God of their own momentary, short-lived, universe.

Part of the problem is the psychology built around causal social fibs the Average Joe Me People perpetuate such as:

You can be anything you want to be.
Or, work hard and you can have it all.
Worst of all is, You’re special.
Accompanying social myths are:
You’re just as good as everyone else.
No one is better than anyone else.
It’s your life.
Find out who you are.
Leave your mark on the world.
The Sky is the limit!
Anything’s possible.

None of these things are true or represent logical thinking, of course. Never the less they are embedded into the American psyche rather deeply. This is why the idea of flying half way around the world to “bring democracy” to ancient civilizations which are fundamentally in opposition to democracy seems feasible to many an American. “Why not?” they ask, “it works for us, and we’re no different than they are!”

Likewise it inoculates them from the conclusions to be drawn from the high crime rate of minorities or the over representation of certain groups among the influential decision makers at the top of the political order.

And of course when everyone believes they are individually special; equally capable of becoming a corporate CEO, nuclear physicist, NFL linebacker, avant-garde travel show cook/host or Pulitzer Prize winning novelist, well, then why shouldn’t Muslim refugees from Somalia become democracy-loving patriots in Minnesota?

Why shouldn’t 20 million Mexican migrants stampeding across our borders become model citizens? Why shouldn’t a black guy become president?  And why should Iraqi’s and Afghani’s fight back?

Everybody wants democracy. Right?

Naturally “the Devil” to the Average Joe Me People is, reality. As such, they make war upon it while declaring all those who claim it exists to be heretics.

But as there is a sense of inevitability to where we are, so too is there a sense of what is to inevitably come. Many people know, think or feel that there is something wrong in the world and that things are off kilter. There is a sense of, ‘this ride is about to stop’ in the air.

Just as the media and the ‘man on the street’ were “sensing” the paradigm shift to the left in the 60’s and 70’s there is now a belief that a “backlash” is inevitable. More to the point, there is an undercurrent felt by Average Joes and ivory tower elites alike that White people are ready to revolt.

And it is not a revolt taught by the state, preached in the churches or shouted by the masses, yet it is as real, palpable and expected as the coming dawn under the glow of early morning light.

The Me People, both Elite and Average Joe, sense it coming. It is that sense of inevitability that the end of an age is saturated in. Unknown to both, however, is that the end of this age will be the doom of the Me People.

The Average Joe types will disappear into the wreckage, perhaps reappearing again in a new prosperous era in an age yet to come. But the Elite Me People, those “citizens of the world” who foolishly chose to stand outside of time and place are an end to themselves. Having separated themselves from the present; blood and soil, nation and era, they are as formless and forgettable as a summer wind.

As the Me People lived in a temporary world of their own making (a world existing for and of themselves) it is very much true for them to see that the end of the world is at hand.
For the rest of us, who stand resolutely connected to past, present and future particulars of blood and soil, our history and our existence, is eternal. We continue on in the real world, which has always been and always will be. A world of day and night, right and wrong, truth and lies, black and white and, yes, love and hate.

Yet the hate that is arising in The West is not of the irrational and reactionary caricature the Left loves to paint.  It is the hate of lies. It is the hate of wrong. It is the hate of that which would hurt, mar and destroy all that is good and true and beautiful.

...

Thursday, May 17, 2012

Estimates...

The only time White people exist in the minds of the establishment is when they are celebrating our demise, or denouncing us collectively. This they do with with much pomp.

Yet should you begin to speak of White interests or the White community these same establishment types (and their ilk) will do a 180 and insist there is no such thing as White people and that race is a "social construct" -hypocrisy being a necessary attribute of leftist ideology.


And, naturally, as we see White percentages drop in America and the rest of the western world we also see society literally falling apart; the economy crumbling into permanent ruin, crime and violence escalating exponentially by the month, political corruption openly flaunted and the physical infrastructure that keeps us going about our daily activities rotting away beneath us.

And this is just the beginning of the hell into which we have descended.  And still we see those who call themselves conservative spending all their time crying out that they are not racist even as their enemies make plain their intention to wage a race war.


The following was written two years ago,



This is an assessment (aka, a rant) of where America currently is, circa 2010, and where it is headed, save an asteroid strike.  Europe, you’re only a step or two behind.
The first thing to mention, of course, is that America has a black president by the name of Barack Hussein Obama. Let that sink in for a second.

That, in and of itself, is beyond any possible conception of reality most Americans could have imagined in their most grim of nightmares just twenty years ago. Twenty years! That’s 1990!
But then, just twenty years ago (1990!), America was still in the neighborhood of 70 to 75% White. Again, just twenty years ago.

Equally inconceivable to Americans back then, is the notion that everything from customer service over the phone to the directions on a can of soup would be in Spanish as well as English.
Of course some will point out that people were seeing such things in places like Los Angeles or New York and warning of the coming storm. And that’s true. But at that time the clouds on the horizon were not yet in range of 99% of American's view (America is a big place). By the time they were, the proverbial rains were already pounding down.

Besides, the fact is that some were warning of the coming storm twenty years ago (and even earlier) and, well, here we are, never the less.  It should give us all pause in our feverish excitement about some politician “voicing concern” or some new book explaining the direness of our plight.

On demographics, it’s truly difficult to ascertain the real situation. Officially, America is still over 60% “white” (“white” being those of European, middle-eastern and north African heritage, as per the Census definition).  Unofficially the percentages don’t match up with what you see with your own eyes. I’ve gone into this before here, so I’ll only add now that it would be perfectly understandable for a tourist to come to the conclusion that America is about 42% White and 58% non-White.

And that’s keeping in mind that in 1965 America was around 90% White, and that all of this has happened without any opposition whatsoever. Not one single leader came forward to oppose the most destructive agenda in human history. Not one!

Whatever the percentages now, it is equally astounding to realize that this was all intentionally engineered on purpose and with effort. This was no natural ebb and flow of circumstances. In short, the demographic transformation of America over the past 40 years is unprecedented in human history. And the reaction of average Americans to all of this has been grumbling acquiescence.

The next point is on the reaction of the right against this engineered destruction of America. Among those laying claim to leadership (or would-be leadership) positions, the reaction has been polite, thought out, informative, reasoned, logical, mature, fact-oriented, measured, respectful, responsible, dignified and various other adjectives denoting a lobotomized personality and generally, if not specifically, attributed to the consistently losing and marginalized side. Facts are of little value in the face of a good argument.

Ironically, this also describes the general approach of the fringe and “far-right” leaders as well.  There’s American Renaissance, from which Jared Taylor gives polite, thought out, informative, reasoned, logical, mature, fact-oriented, measured, respectful, responsible, dignified and redundant speeches to, essentially other versions of himself and a few jews. Then there is V-Dare, Stormfront, Chronicles, Taki and other assorted therapeutic sites where confused or trolling Jews and a few Whites can come to vent-via-commentary and agree that “things sure are bad”. They function as a sort of electronic Prozac.

Next up is Alternative Right, that pro-Western gathering place where you can read articles by jews, black women, Indians and Satan-worshipping homosexuals unabashedly discussing race.
Then there are Tea Party gatherings, where upper-middle class White people come together to listen to lower-class black and Hispanic speakers lecture them on the importance of denouncing racism. Oh yeah, and too much government in finances, or something.  This movement started off protesting the taxpayer funded ‘Bank Bailouts’ in late 2008.

As of mid-2010 the bailouts have long since been instituted and theAmerican government is openly and unabashedly controlling industry and manipulating markets, plunging the economy further into the abyss.

And the Tea Party members are still despised and labelled racist by the establishment whose posterior they fight over for the privilege of kissing.

Or, there is the American Third Position Party, which seeks for an equal chair at the table for Whitey. A table Whitey once owned, and which was seated exclusively by Whitey. They’re centered in California, where, I’m told, nearly one-third of the 8 White people who live in that state are members or considering membership.
Their motto might as well be ‘Beggars Can’t be Choosers’.

Then there are the illegal immigration protesters. If they succeed, all 50 million illegal immigrants will have to leave America ... then come right back in legally. For this group, the millions of legal immigrants and tens of thousands of refuges being dumped into the American heartland year after year is fine and dandy, even in the face of the ongoing economic downfall and thickening racial tensions.

It’s the legality of the issue that concerns them, you see. The paper work, in other words. Having the mentality of anal-retentive bureaucrats, their objections revolve around whether or not every “T” has been crossed and every “I” (and lower case “j”) has been dotted.

And yet these are the same people who mock and decry the justice system that lets a rapist or serial killer go free on a technicality involving improperly filed paperwork.

Then there is the “patriot movement” in general. These useful tools spend restless nights on self-induced nightmares about “jack-booted government thugs” kicking in their doors even as Third World gangs are slaughtering and beheading people in their streets. These are the types who go on about a New World Order and listen to Alex Jones.

They actually worry that the government is busying itself trying to conquer an already defeated and powerless people whom they’ve been bullying into submission for over fifty years.

This group is also about 99.99999% White, but they proudly assert that race doesn’t matter and that we’re all Americans. Theirs is the “Everybody everywhere is potentially an American” meme.

They are, ironically, the most ardent foot soldiers in the cause of a One World Global Order.

It seems that what both ends of the right (far and center) has in common is their willing dependency upon a system that works to harass and ultimately destroy them. If the goals of Richard Spencer, Jared Taylor, James Edwards, William Johnson, Kevin MacDonald, Peter Brimelow and the rest are achieved, then the following is your future:
It’s late summer, 2020 and you’re at home on a typical Tuesday evening and, as usual, sweating profusely in the sweltering summer heat. The fans and air-conditioners are useless because of the rolling blackouts caused by the strain of an additional 200 million people –and counting (added to America since the 1980’s) on the electrical grids. And, naturally, the flak jacket you’re compelled to wear, day and night, isn’t helping.
You consider opening a window, but it’s just too dangerous. Besides keeping the living room window closed helps muffle the noise and “music” the 40 Mexicans next door blast 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Ditto the dining room window on the other side of the house. It helps to slightly muffle the BOOM, BOOM, BOOM the blacks play at their place. Besides, who wants to hear ALL of the screaming and gunshots as the two groups intermittently strive to ambush one another (across your backyard) on a daily basis?
And, as a bonus, by keeping all the windows closed you can barely hear the Muslim prayer calls five times a day. Not to mention that it keeps the smoke out. Yeah, there’s always smoke in the air.  If it isn’t from from some riot or gang fight going on somewhere, it’s Detroit everywhere and Devil’s Night every night for the local blacks arsonists.
Even so , closed windows won’t shield your view of the two dead bodies in the street out front: the result of the ongoing Somali vs. Peruvian turf war in your neighborhood. It’s all the worse that they’ve been lying there in the street for two weeks now. There’s no police, no fire department, no nothing - except for the IRS, of course!  Death and taxes, you know. And to think, you were once worried about a police state!
Following standard safety protocol, as it’s evening and nearing dark, the wife and kids are huddled together in the basement below. Sure, it’s dark and stiflingly hot down there, but they have a flashlight if they need it and a bucket if they have to go the bathroom.
As you crawl around your house (standing in a home or office just isn’t done - too many random shooters going by), clutching your trusty-rusty shotgun, you happen upon some mail that the US Armed Postal Service delivered this month (they’re back on their usual tri-monthly mail service now!). You come across a newsletter from the Joint Organizations for Keeping English, one of those conglomerations of traditionalist groups who got together in a bunker somewhere and came up with a platform to oppose the outlawing of the English language in the Peoples Republic of North America.
They inform you that, thanks to their lobbying, if you can steal some gas for your Tuk-tuk, sneak out of your favela without getting your throat cut, and find a polling station that has not yet been burnt to the ground or heavily guarded by black, Mexican, Brazilian, Arab, Hindu, Muslim, Native American, Peruvian, Somalian, Iraqi, Iranian, Pakistani, Puerto Rican, Columbian, Venezuelan, Turkish, Hmong, Vietnamese, Cambodian, Thai, Afghani, Chinese, Filipino, Honduran, Nicaraguan, Haitian, or Nigerian thugs, AND IF the voting material is not censored in your area or destroyed or permanently “delayed in transit”, then it is entirely possible, and not beyond the realm of possibility, that your vote may count come this fall….if there are elections this year.
I should mention that jews are not included in the above list because they do not have to control the polling stations. They control the government(s).
Of course, there are times when you have to leave the building. But you don’t just up and walk outside or around your own yard, let alone go down the street or to the market for groceries.
Your brother tried that a few months back and his charred body is still hanging off the overpass downtown. Far worse happened to Aunt Jane last year and grandma and a few cousins the year before that. But, hey, that’s just life in rural, small town, Iowa. It’s the same all over. And they say the cities and large towns are worse. Much worse.
Granted, voting on whether or not English is to be legally outlawed in a nation where 65% - the official figure - don’t speak English anyway, might not be as critical an issue as, say, acquiring food and water or striving every day to keep yourself and your family from being murdered or your house from being burned to the ground, but, it’s a start, right? First steps and what not, and all that, and so forth.
And if all goes well with the mailing lists, who knows, maybe you and the two other surviving White families in your state can network, somehow, sort of. Well, probably not. But it’s a nice idea!
If the goal of an advocacy group is for Whites to have an equal seat within the same political institutions and social constructs as a few hundred million non-Whites , then I’d advise holding off on donations. You’ll need the money for survival gear. And don’t worry about old age pensions. You won’t survive.

To put it bluntly, we will not vote our way out of this mess. The system is gone. The justice system is securely in the hands of our enemies. The economy is permanently ruined, which means the physical infrastructure of the nation (extending over three million square miles) is gone as well. Take a good look around. 98% of the roads, bridges, buildings, electrical grids, railways, water systems, waste management, police departments, fire departments, hospitals and so on are in as good a condition as they’ll ever be. From here on they will degrade and deteriorate until abandoned and Nature reclaims them.

We may, however, vote ourselves out of the situation. But that depends on leaders leading and followers following. And by that I mean that advocacy and voting within America today is pointless and will not solve a thing. In fact it will make matters worse. When the Huns are already rampaging through the streets, only insane people go around carrying a ballot on fixing the potholes.

No, the ONLY option is for Whites to vote themselves out of the empire, socially, politically and economically. Whites must separate and form their own nation, because the current one has already disowned them and has fallen too far to be brought back.
That is the goal, the only goal, for which any struggle must aim for.

So all of the authors, pundits, advocates and so on can go about such activities till their heart’s content, but if their agenda is to “Inform to Reform”, then they are simply wasting time and resources. And time is something we do not have. In fact we’re already out of time. The point of no return came and went about twenty-five years ago.

...