Featured post

The West's Overreaction to Nazism

Western civilisation, especially in America, is to a large extent defined and shackled by its OVERREACTION to Nazism and the Holocaust, some...

Sunday 31 July 2016

NYT Misses Point about Immigration

A Few Simple Truths on Immigration

By the Editorial Board, July 30 2016 (LINK to editorial)

As usual, the Editorial Board is missing the main point about immigration, which is the way in which it is changing America's ethnic composition from once overwhelmingly white to ever-increasingly non-white.

I can almost hear the moderator drawing in his or her breath as they read this, because it is an issue that is only supposed to be of importance to bigots, xenophobes and racists. What does it matter what colour, i.e. race or ethnicity, Americans are?

Does it not matter that the Chinese LOOK Chinese? Or that Europeans LOOK European? According to the NYT's logic, clearly not.

I'm reminded of a demonstration I once saw of post-hypnotic suggestion, where an individual was put into a hypnotic state and told that when awoken they would not be aware of something, and they weren't, until the suggestion implanted in their brain was removed.

A form of collective post-hypnotic suggestion, it seems to me, has occurred in the West in respect to race and ethnicity. In overreaction to Nazism and the Holocaust, which was blamed on "prejudice" towards a particular ethnic group, a taboo was made of attributing any social or political importance to them.

In an editorial response to the Islamist terror attacks in Paris last November, The Price of Fear, the Editorial Board warned its readers,
“In the reaction and overreaction to terrorism [evil] comes the risk that society will lose its way.”
This, I suggest, is what happened, resulting in a form of collective post-hypnotic suggestion, blinding some, very influential people, especially in academia, to the importance, even the very existence, of race, which was elevated to a moral imperative, academics being modern heirs and counterparts of the priesthood of earlier times.

"Colour-blindness" became a measure of moral authority, which politicians quickly latched on to as a way of promoting their own authority and POWER.

Race is real and important. Not in the way that racial supremacists, like the Nazis, believe it is, but because central to any deep and meaningful sense of both personal and group identity, and thus, socially and politically.

See BLOG in which I elaborate on these ideas.

Friday 29 July 2016

Left Provoking "Far-Right" Backlash

Germany, Caught Between Two Violent Extremes

By Anna Sauerbrey JULY 28, 2016 (LINK to article)
" . . fear that the attacks will change the character of Germany itself, destroying the tolerant, cosmopolitan identity that we have assiduously built over decades, and that we cultivate as if it were a prize flower."
Frau Sauerbrey is speaking for herself and the political left that is her tribe, but not for a majority of Germans, I am sure, who are as unhappy about mass immigration into their already overpopulated country and the multi-ethnic society that comes with it, as most other West Europeans are, including myself.

The natural decline of Western Europe's native population is a godsend, given how overpopulated we are, as is (or rather, was) our racial and cultural homogeneity, which our ruling elites decided to put an end to - probably not consciously, but nevertheless, though the madness of mass non-European immigration.

There is method to this madness, of course, which I elaborate on HERE.

The Left fears a "far-right" backlash, which is inevitable, once it becomes more widely recognised that  "celebrating DIVERSITY" is Orwellian newspeak for Native Europeans (in America, white Americans) to celebrate our own ethnic displacement (white flight), replacement (we have already been reduced to an ethnic minority in large swathes of our major cities) and ultimate demise.

Tragically, but typically, "progressives" have managed to put themselves on the wrong side of history.

I the blog I have linked to and other blogs you will find links to in it, I attempt to explain this. Only by recognising and understanding our mistakes can we correct them.

Monday 25 July 2016

What's Wrong with Ethno-Nationalism?

The Donald Trump Show

By Ross Douthat July 23, 2016 (LINK to article)
"[Donald Trump's] ethno-nationalism"
That is mean as a slur, of course, which Trump would reject, claiming to want to be President for ALL Americans.

The question is, does ethno-nationalism deserve to be demonised the way it is? I don't believe it does.

It's demonised because the Nazis were ethno-nationalists, as are some modern groups of racial supremacists, but ethno-nationalism doesn't have to be judged by such negative examples. Zionism is also a form of ethno-nationalism, and, although it includes some extremists, is generally viewed positively. Good Zionists - and there are many of them - reach out the hand of friendship and cooperation to Palestinians, who unfortunately refuse to accept it.

So, taking Zionism as a positive example of ethno-nationalism, how might one apply it to multi-ethnic America?

First, one needs to recognise that the present Constitution was written by and for just one ethnic group, i.e. whites. The founding fathers never intended it to be applied to races other than their own. Thus, America needs to be refounded with a new constitution written by and for ALL Americans, not just whites. A revolutionary idea, but a good one, I think.

Also we need to recognise the deceit of equating state and nation, not just in America, but in all so-called "nation states", which are not genuine nations at all, but mercenary "patron states" deceitfully posing as nations, to legitimise themselves, their ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse.

Friday 22 July 2016

What's Wrong With Nativism?

This is in response to an article, A vote against the mass immigration society, by David Goodhart in Prospect Magazine, which I was unable to post a comment on (LINK to article).

The following quote is taken from the article:
"there is a hard core of nativists and racists . . "
What is wrong with nativism? Why should every indigenous population not enjoy certain indigenous rights and privileges?

Does the fact that our ancestors treated the indigenous peoples of the lands they colonised so badly mean that we should treat our own indigenous population with the same contempt? Our ruling elites seem to think so, although most of us are now ashamed of how our ancestors often behaved towards indigenous peoples.

And what is meant by "racist", which is often simply used to dismiss, demonise and dehumanise anyone who doesn't share the state's post-racial multicultural ideology? Racism is generally equated with the evils of racial hatred, racial supremacism, Jim Crow, Apartheid, and, of course, Nazism, while at the same time being equated with perfectly natural racial prejudice, which virtually everyone is guilty of. Like xenophobia, it is inherent to human nature, both of which need to be understood and controlled in a civilised fashion, but not demonised.

Show me anyone claiming to be without prejudice and I'll show you a liar, or someone with a serious lack of self-awareness.

I confess openly to being a nativist and racially prejudiced, but I'm not a racist, except perhaps to a moral supremacist who has no qualms about demonising and dehumanise anyone who doesn't share his and his state's ideology.

Post-racial multicultural society and ideology, it seems to me, after puzzling over it for many years, serve the state’s age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, dividing society into a morally superior, now supposedly unprejudiced, i.e. "colour-blind", elite and the morally inferior, naturally (human nature being what it is) more prejudiced, i.e. less "colour-blind", masses, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

It is used by the state and its elites (which the mob is keen to please and emulate) as an instrument of socio-political intimidation and control, a modern, secular replacement, effectively, for the power-political role of medieval church ideology.

If you think about it, "celebrating DIVERSITY" is nothing less than Orwellian newspeak for native Britons (and white people everywhere) to celebrate our own ethnic displacement (white flight), replacement (we have already been reduced to an ethnic minority in large swathes of our major cities) and ultimate demise.

Sunday 17 July 2016

Progressives Take Heed as You Push Us Towards the Brink"

A Cure for Trumpism

by Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam, July 15 2016 (LINK to article)
"an unsubtle emphasis on white identity and white nostalgia."
There is nothing subtle about it when black and Latino Americans assert their ethnic identities, and many white Americans are clearly sick of having their own ethnic identity trampled underfoot, primarily by their own white elites, including, it seems, everyone who write for the NYT.

The support for Donald Trump is an inevitable response to the ideology of white racial self-denial and self-contempt that has gained ascendency amongst virtually all western elites, initially in overreaction to Nazism and the Holocaust (see this BLOG), but subsequently as part of the age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, whereby society is divided into a morally superior, now supposedly unprejudiced, "colour-blind", elite and the morally inferior, naturally (human nature being what it is) more prejudiced, less "colour-blind", masses, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

In America the situation for whites is precarious, because already well on their way to becoming an ethnic minority (which Big Brother state expects them to "celebrate"), but in Europe, where whites are the indigenous population the situation is very different.

Native whites, once awoken from their slumber to their betrayal by their own elites, will fight for their continent, and win, or take western civilisation, which they created, with them. So take heed, you "progressives" as you push us, with your "moral supremacism", towards the brink.

Saturday 16 July 2016

Editorial Board, Know Thy Self!

Our Best Defense Against Terrorists

By the Editorial Board, July 15 2016 (LINK to editorial)

The editorial scorns the following remark by a member of the "far right" National Front party in response to the atrocity (more than 80 dead) committed in the French city of Nice by Mohamed what's his name, which pretty much  reflects my own sentiments:
“Spare us the indignation of the vultures of the main parties who let the wolves in to carry out this carnage.”
Why is the Editorial Board so supportive of these "vultures", who have promoted mass immigration of alien peoples into the West, along with the ideology of post-racial multiculturalism that goes with it?

It is, I suggest, because they embrace the same attitude and ideology, which allows them to demonstrate what they consider to be their own moral superiority in respect to their supposed lack of prejudice towards people of different race and/or culture from themselves, which they like to contrast with the prejudiced, i.e. "racist" and xenophobic masses - the kind of people that Donald Trump and the "far right" appeal to.

What the Editorial Board fails to do is recognise the applicability of its own advice to itself.

In an editorial response, The Price of Fear, to the Paris attacks last November, the Editorial Board wisely warned its readers (LINK):
“In the reaction and overreaction to terrorism [evil] comes the risk that society will lose its way.”
This is exactly what happened in response to the extraordinary evil of Nazism and the Holocaust, an overreaction which produced an ideology which is the exact but equally extreme and insane opposite of Nazi racial ideology: post-racial multiculturalism, or one-human-racism, which demonises human tribal nature, with its natural prejudices and xenophobia, and allows those doing the demonising to claim a spurious moral authority for themselves, along with the social status, and personal, professional and/or political advantages that go with it.

Editorial Board, know thy self!


Thursday 14 July 2016

A History of Moral Supremacism

A History of White Delusion

by Nicolas Kristof, July 14 2016 (LINK to article)
" . . how easy it is for a [white] majority to “otherize” minorities in ways that in hindsight strike us all as repugnant."
Nicholas, are you seriously suggesting that ethnic minorities don't "otherize" the ethnic majority or other ethnic minorities?

Of course they do, and always will, because deeply rooted in human tribal nature.

I'm sure you don't mean to, but what you and your "progressive" colleagues are doing,  is playing the "moral supremacist".

You just want to be "moral", of course, as we all do, because our tribal nature also makes us a "moral animal",  but you were taught, if not by your parents and at school, certainly at university, that being moral entails suppressing your own racial prejudices and demonising them in others, which necessarily involves denying and despising one's own racial identity,  which we are taught is just a "social construct", only of importance to nasty racists.

Instead of demonising human tribal nature and prejudices, we need academics to study and understand them, so that we can better lean to deal with them in a civilised fashion, just as we do with human sexuality, which until very recently was also demonised by the state for purposes of social-political intimidation and control.

The demonisation of racial prejudice was an overreaction to the evils of Nazism and the Holocaust, which is something the NYT itself warned its readers about in an editorial response, The Price of Fear, to the Islamist terror attacks in Paris last November (LINK to my comment).

Moral supremacism has a long history, going back to before the first states and civilisations emerged from a tribal society.

Man being an inherently tribal and moral animal, society has always been ruled to a large extent by those claiming moral authority for themselves. This used to be the priesthood, which, in coalition with a warrior class (aristocracy) that provided the muscle and power of the sword, dominated society, exploiting it as a human resource. The priesthood provided the brains and power of the Word, i.e. moral authority, which in modern times has been largely replaced by academia. While the power of the sword has largely been replaced by the power of money, i.e. capital.

Wednesday 6 July 2016

Progressives, Like Medieval Clergy, are Moral Supremacists

Barack Obama’s Final Fight

By Frank Bruni, July 6 2016 (LINK to article)
"the invocation of race and ethnicity in our politics . . . enrages Obama [whose] message is about the emerging America and the strength of our diversity."
Man is both a "political animal" and an inherently "tribal animal",  and anyone who thinks that you can separate the two is a fool. In a multi-ethnic society, politics will always be strongly influenced by race and ethnicity. To suggest that it shouldn't be is ideological and moral supremacist nonsense.

DIVERSITY, as referred to by "progressives" like Frank Bruni, is Orwellian newspeak for a racial melting pot into which the white race, according to post-racial multicultural ideology, is to dissolve and disappear, which anyone with a healthy sense of their own racial identity will reject, unlike white "progressives" who are smitten by an ideology of white racial self-denial and self-contempt.

It's an ideology that is the exact but equally extreme and insane opposite of Nazi racial ideology, the extraordinary  evil of which it began as an overreaction to (something the NYT Editorial Board itself warned against in an editorial, The Price of Fear, following the Islamist attacks in Paris last November), before being transformed into an instrument of socio-political intimidation and control, a modern, secular replacement, effectively, for the power-political role of medieval church ideology, serving age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, dividing society into a morally superior, now supposedly unprejudiced, i.e. "colour-blind", elite and the morally inferior, naturally (human nature being what it is) prejudiced, i.e. less "colour-blind", masses, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

Most "progressives", like Frank Bruni, mean well, I'm sure, but are deluded, just as the medieval clergy were, by their own ideological and professional dependencies.

I elaborate on these ideas is this and appended BLOGS.

Saturday 2 July 2016

Trump's Appeal to White Americans

Can Old-Style Politics Beat Donald Trump?

By Editorial Board, July 1 2016 (LINK to article)
"Mr Trump’s continuing appeal [is] to aggrieved working-class voters"
Mr Trump's main appeal, it seems to me, is to white Americans who are sick of their own white elites (the likes of Mr & Mrs Clinton) telling them that they must deny and despise their own race in order to avoid being demonised as "bigots", "racists" or "xenophobes".

Trump clearly has many faults, but at least he doesn't despise his own race, as his "progressive" opponents all do.

WHY do so many white Americans deny and despise their own race?

In an editorial response, The Price of Fear, to the Islamist terror attack in Paris last November, the NYT warned its readers that
“In the reaction and overreaction to terrorism [evil] comes the risk that society will lose its way.”
This is what happened, on a massive scale, in regard to Nazism and the Holocaust, which traumatised the West, especially academics, and even more especially Jews and Jewish academics.

This denial of and contempt for one's own racial/ethnic identity, as a European (whether Jew or non-Jew) is a grotesque overreaction to Nazism and the Holocaust (also to European imperialism, slavery, Jim Crow and Apartheid), which now serves the age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, dividing society into a morally superior, now supposedly non-prejudiced, i.e. "colour-blind", elite and the morally inferior, naturally (human nature being what it is) more prejudiced, i.e. less colour-blind, masses, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

I elaborate on this idea in this and appended BLOGS.