The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Kevin MacDonald Archive
Justin Murphy’s “the Psychology of Prohibiting Outside Thinkers”
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_639672952

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Here is Justin Murphy describing his background, research, and activism:

Why is there not more rebellion against status quo institutions? How have economic and political processes pacified our capacity for radical collective action? As a political scientist, I am interested in the roles played by information, communication, and ideology in the pacification of political resistance and conflict. Before joining the faculty of Politics and IR at the University of Southampton in the UK, I did my PhD at Temple University in the US. There I was active in Occupy Wall Street, some civil disobedience and shutting down of things, some longer-term campaigns against the big U.S. banks, and sundry other works and deeds, including a radical warehouse project where I lived for nearly three years.

So Murphy is an academic on the left. He is therefore part of the establishment, a card-carrying member of the institutional structure that dominates intellectual discourse in the West. But, unlike the vast majority of his academic brethren, he is quite aware that the left is now the status quo and that it is doing everything it can to preserve its elite status — and that its self-preserving tactics are at base nothing more than irrational assertions of power and privilege. Murphy makes these claims in a blogpost: “The psychology of prohibiting outside thinkers.” Part of the subtitle says it all: “The real motivation of respectable progressivism is managing guilty conscience and conserving bourgeois privileges.”

What’s so refreshing about this is that instead of “exclud[ing] independent right-wing intellectual work on moral grounds,” he would actually “enjoy thinking” with intellectuals on the right. Indeed, moral indictments have become the stock in trade of establishment intellectuals — as noted in my three-part “Moralism and Moral Arguments in the War for Western Survival.” Moral condemnations are easy. No intellectual heavy lifting required. All one need do is appeal to conventional moral intuitions as shaped by the the same institutions that are now the status quo — the media and academic culture. As I note, those who dissent from the status quo are “not only misguided, [they are] malevolent … consumed by hatred, anger and fear towards non-Whites, gays, women and the entire victim class pantheon, or so goes the stereotype And that’s the problem. Being cast as evil means you are outside the moral community. There’s no need to talk with you, no need to be fair, or even worry about your safety. You are like an outlaw in Old Norse society — ‘a person [who] lost all of his or her civil rights and could be killed on sight without any legal repercussions.’”

Back to Murphy:

Very simply, [“institutional intellectuals”] are imposing a cordon sanitaire that is instrumentally necessary to the continuation of their unjustified intellectual privileges in the institutional order. I am increasingly convinced there is simply no other public function to this political repetition compulsion. The reason this is important, from the left, is that this cordon sanitaire is straightforwardly a mechanism to conserve the status quo, everything progressives pretend to be interested in overthrowing. This is why neo-reactionary intellectuals speak of the status quo political order as dominated by a left-progressive “Cathedral.” …

The religious analogy is quite apt. Like moral pronouncements, religious dogmas are not refutable and need not be justified empirically. They are nothing more than intellectually shoddy ex Cathedra pronouncements that take advantage of a pre-existing intellectual consensus.

First, it seems to be a fact that the genuinely intellectual wings of the alt-right or neo-reaction (NRx) or whatever you want to call it, are probably too intelligent and sophisticated for bourgeois intellectual workers to engage with, let alone compete with. … So if those essays are actually pretty smart and a legitimate challenge to your institutional authority as a credentialed intellectual—you are functionally required to close ranks, if only with a silent agreement to not engage.

Now, as soon as anyone from this non-institutional world produces effects within the institutional orbit, it is actually a really serious survival reflex for all institutionally privileged intellectuals to play the morality card (“no platform!”). If all these strange, outside autodidacts are actually smart and independently producing high-level intellectual content you don’t have the time to even understand, let alone defeat or otherwise control, this is an existential threat to your entire livelihood. Because all of your personal identity, your status, and your salary, is based directly on your credentialed, legitimated membership card giving your writings and pontifications an officially sanctioned power and authority. If that door is opened even a crack by non-credentialed outsiders, the whole jig is up for the respectable bourgeois monopoly on the official intellectual organs of society.

This comment really strikes home with me. I wrote three books on Judaism from an evolutionary perspective, the first of which was reviewed positively in academic journals; the second was less widely reviewed, and the third was basically ignored apart from a favorable review by Frank Salter in the Human Ethology Bulletin. Instead I was subjected to a vicious witch hunt spearheaded by the SPLC, joined by a great many of the faculty in the College of Liberal Arts, especially the Jewish faculty. In all of the exchanges on faculty email lists there was never any attempt to deal with the academic soundness of these books. Labels like “anti-Semitic” sufficed. So now, nearly 20 years after publication, Culture of Critique remains ignored by the academic establishment even as it gains traction on the Alt Right.

The same can be said about Murray’s The Bell Curve. It is referenced at times but almost always with the adjective ‘discredited’ even though the data are rock solid. I know a liberal academic who commented, “I don’t have to read Mein Kampf to know it is evil. Same with The Bell Curve.”

Murphy:

An interesting question is, because respectable intellectuals are often pretty smart and capable, why are they so fearful of outside intellectual projects, even if they are as evil as some fear? They are smart and capable intellectuals, so you’d think they would embrace some interesting challenge as an opportunity for productive contestation. Why don’t they? Well, here’s where the reality gets ugly. The reason respectable intellectuals so instinctively close ranks around the moral exclusion of NRx intellectuals is that currently working, respectable intellectuals privately know that the intellectual compromises they have made to secure their respectability and careers has rendered most of their life’s work sadly and vulnerably low-quality.

I suspect this is quite true. There is a replication crisis centering on psychology and particularly in social psychology, the most blatantly politicized field within psychology. This is my summary of Prof. Jonathan Haidt’s comments on the topic:

when scholarly articles that contravene the sacred values of the tribe are submitted to academic journals, reviewers and editors suddenly become super rigorous. More controls are needed, and more subjects. It’s not a representative sample, and the statistical techniques are inadequate. This use of scientific rigor against theories that are disliked for deeper reasons is a theme of Chapter 2 of The Culture of Critique where it was also noted that standards were quite lax when it came to data that fit the leftist zeitgeist.

Whole areas of education and sociology doubtless have similar problems. For example, in education, there have been decades of studies “discovering” panaceas for the Black-White academic achievement gap — without any success. But, as Prof. Ray Wolters notes (“Why Education Reform Failed,” The Occidental Quarterly [Spring, 2016]), hope springs eternal because there are always new wrinkles to try. Fundamentally the field fails to deal with IQ or with genetic influences on IQ and academic performance.

ORDER IT NOW

The same is likely true of huge swaths of the humanities where verbal brilliance, post-modern lack of logic and rigor, and leftist politics have created wonderlands of inanity. All this would be swept away if the outsiders triumphed. I strongly suggest following @RealPeerReview on Twitter to get a feeling for what is now going on in academia. Remember, these people are getting jobs and students are paying exorbitant tuition to hear them lecture.

Murphy:

To convince status-quo cultural money dispensers to give you a grant, fourr instance, any currently “successful” academic or artist has to so extensively pepper their proposal with patently stupid words and notions that knowingly make the final result a sad, contorted piece of work 80% of which is bent to the flattery of our overlords. But we falsely rationalize this contortion as “mature discipline” which we then rationalize to be the warrant for our privileged status as legitimate intellectuals.

And then, twisting the knife:

Because we know deep down inside that our life’s work is only half of what it could have been had we the courage to not ask for permission, if there ever arise people who are doing high-level intellectual work on the outside, exactly as they wish to without anyone’s permission or money, then not only are we naturally resentful, but we secretly know that at least some of these outsiders are likely doing more interesting, more valuable, more radically incisive work than we are, because we secretly know that we earn our salary by agreeing to only say half of what we could.

Can’t think of a better way to end it. What its really incredibly pathetic is that really challenging this regime from within the academic world is vanishingly rare. Or perhaps it’s not so surprising given the above. But what happened to all that idealism that young scholars have when they really get interested in a field? Why don’t professors in evolutionary science, who know well how natural selection works when there is an invasive species or sub-species — why don’t these White people become vocal opponents of the current multicultural zeitgeist that is actively selecting against European genes? How can they just watch or even applaud the demise of their own people?

This for me is the hardest to understand. Careerism over their obvious genetic/evolutionary interests.

(Republished from The Occidental Observer by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Academia, Alt Right, Political Correctness 
Hide 295 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. AaronB says:

    “This for me is the hardest to understand. Careerism over their obvious genetic/evolutionary interests.”

    Both are selfish materialistic interests.

    You will never be able to understand why Whites are committing suicide if this is all you can see.

    You are doomed to eternal puzzlement and perplexity, like Derbyshire, like Sailer. Eternally scratching your heads, yet unwilling to question your premises, trapped in the sterile circle of materialism.

    You yourself admit you cannot understand it – i.e it cannot be explained in terms of your premises. One would think when one has reached the limits of one’s premises explanatory power, its time to think beyond them.

    Yet how seldom that happens. People just circle endlessly their central premise, unable to break free.

    Yet to anyone who isn’t a materialist, how obvious it is why Whites are committing suicide.

  2. joe webb says:

    The left used to call the intellectual enablers of capitalism “bourgeois intellectuals.” This included various professions like economics, political science, etc.

    Since Sociology was the Revolution Party led by Jews, it got a pass.

    Today, with commies like the handsome negro Van Jones, at one of the major networks, and these networks nothing more than Pravda Dem Party hackworks, we need a new term for the media-Left-Revolutionary minority-racist-jewish-liberal-anti-fa, academic , etc. cultural revolution.

    The fact that , per this article, it has become so trendy as to attract opportunists of many colors, it arguably is in danger of strident internal divisions, like the LGBTxyz, loonies that have self-destructed. Something that denotes the internal instability of the Dem coalition would be useful.

    The bizarre connection with international capital as a theoretical vehicle for inauguration of the great Age of Globalism and One World of racial group-groping should be captured in any such term of the cultural revolution II that we are experiencing.

    Dunno, but the Brave New World needs a catchy term. Liberal Opportunism also must be compassed in the term. Liberal World Equality Trashniks, etc.
    Joe Webb

    • Replies: @Captain Willard
  3. Wally says: • Website

    The world’s largest fraud must be addressed before anything changes.

    The ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here:

    http://codoh.com

    No name calling, level playing field debate here:

    http://forum.codoh.com

    [MORE]

    from “holocaust historian” Raul Hilberg:

    “In 1976, I went to a small town in Bavaria, Ludwigsburg, which has the headquarters for investigations of so-called National Socialist crimes, an office maintained by the provinces of the Federal Republic of Germany. About thirty prosecutors were housed in that particular building, and I went there to study court records, various affidavits, and other materials. But one afternoon, they said, “We’re having a party today, would you join us?” Why, yes. They said, “we have one bottle of wine for each person.” (laughter from the audience). And after a while I chanced to talk to the deputy chief of that office, and I said to him this: I’ve been troubled by one question. And I’m afraid that I went into print with something that isn’t entirely accurate. And that is the role of Adolf Hitler himself in the annihilation of the Jewish people in Europe. Now, I know that you are only concerned here with live individuals, and that you do not investigate the dead.”
    “But still … what do you think?
    “Ach,” he said, “we’ve often fantasized about drawing up an indictment against Adolf Hitler himself. And to put into that indictment the major charge: the Final Solution of the Jewish question in Europe, the physical annihilation of Jewry. And then it dawned upon us, what would we do? We didn’t have the evidence.”
    at: http://takimag.com/article/fear_of_a_gray_planet_david_cole/print#ixzz3TxrfJenl

    Why have supremacist Jews have been marketing the ’6,000,000′ lie since at least 1869?

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  4. I wonder if Prof. Murphy has not only tenure but a trust fund.

    • Agree: MBlanc46
  5. Yup. careerism is spiritual whoredom.
    As somebody once said, “I was only following orders”.

  6. Randal says:

    Excellent stuff. The hard truths that our society refuses to listen to and tries its best to suppress.

    This for me is the hardest to understand. Careerism over their obvious genetic/evolutionary interests.

    Not hard to understand – genetic interests are not individual interests unless the individual chooses to make them so.

    Many of these people are childless, as a result of lifestyle choices – choosing to engage in homosexual or recreational activity instead of reproductive for hedonist reasons, postponing childbirth until too late for career materialist reasons. Such people have turned away from the instinctive objective of reproduction in the most fundamental way, and have no direct interest in the future beyond their own brief lives. No wonder they are free to engage in the profound selfishness of destructive altruism.

    Others think their children will be sheltered from the consequences by their own establishment status, or genuinely believe the dogmas they have repeated for so long.

    • Agree: TelfoedJohn
    • Replies: @iffen
  7. Being cast as evil means you are outside the moral community. There’s no need to talk with you, no need to be fair, or even worry about your safety. You are like an outlaw in Old Norse society — ‘a person [who] lost all of his or her civil rights and could be killed on sight without any legal repercussions.’”

    Projection of such an incredible amount of animus directed at one individual must be an indicator of a huge lacking in our culture. Common decency aside, the simple repetition of such hostility must be masking other ills. S.H.I.T. Happens! Self. Haters. Impugning. Trump. Happens! Examined here:

    https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2017/05/22/s-h-i-t-examined/

  8. One wonders if psychologists are ignorant of history.
    Some 300 years BCE a Greek calculated the circumference of the earth at 39.000 km, the right figure is 40.000.
    Yet Columbus’ sailors were afraid to fall of the earth.
    For some 1600 years the christian church prevented all independent thought, in 1600 the pope had Giordano Bruno burned alive, for heretic thoughts, about the universe, about the holy trinity.
    At about the same time Calvin burned Servetius, the man who discovered blood circulation, alive to death, also about the trinity.
    So Servetius was unable to tell the world about the blood circulation.
    Galileo got away with house arrest.
    Even around 1860 the pope declared that philosophical thinking not controlled by the church was illegal.
    So there is nothing special in the christian culture about no independent thought.
    On top of that, as Chomsky states: in any culture there is a standard truth, if this truth is not considered, no debate is possible, but between those who know better.
    We see this right now, much wailing about the indeed horrible carnage in Manchester, that the USA, Predators with Hellfire, causes such carnage every week three or fout times, it cannot be said.
    Terrorism is caused by the Islam, not by the west.

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @Alden
  9. @Wally

    Even more important to me seems the question ‘who wanted WWII ?’.

    Charles A. Beard, ‘American Foreign Policy in the Making, 1932 – 1940, A study in responsibilities’, New Haven, 1946

    A J P Taylor, ‘The Origins of the Second World War’, 1961, 1967, Londen

    • Replies: @Anon
  10. anonHUN says:
    @AaronB

    Can you elaborate? You mean they aspire to be saints, and sacrifice themselves or to repent for the sins of their fathers? (by going extinct?) Well true, Christianity introduced this kind of nutjobs to the world who aimed to die without resisting “evil” and expecting to win that way on the metaphysical plane. Progressives don’t believe in such things though.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  11. @joe webb

    “The bizarre connection with international capital as a theoretical vehicle for inauguration of the great Age of Globalism and One World of racial group-groping should be captured in any such term of the cultural revolution II that we are experiencing.”

    How is this “bizarre” or “theoretical”? I would politely suggest instead that it’s “logical” and “intended”. Where you see culture, tradition and Western values, the Globalist Hierarchy sees a competitive ideology to its hegemonic project. You see a nation or tribe, they see cheap labor and “customers”.

    Meanwhile, it is essential that, per Murphy, the independent Left be subjugated and/or co-opted. They cannot leave any Trotskys around to mess things up. They have correctly judged that the Right can be mopped up later.

    • Replies: @animalogic
    , @joe webb
  12. BozoB says:
    @AaronB

    Okay, I guess I’ll be the one to bite: Why are Whites committing suicide?

    • Replies: @Wally
  13. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @jilles dykstra

    Nothing like recent, cutting-edge research to support your viewpoint.

    • Replies: @Ace
  14. William says:
    @AaronB

    AaronB, Do you understand? Do you see what you claim is so obvious? If so, then clearly state your point or position.

    You do not make any statement in your comment, you only attempt to belittle the author. Is belittling the author your central premise? Does this mean you in actuality have nothing to add?

    If you have some insight, then let’s hear it! I’m curious. Why are Whites so obviously committing suicide?

    • Replies: @AaronB
  15. iffen says:
    @Randal

    instinctive objective of reproduction

    There is no instinct for reproduction.

    There is an instinct to have sex.

  16. @AaronB

    You are being too cute. Trolling? Or maybe you can’t spell out your case without showing it up as dealing with something not relevant to KM’s careerism v. genetic/evolutionary conundrum.

    KM is dealing with the attitudes of academics to what other people are doing or allowing (and finding that their career interests prevent them seeing and speaking honestly about what fellow whites are doing and failing to do).

    You, I suspect are suggesting that nearly everyone is putting petty materialism of the crass or everyday variety ahead of having children and of relying on fellow citizens to do many mundane things for us, including our care in old age, that we materialistically encourage immigrants to do for lower wages.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  17. This is a fascinating take on the true Establishment, if not the ‘counter-culture’; both of which are politically correct and engineered to be self-perpetuating.

    The progressive Trojan Horse has penetrated the kingdom’s walls.

    Tolerance! (Do not resist.)

    These progressive movements are also censorious, authoritarian and highly exclusive.

    ‘We are all One’. Bigotry will not be tolerated!

    At their core, these liberal movements and their rainbow collection of accompanying values represent the subversive interests of an invasive species.

    • Replies: @woodNfish
  18. reiner Tor says: • Website
    @iffen

    Most people like kids, and it’s comforting for most people to know that they have many descendants. It’s also deeply dissatisfying to know that you have no descendants, or just very few of them. Have you not heard of old parents begging their adult kids to settle down and produce grandkids for them? (An example would be Hillary Clinton, who, according to Chelsea, was begging her daughter to have kids.) I know of grandparents who were even trying to make their kids have a second child (and so an extra grandkid for the grandparents). (Over two kids there is usually no pressure, but I’d bet most grandparents would be happy to have more grandkids. Especially since they don’t have much downside, since the grandkids are not their responsibility.) I think it’s largely hardwired.

  19. benjaminl says:

    Like moral pronouncements, religious dogmas are not refutable and need not be justified empirically. They are nothing more than intellectually shoddy ex Cathedra pronouncements that take advantage of a pre-existing intellectual consensus.

    This is a bit unfair to religious dogma. From Justin Martyr and Irenaeus to Augustine and Aquinas, many theologians did their most notable work, precisely in arguing against people who did not share their views.

  20. Tulip says:

    I hope Murphy already has tenure. . .

  21. AaronB says:
    @William

    I thought it was obvious from my last line.

    A society that becomes materialist, loses contact with the spiritual and transcendent, loses the will to live.

    A society that becomes mechanistic, individualistic, and rationalistic creates a life not worth living. Responding to an obscure inner need, humans rebel against it, seek to destroy it, and yearn for the “other”.

    This has been going on since the late 18th century, if not earlier. First a trickle, then a flood. At first a few adventurers rejected the West for exotic climes – Sir Francis Burton, Rimbaud, etc, writing about their disgust with life in the West.

    By the 19th century dozens of writers, perhaps the majority, are writing about their disgust with life in the modern West. Flaubert, Baudelaire, Schopenhauer, Dickens, etc. Countless others.

    Jews exploit weaknesses, but they do not create them.

    • Replies: @Harold
    , @TelfoedJohn
  22. @AaronB

    I agree absolutely, no doubt it’s more and more ”spiritual” than just ”evolutionary”. Yes, existentialism is one of the ”plague” that is destroying west BUT existentialism should be a good thing, a emancipation from childish belief systems, less for people who hasn’t been selected to be mature, so instead a clear evolution of ”spirit” be beneficial, it’s become maladaptative. ”’They”’ create a moral game that is impossible for those who can’t think in ”multiple’ perspectives to win.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  23. AaronB says:
    @anonHUN

    As you probably realize, the West isn’t engaged in altruistic self-sacrifice, but in suicide. There is a big difference. One is good, the other bad.

    One is based on love and compassion, the other on self-disgust. If we were capable of love we would defend our way of life, not destroy it – if we could love, our life would have some meaning, and some happiness. Love is a transcendent, non-materialist, value.

    What the West is doing is motivated by hate, not compassion.

    This isn’t Christian, either. Suicide is forbidden in Christianity, nor can one force others to sacrifice themselves, as in forcing entire unwilling nations to self-destruct.

    Also, our policies are obviously increasing misery, hatred, and bloodshed, in the long run, and the short run. If we were motivated by compassion, we could send money, aid, entire teams, to other countries. But that would not serve our true purpose.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  24. Ace says:
    @Anon

    Were those sources discredited after they appeared?

    • Replies: @Anon
  25. AaronB says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    But why are people putting career interests above their genetic interests?

    Both are selfish, but career interests are short term, and genetic interests are long term.

    In fact, genetic interests – nationalism – can only be a transitional stage between religion and nihilism. Necessarily so.

    As a society moves away from transcendent values – religion – nationalism is the first stage in the transition towards complete materialism, and complete selfishness.

    Nationalism is long term selfish materialism, and it also retains some concern with people other than yourself – i.e it retains the faint echo of a transcendent value, love.

    But as materialism advances, short term selfish materialism must come to predominate and become the mainstream attitude. Complete materialism cannot tolerate even the trace of a non-materialistic transcendent value.

    Careerism is merely the second to last stage in the transition away from religion. The last stage is self-disgust, weariness of life, and suicide. Nihilism.

    Nationalism – long-term genetic interests – cannot replace religion, nor serve as the long term basis for a healthy society on its own. It can only make sense within a religious context, as one element.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  26. @Captain Willard

    This article, & your comment captain, are “spot on”.
    There is a name for the so-called left addressed in this article: they are the “pseudo-left.”
    These “progressives” have been largely complicit with the neoliberal take over of western democracy over the last 40 years. They have actively degraded working people to a mere aggregation of identity groups: gay ? (tick) female ? (tick) black/minority ? (tick) white ? ( …um?) male ? (…oppressor, tick)
    They have turned their backs on the economic interests of working people — whatever their “identity” — & usually given support to whatever insane imperialist military escapade the ruling class has concocted. (That Assad, he’s a DESPOT ! so if Syria gets destroyed…well it’s “worth it” (M. Albright’s famous reference to half a million victims of Iraq sanctions)
    Capitalist elites have supported all this nonsense. Anti-racism = unconditional immigration = weakening of labour.
    Identity politics ? Wonderful. All issues confused. Workers split. Accuse anyone who wants to alter the status quo as “fascist” (ie Trump, Le Pen, Brexit).
    And the theoretical underpinning of the pseudo-left ? Post Modernism — the most intellectually & spiritually poisonous ideas to emerge from universities in the history of the West.

  27. Agent76 says:

    Dec 7, 2011 Council on Foreign Relations – The Power Behind Big News

    One version says that the CFR is an organization sister to the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Britain), both founded in 1921 right after World War I when the League of Nations idea failed. The sole purpose of such organizations is to condition the public to accept a Global Governance which today is the United Nations.

  28. Randal says:
    @iffen

    There is no instinct for reproduction.

    Seems pretty unlikely to me, based upon simple observation.

    The evidence for an instinct to reproduce seems to be obvious in the widespread desire for children/grandchildren of one’s own. Any reason to deny the obvious presumption?

    Though of course it’s not really relevant to the point I was making, since “instinct for reproduction” could as easily have been written “genetic imperative for reproduction” without affecting the point.

    • Replies: @iffen
  29. AaronB says:
    @Santoculto

    But man cannot live without metaphysics – if he tries, we get what we have now in the West. We are metaphysical creatures.

    So “existentialism” may have liberated us from childish beliefs, many of them pernicious, but at the same time it has grounded us in the dead weight of materialism (“physics”, not metaphysics).

    As for “them” creating a game we cannot “win”, I believe we are actively cooperating with “them” – willing our own destruction. We do not wish to live the life we have created for ourselves.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  30. utu says:
    @AaronB

    I would never put Kevin MacDonald in the same bag with Derbyshire and Sailer. Unlike them MacDonald had courage to tackle the ultimate subject of the Jews. And he did it very thoroughly w/o holding any punches. He did it the way his training as a evolutionary sociologist permitted him which was by putting more emphasis on genes then cultural memes. This is unfortunate because cultural memes dominate. But writing about genes is a bit safer than about memes because one can fall on and hide behind presumably objective scientific narrative. That’s why also Derbyshire and Sailer rather yap about genes than cultural memes.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @Wizard of Oz
  31. @AaronB

    Genetic interests can be more morally acceptable if people start to perceive on themselves certain psychological features that is preditive to good behaviors or a higher frequency of that, and start to breed among themselves, if they understand the basic principles of genetics. Genetic interests is not always selfish.

  32. Wally says: • Website
    @Anon

    Proof?
    None.

    recommended:
    WWII Europe / Atlantic Theater Revisionist Forum

    http://forum.codoh.com/viewforum.php?f=20&sid=27d79dacb20ae3a55893358c9982f39e

    and:
    WWII Asia / Pacific Theater Revisionist Forum

    http://forum.codoh.com/viewforum.php?f=26&sid=27d79dacb20ae3a55893358c9982f39e

    ‘holocaust historian’ Raoul Hilberg:

    “In 1976, I went to a small town in Bavaria, Ludwigsburg, which has the headquarters for investigations of so-called National Socialist crimes, an office maintained by the provinces of the Federal Republic of Germany. About thirty prosecutors were housed in that particular building, and I went there to study court records, various affidavits, and other materials. But one afternoon, they said, “We’re having a party today, would you join us?” Why, yes. They said, “we have one bottle of wine for each person.” (laughter from the audience). And after a while I chanced to talk to the deputy chief of that office, and I said to him this: I’ve been troubled by one question. And I’m afraid that I went into print with something that isn’t entirely accurate. And that is the role of Adolf Hitler himself in the annihilation of the Jewish people in Europe. Now, I know that you are only concerned here with live individuals, and that you do not investigate the dead.”
    “But still … what do you think?
    “Ach,” he said, “we’ve often fantasized about drawing up an indictment against Adolf Hitler himself. And to put into that indictment the major charge: the Final Solution of the Jewish question in Europe, the physical annihilation of Jewry. And then it dawned upon us, what would we do? We didn’t have the evidence.”
    at:

    http://takimag.com/article/fear_of_a_gray_planet_david_cole/print#ixzz3TxrfJenl

  33. AaronB says:
    @utu

    You are right – Sailer in particular seems to admire Jewish “success” – which shows he does not understand what it is based on.

    Kevin deserves admiration, but his analysis is vitiated by his materialism. He does not understand White vulnerability – because as a materialist, he cannot.

    His materialism also limits his ability to understand Jews.

    Genetic determinism has severe limits in explaining history – the idea that Whites are uniquely altruistic is historically ignorant, for instance. Also, it is a serious misunderstanding to describe current White behavior as altruistic.

    Further, there can be no evolutionary logic for a group to preserve itself under pressure – survival on the genetic level would seem most assured by assimilating – a fact, by the way, which seems easily grasped by our current-day White materialists.

    Group-survival can only be a non-materialist transcendental value. But then, the identity of the group – not its genetic material, which will survive anyhow – must bee felt as worth preserving.

    These, and other defects, must be swept under the rug if one is to be an extreme materialist.

  34. Wally says: • Website
    @BozoB

    Quick answer: indoctrinated guilt.

    Guilt for things that Gentile whites didn’t do.
    ex.: ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’

    All but two of the Germans [on trial at Nuremberg], in the 139 cases that we investigated, had their testicles kicked in beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American investigators:” 23.1.49, The Sunday Pictorial (quoted in For Those Who Cannot Speak (ref. 27), p.21.The statements which were admitted as evidence were obtained from men who had first been kept in solitary confinement for three, four and five months..The investigators would put a black hood over the accused’s head, punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hoses.
    - American judge, van Roden

    Notice that Jews are doing the opposite.
    They support strict Israeli immigration laws which specify Jews Only, while they demand massive low IQ, criminal 3rd world immigration into the US & Europe.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Anon
  35. iffen says:
    @Randal

    There is no genetic imperative for reproduction.

    There is a genetic imperative to have sex.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    , @Randal
  36. MBlanc46 says:

    So academic Leftists are now what pass for professional revolutionaries. V.I. Ulyanov would be appalled.

  37. @utu

    You unfairly snipe at SS and JD for some reason. My tecollection is that Steve was brought up Catholic but his genetic father is Jewish. But i can’t see in any case why he should be expected to write to your prescription.
    Also you seem to have missed the Derbyshire piece about the Jews in America who still mrntally live in 1880 Russia hiding from the Cossacks.

    • Replies: @Alden
  38. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    What its really incredibly pathetic is that really challenging this regime from within the academic world is vanishingly rare.

    It’s not incredibly pathetic, it’s just disgustingly pathetic. As you’ve said, they’re all intellectual whores. That’s what the public sector has always been comprised of. I know. I worked for three governments (briefly) and I devoted an even shorter part of my one and only life to appointments at three universities, including two of the World’s top 30 (according to the Times Higher Ed) research schools.

    But what happened to all that idealism that young scholars have when they really get interested in a field?

    The idealism remains, but those young idealistic scholars, realizing what a degraded, sordid, bureaucratic world the university has become, went out into the real world, whether to drop out, make money, or pursue the intellectual life with real, personally paid for, freedom.

    Why don’t professors in evolutionary science, who know well how natural selection works when there is an invasive species or sub-species — why don’t these White people become vocal opponents of the current multicultural zeitgeist that is actively selecting against European genes?

    They are far from the brightest of the bunch and they are, as we already said, intellectual whores.

    How can they just watch or even applaud the demise of their own people?

    How many kids does Frau Merkel have? How many kids does Frau Theresa May have? Why would they care about the future of their own people. Same problem with a lot of female quota academics.

    There’s no solution other than to tie the feminists in bags and dump them in the Bosphorus, and the same with the academic eunochs, the scoundrel academic deans, and the slimebag university presidents and vice presidents. Screw the whole dirty lot of them.

    Trump could make a start by ending all Federal support for universities.

  39. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Why do blacks cause so much trouble:

    Bammama, or Blacks are more muscular and more aggressive.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2CvE5N-1Ss

  40. @AaronB

    I don’t think like that, THEY just re-organized social structures to favor the destroyers/ left-retards. It’s just like in the Terminator III, when the infamous Terminator was reprogrammed by T-X to kill its original protected, ”kill itself, its own sense to exist”.

    Meta-physical is a escapism from reality, a confusion with ultimate beauty of existence. We can dream with stars without gross and ridiculous fairy-tale stories. We can create them, but without confuse them with reality, something has been fatal for us, in direct or indirect ways.

    But yes, without someTHING forward guide us, we become more individualistic. But still is not a problem be individualistic expressing our individualities, it’s a problem when we become selfish individualistic expressing our individualisms or lack of empathy.

  41. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @AaronB

    What the West is doing is motivated by hate, not compassion.

    Yeah, hate by the globalist elite for the mass of mankind (aka what Bill Clinton’s history mentor, Carroll Quigley called the Money Power), which is rather different from self-hatred, although self-hatred or at least the lust for what is self-destructive is what a mass-hating elite seeks to instill in the masses.

    Societies don’t live or die according to the minds of the mass, but according to the wisdom and ambitions of the leadership. So let’s forget the BS about a lack of spirituality, let’s recognize who are the bastards driving the West to destruction and how they and their agents are to be exposed and destroyed.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @annamaria
  42. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    Meantime, if you want to take a kick at the crooks in academic administration, go over to the blog of Professor John McAdams — booted from the Marquette U, supposedly a Christian institution, for the terrible crime of standing up for a student who wished to make a case against gay marriage in a philosophy class — and give him your encouragement and support.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  43. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    And to be quite clear:

    It was not a gay marriage, but the case the student wished to make against gay marriage that was in a philosophy class.

  44. annamaria says:
    @jilles dykstra

    “JFK at 100″ by Paul Craig Roberts: http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/05/24/jfk-100-paul-craig-roberts/
    “The assassination of President Kennedy was an enormous cost to the world. Kennedy and Khrushchev would have followed up their collaboration in defusing the Cuban Missile Crisis by ending the Cold War long before the military/security complex achieved its iron grip on the US government. Israel would have been denied nuclear weapons, and the designation of the Israel Lobby as a foreign agent would have prevented Israel’s strong grip on the US government. In his second term, JFK would have broken the CIA into a thousand pieces, an intention he expressed to his brother, Robert, and the Deep State would have been terminated before it became more powerful than the President.”

    “The Globalization of War, America’s “Long War” against Humanity ” by Michel Chossudovsky: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-globalization-of-war-americas-long-war-against-humanity-michel-chossudovsky/5427720
    “Under a global military agenda, the actions undertaken by the Western military alliance (U.S.-NATO-Israel) in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, Ukraine, Syria and Iraq are coordinated at the highest levels of the military hierarchy. We are not dealing with piecemeal military and intelligence operations.”

    “Israel: the original terrorist state:” http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/189264/israel-original-terrorist-state

  45. Tulip says:

    There is an interesting point in the life of any maturing intellect when one discovers the gap between how the Academy insists on “explaining” how the world works and how the world really works. It is very hard to resist the urge to talk about it. [Even harder to look at the raw scientific data "no platformed" out of the dialogue.]

    Unfortunately, Mr. Murphy’s new enemies already know how the world works, and will only double down on their “explanation” because it serves their group interests. Further, Murphy will likely face professional backlash for discussing the Emperor’s attire. This will be exciting for a young scholar, but likely will sour with time. Cordelia was the youngest of Lear’s daughters, and Socrates probably got the fate he deserved.

  46. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    You are right, and it is the Western intellectual elite that had turned against itself by the time of the late 19th century. Precisely the ones who engage most deeply with Western ideas, and are most affected by them.

    In the 19th century, a Baudelaire and a Rimbaud may have been horrified at the banality and dreariness of life in a mechanized society, but the masses, though obscurely suffering, were not so deeply affected.

    But today, the masses have caught up – obesity, the opioid epidemic, etc.

    The “bastards” who are responsible – unfortunately, you can’t hunt down materialism.

    If you don’t see the significance of our lack of spirituality, you will never be able to break free.

    Santoculto – but you see, “beauty” is a metaphysical concept – it transcends mere matter. Materialism has no use for beauty. We see this today – with the loss of metaphysics, our architecture, our art, has become ugly. Beauty is “useless”.

    We have some “thing” driving us forward – selfish materialism. If you don’t like it, and wish to escape it, then what drives you forward cannot be a “thing”.

    • Replies: @nickels
    , @Santoculto
  47. annamaria says:
    @CanSpeccy

    What the West is doing is motivated by greed (and the superiority complex).

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com

    “… Muslim fundamentalism is such a strong growth that it needed no Western provocation to set it in motion. We have not only removed or weakened the regimes that inhibited, more or less, that growth. What we have done is to encourage Jihad to flourish on an immensely greater scale. That increased scale increases its glamour and its pull for our English Muslims many times over.
    … Western countries have been arming and training Muslim fighters knowing full well that those fighters were Jihadis, and were more than likely to join even more extreme Jihadi units. Knowing full well also that some of those Jihadis, but now trained in killing and invigorated by contact with other true believers, would return to their countries of origin and do what harm they could.
    … We see ragged groups of thugs using, often inexpertly, the deadly equipment we give them or the supply of which we facilitate. … For there is now no doubt that the flood of foreign Jihadis that have wreaked such havoc in Syria and neighbouring countries was released by us or with our active complicity. It could not have happened but for Western assistance. We do not acknowledge it.”

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @Wizard of Oz
  48. Sean says:

    I think liberals would disagree with a lot of this post. They see themselves as protecting the individual to live as they choose within a principle of no harm, whereby a problem of groups in competition does not arise, which is fair enough within a state, but falls apart if applied across borders and separate polities.

    The intellectual consensus against heterodox thinkers, especially those of Prof. MacDonald’s ilk, is due to the principle of no harm, taken as mandating an open society and global utility. But, restricting immigration on the grounds he advocates is a terrible mistake from every point of view.

    What its really incredibly pathetic is that really challenging this regime from within the academic world is vanishingly rare. Or perhaps it’s not so surprising given the above. But what happened to all that idealism that young scholars have when they really get interested in a field? Why don’t professors in evolutionary science, who know well how natural selection works when there is an invasive species or sub-species — why don’t these White people become vocal opponents of the current multicultural zeitgeist that is actively selecting against European genes? How can they just watch or even applaud the demise of their own people?

    This for me is the hardest to understand. Careerism over their obvious genetic/evolutionary interests.

    Be that as it may, I think phrasing opposition in terms of anything pertaining to genes is disastrous. And the proof of that is the virtually open borders advocates constantly try to bring up genetic and related arguments as what lies behind all calls for immigration restriction. They want us to make the hereditary/ genetic/white/ nordic argument. All these terms denote supremacy and are identified with a philosophical error ( essentialism).

    Border security is self-defence for the national state communities that aspire to protect their polity (sovereign country), but liberals are assuming a global delimited polity (one world ) with a principle of no harm; they have to save the immigrants. The case for immigration restriction should be put as relating to a democratically ratified state’s borders. A citizen’s right to cross the border has a corollary in relation to foreigners having no such right.

    “I don’t have to read Mein Kampf to know it is evil. Same with The Bell Curve.”

    Kampf has a bit where Hitler talks of the conquest and colonisation of space, but predicts the globe will spin through space devoid of life if Jews are allowed to direct its development. I wonder, liberalism and nation speaking peace toward nation is going to make the open and technologically innovative Western counties a mulch cow for the world, one can imagine a much more internationally cooperative spirit becoming de rigueur, and progress harnessed to the hypercapitalism as foreseen by Nick Land. At which time pursuit of a technological singularity will be brought well within striking distance for that generation.

    The great silence from the Universe (we’re all alone) and it seeming that, contrary to what evolutionist say, evolution does seem to have an upward direction to it (nervous systems having evolved twice) plus we now we know that bacteria can survive meteorite crash landings all points toward life forms being self exterminiting by getting a little too advanced.

    Perhaps his expectation of the aforementioned advances in globalism and invention (or rationalist morality and inteligence) is why Professor Stephen Hawking thinks life on Earth will be extinguished within a century. As Yoda, or was it Revilo Oliver, said “night must fall”.

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @CanSpeccy
  49. reiner Tor says: • Website
    @AaronB

    there can be no evolutionary logic for a group to preserve itself under pressure

    Wrong.

  50. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @AaronB

    survival on the genetic level would seem most assured by assimilating – a fact …

    Oh sure!

    Just what a globalist shill for European genocide would say.

    The truth, however, is quite the opposite.

    Thus, if in a territory of fixed carrying capacity, indigenous females are impregnated by alien settlers, then in the next generation, the proportion of indigenous genes in the gene pool will be diminished.

    Some survival strategy!

    That that is a strategy for self-genocide is why Jews won’t “marry out” and insist on having a Jewish state.

    And the genocidal effect is the same if you merely have mass immigration, especially when combined with below replacement birth rates as have been engineered throughout the West by government policy on abortion, divorce, toleration of immigrant polygamy, and the promotion of sexual perversion under the guise of sex “education.” Under those circumstances, it doesn’t matter who the indigenous people mate with, their genes in the gene pool will be diluted, eventually to extinction.

    Even if the indigenous mate only with one another, the frequency of their genes in the gene pool will be diminished both proportionally and in total, unless the population grows without limit.

    Then there is the cultural genocide, better known as multi-culturalism. First you invite in the adherents of the religion of love, next thing you know is the bastards are yelling Europe is the Cancer, Islam is the Answer, and terror bombing indigenous kids.

    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @AaronB
  51. reiner Tor says: • Website
    @iffen

    People love having grandkids, even feminist Hillary Clinton (who otherwise didn’t care much for reproduction) begged her only daughter to produce grandkids for her. Childless spinsters are often quite bitter, and most folk psychologists give at least two reasons why, with one of them being bitter about not having children. What makes you think it’s not hardwired?

    • Replies: @iffen
  52. FKA Max says:
    @AaronB

    I personally believe in — based on my personal experience and research — and support the “Northern Europeans are uniquely altruistic/idealistic” hypothesis http://www.unz.com/article/two-cheers-for-trump-advisor-mike-anton-he-has-the-right-enemies/#comment-1771264 , but there is an interesting study, which hypothesizes the opposite, namely that Northern Europeans are less altruistic than other races/cultures. I believe, that the author of this study mistakens clannishness/tribalism for altruism/emotional intelligence, so his conclusion/understanding is flawed, in my opinion, but the study is still well worth a read:

    Correlation of the COMT Val158Met polymorphism with latitude and a hunter-gather lifestyle suggests culture–gene coevolution and selective pressure on cognition genes due to climate Piffer (2013)

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/correlation-of-the-comt-val158met-polymorphism-with-latitude-and-a-hunter-gather-lifestyle-suggests-culturee28093gene-coevolution-and-selective-pressure-on-cognition-genes-due-to-climate.pdf

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/sex-differences-in-intelligence-in-nigeria/#comment-1866670

    Excerpt:

    The hypothesis of the present study is that ethnic groups start as hunter-gatherers in their respective geographical locations. The populations with a higher genotypic level of WM or fluid intelligence (thanks to a high frequency of the Met allele) were initially advantaged in their quest for technological progress and the adoption of a sedentary lifestyle requiring planning, such as that of agriculturalism. The behavioral inflexibility and lower emotional intelligence/altruism associated with Met allele carrier status favored the development of a hierarchical society, where resources were not shared but were concentrated in the hands of a few and formal rules governed human relationships. This first gave rise to city-states, ancient empires, and eventually the modern Western economy and society, based on monetary profit and scientific progress. Conversely, ethnic groups characterized by very low frequencies of the Met allele, but high Val frequencies, were predisposed to form deeper bonds based on reciprocity and altruism. Their higher behavioral and cognitive flexibility made it harder for them to accept the rule of formal rules or an impersonal bureaucracy.
    An additional mechanism of gene–environment interaction can be included, which involves the addition of a feedback loop, with culture acting back on genes via selective pressure, which eventually increased the initial genetic differences between different, isolated populations.

  53. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @annamaria

    We have not only removed or weakened the regimes that inhibited, more or less, that growth. What we have done is to encourage Jihad to flourish on an immensely greater scale. That increased scale increases its glamour and its pull for our English Muslims many times over.

    Who are “we”? Not me, not the average voter, and perhaps, even, not one in ten voters. It is a treason party in power, not “we” the people, that is driving the European nations to extinction.

    Few people can actually think through a political, moral or religious problem. The people need guidance. But for guidance we have a bunch of shills for the Money Power globalists: people such as the scoundrel and war criminal Blair and the scoundrel and war criminal Dubya Bush. And now Merkel, May and Macron. Wow, what a deadly line-up.

    We the people did not set out to destroy ourselves and our posterity. It was the elites, backed by people like Aaron B who pretends that the elite are some kind of Will-o-the-Wisp that it would be futile to attempt to finger, who are destroying the Western nations.

    And the people, many of them do understand what is being done to them and to their children. That’s why Trump won the election. Not because Trump will necessarily, or even probably, do what he promised to do, but because of he did promise to reverse the evil that has been perpetrated against the people.

  54. @Anon

    Well, that settles it, I guess.

  55. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    You’re not thinking it through.

    First, you have misunderstood me badly if you think I support European genocide. I am offering my analysis out of a desire to avoid just that. I just think your analysis is badly superficial.

    You are badly conflating “group identity” with “genetic group” – if the indigenous group agrees to assimilate to the invaders identity – religion, etc – then the indigenous group need not suffer any loss of genetic frequency.

    Even today, if you convert to Islam – assimilate – you will be provided a wife in many places. Your genes will most certainly not perish. Rather the opposite, for many young Western males.

    There can be no genetic, materialist reason to resist Islam – many low-status Western males will have improved chances of reproduction, and elite Western males will compose a valued intellectual and technocratic class, as happened historically. Genetically, females will be in no way worse off.

    To retain our distinct group identity we need a metaphysical reason – our distinct identity must be felt as worth preserving. This fact is implicitly admitted by our materialist Western elites, by their behavior.

    Historically, if you merged with your neighbor tribe, you became larger and stronger – the optimum strategy was for tribes to merge into “hordes”, which happened in many cases. A tribe that wanted to retain its distinct identity had to have a reason – it did not make genetic sense.

    Consider, also, that females of conquered tribes frequently despise the conquerors and refuse to mate with them, which makes no genetic sense. Take Israel – attractive Palestinian women should be rushing into the arms of Israeli men in droves. They are a conquered nation. Israeli men of Arab descent would love to pair with them. There is an interesting film on youtube called “checkpoint”, where you see Israeli soldiers of Arab descent hitting on (boderline sexually harrassing), young Palestinian women crossing their military checkpoint, and talking about how attractive they find them. Yet the women scorn them.

    European colonialists in Asia also did not typically have to fend off high-quality local women – both groups felt their own identity was worth preserving, for the most part.

    Yes – Jews retain a distinct identity, but it is highly obvious that the genetic survival of individual Jews is not served by this. This is why “assimilation” is so deplored by the Rabbis, who strive to provide a metaphysical reason for avoiding it – they know no materialist explanation can suffice. It is also why the Torah makes such strict and severe rules against Jews associating with gentiles – it understands well that every genetic imperative promotes assimilation, and only metaphysical considerations have a chance of providing a countervailing tendency. And the 50% intermarriage rate of secular Jews strongly illustrates this point.

    In Europe for most of history, Jewish genes would obviously have done far better by converting to Christianity and assimilating.

    And so on and so forth.

    Once you liberate yourself from the straitjacket of materialism, it is amazing the vistas that open up before you. So much that is puzzling to people like Kevin Mcdonald slip nicely into place.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @CanSpeccy
  56. annamaria says:
    @Sean

    A case in point – Libya: http://theduran.com/hillary-clinton-bears-responsibility-for-the-manchester-atrocity/
    “The illegal NATO war against Libya was Hillary Clinton’s war above all others. It was her who took a stable, prosperous, secular socialist country and turned it into a failed state and a terrorist playground. Gaddafi warned that he was the rampart holding back al-Qaeda from Europe, but Hillary Clinton did not care. She even laughed about Gaddafi’s inhumane, barbaric execution at the hands of terrorists.
    Had Hillary Clinton not been able to convince Barack Obama and his useful war propagandists David Cameron in Britain and Nicholas Sarkozy, the dead children in Manchester might be with us today.
    Hillary Clinton famously said of Gaddafi’s illegal execution, “We came, we saw, he died”. Indeed, she came, she saw, he died and now thousands of more have died in Libya, many others have died in Europe because of this, including those who recently perished in Manchester.”

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Sean
  57. nickels says:
    @AaronB

    What I find interesting is that, even if one buys the full materialistic/scientific/mechanistic nonsensical metaphysical ball and chain as a worldview, the writings of such as Gustave Le Bon demonstrate quite clearly the uselessness of such a reason/matter based ideology amongst a people.
    A people must have a ritual, something that hits them at a deeper level than the mind to function, to unite, and to thrive. Rationality only works with an individual. When more than one person combine together, they enter into a group conscience that is far less intelligent than any individual, ruled by the passions, and easily swayed by the contagion of thought, will and feeling.

    Without a given ritual, they fall easily to manipulation and to whatever random ideology springs from their midst or is imposed from without. The result is the madness of the crowd.

    So the materialistic viewpoint is intellectually a dead end even when evaluated from within its own philosophical context.

  58. @AaronB

    Beauty is a physical harmony, it’s not meta-physical. Beauty can be expressed via form or shape, for example, a beautiful person or a beautiful landscape, and it’s can be expressed via behavior or expression, and always is correlated in its partiality or totality to balance/harmony/symmetry.

    ”Our” arts is also used by malevolent purposes. A beautiful vatican has represented the evil of christendom in many ways, for example, for its adoration of material [gold,etc] over sencient goods.

  59. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Wally

    More Jews marry non-Jews than marry Jews. That’s hardly the opposite of “suicide,” given the strict rules under which they define themselves. The only place they’re not doing this is in Israel. But I thought ethnic states protecting their populations against immigrants was good? And who are these Jews who “demand massive low IQ, criminal 3rd world immigration into the US & Europe.” Got a source for that?

    • Replies: @utu
  60. iffen says:
    @reiner Tor

    What makes you think it’s not hardwired?

    No scientific evidence.

    I think it would have turned up by now.

    In 2-3 generations, people go from having 10-12 kids to having 0,1,2.

    How would that work genetically?

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    , @Alden
  61. utu says:
    @Anon

    And who are these Jews who… Got a source for that?

    I think there is a resurgence of anti-Semitism because at this point in time Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural. And I think we are going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the centre of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multicultural mode and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role and without that transformation, Europe will not survive.

    • Replies: @Anon
  62. AaronB says:

    @ FKA Max – thanks, that sounds interesting. I don’t know if Europeans are less altruistic than others, but I do know that the Muslims whom the Crusaders came into contact with considered Europeans to be especially ethnocentric.

    In my view, genetic determinism is simply a limited view – nations change their character, often dramatically, over time. Examples are numerous – dishonest Germans, lazy Chinese, etc, etc.

    To ignore this, truly one must do violence to one’s mind.

    @Nickels – yes, but that is the materialist trap. One cannot simply choose not to be a materialist for prudential reasons – as prudence itself is a materialist value. Materialism certainly undermines itself in many ways, though. It is, even, self-contradictory (if our minds are evolutionary, we can’t assume it produces truth – but then our minds produced the theory of evolution, which we then have no basis to believe in, and so on. It’s circular, and self-undermining.)

    @Santoculto – but beauty is not a physical thing – it is a relation between things, a certain proportion, an arrangement of things. Therefore, it is metaphysical – i.e above physics.

    Agree with you about the Vatican – though beautiful, it represent power and wealth, values utterly foreign to Christianity.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  63. utu says:
    @AaronB

    Your genes will most certainly not perish.

    I do not like the BS about gene survival. But if you have 1 child only only 50% of your genes survive if you mate with dog. But if you mate with random person from Africa more than 50% of your genes will survive because probably you share some genes with Africans. But even more of your genes will survive if you mate with somebody from your ethnic/racial group. But if you want to really maximize your gene survival try incest.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @CanSpeccy
  64. reiner Tor says: • Website
    @iffen

    In 2-3 generations, people go from having 10-12 kids to having 0,1,2.

    How would that work genetically?

    If I paid you $10,000 and gave you a day, could you come up with a rough back-of-the-envelope model where people would have a hardwired genetic predisposition to wanting to have many kids yet end up having a different number of kids under different circumstances?

    Actually, I could come up with such models for free.

    • Replies: @iffen
  65. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @AaronB

    First, you have misunderstood me badly if you think I support European genocide.

    I didn’t say what I thought you support. I said that what you were saying was consistent with the objective of those who do seek European genocide.

    if the indigenous group agrees to assimilate to the invaders identity – religion, etc – then the indigenous group need not suffer any loss of genetic frequency.

    That’s a clever piece of bullshit. What your saying is, as long as the indigenous Europeans agree to become part of some other group then the loss of their genes does not matter because, hey, they agreed in advance to merge and be submerged and ultimately eliminated.

    As for

    You are badly conflating “group identity” with “genetic group”

    More clever bullshit, since it is you who are doing the conflating.

    Even today, if you convert to Islam – assimilate – you will be provided a wife in many places. Your genes will most certainly not perish. Rather the opposite, for many young Western males.

    So you are crassly advocating conversion of Europe to Islam on the preposterous falsehood that it will increase European genes in the European gene pool, which is mathematical nonsense. If a European turns Muslim in Europe, it’s most likely that he will marry a European or several, and if it is several, so much the worst for the genes of those European males who might otherwise have married but who will have to make do without a wife at all.

    Consider, also, that females of conquered tribes frequently despise the conquerors and refuse to mate with them

    Bollocks. Tell that to the 40 million living descendants of Ghengis Kahn.

    Take Israel

    Please do.

    There can be no genetic, materialist reason to resist Islam – many low-status Western males will have improved chances of reproduction, and elite Western males will compose a valued intellectual and technocratic class, as happened historically.

    I’ve already exploded that idiotic fallacy in an earlier comment (see #52, above). I’m not engaging in a ’tis ’tisn’t dispute.

    To retain our distinct group identity we need a metaphysical reason

    Any group thinking the way you want the Europeans to think will be wiped from the page of history in very short order.

    attractive Palestinian women should be rushing into the arms of Israeli men in droves. They are a conquered nation. Israeli men of Arab descent would love to pair with them.

    The Palis haven’t surrendered yet. They want to kill everyone of you Jews or at least drive you back wherever the Hell you came from.

    Historically, if you merged with your neighbor tribe, you became larger and stronger

    You certainly pack a lot of BS into one comment. The optimum strategy depends greatly on circumstances. Genocide, as practiced by the Jews of old against the original inhabitants of Israel, involving slaughter of the males and post menopausal females, and impregnation of the females is often the optimum strategy, but circumstances alter cases in a vast number of different ways, so your comment is, frankly, fatuous.

    European colonialists in Asia also did not typically have to fend off high-quality local women

    There was no European colonization of Asia, so what are you talking about?

    Yes – Jews retain a distinct identity, but it is highly obvious that the genetic survival of individual Jews is not served by this.

    There is no such thing as the genetic survival of individual Jews or anyone else. All that counts, in the evolutionary sense, are genes, and the share of your gene in the gene pool, and what is apparently “highly obvious” to you is not the case.

    In Europe for most of history, Jewish genes would obviously have done far better by converting to Christianity and assimilating.

    “Obviously”? Usually a sign of bunk to be asserted. You have no arguments at all. Mere ridiculous and uninformed comment that happens to conform exactly with the globalist project for the destruction of the independent, sovereign, democratic, and by tradition Christian, European states.

    And so on and so forth.

    Yes, very good. That typifies the deficiency in fact and logic of your entire spiel.

    Once you liberate yourself from the straitjacket of materialism, it is amazing the vistas that open up before you.

    And once you open yourself up to unadulterated bullshit, it’s amazing how quickly you can inadvertently destroy your own people and posterity.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  66. Jason Liu says:

    This is exactly why “neoreaction” should have been the face and force behind the Alt-Right, not the Stormfront types. You can tell by just how afraid the academic left is when equality is questioned on an ideological level — the immediate reaction to accuse their opponents of moral sin indicates an insecurity in their ideas.

    Barring all-out, society-wide nationalism, it’s the Dark Enlightenment nerds who will produce the cultural change necessary to bring down the left. Pepe and beating up Antifa will only get you so far.

    • Replies: @SFG
    , @MarkinLA
  67. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @utu

    So one Jew speaks for the whole group? Does Ted Bundy speak for you?

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @Alden
  68. @AaronB

    Nickels??

    I think you’re just playing with words, sorry. “Above” physics in terms of value maybe but “still” physical, something that is impossible to avoid.

    We are arrangement of things we are physical.

  69. AaronB says:
    @utu

    lol, so incest makes most sense from a genetic perspective :)

    But seriously, I do not see why more of *my* genes will survive if I mate with someone of my own ethnic group, with whom I share genes?

    Do you mean the phenotypic expression of a gene will more likely occur when combined with compatible genes (blond hair might get canceled out if I mate with an African)?

    Or that redundancy – if both parents share a gene – might ensure a better environment for transmitting that gene?

    Since genes aren’t intelligent, and this entire process is “blind” – genes that confer a survival advantage get selected for, but don’t themselves choose – then those genes which are peripheral to survival, like hair color, probably do not exert strong selective pressure.

    That being said, yes, merging of two distinct ethnic groups definitely alters the phenotypic expression of differing genes – and yes, it does alter the “frequency” of your genes being expressed – i.e the relative expression of that gene – but not the absolute presence of that gene.

    I think what changes is the phenotypic expression of genes in the resultant population – which population will indeed look different and have different attributes than either parent population.

    However, this is of concern only for metaphysical reasons – on the genetic level, as long as survival is ensured, it matters not at all.

    I am reminded again, of how hard it is to discuss genes without giving them agency, will, and intelligence, “souls” – which they do not have – and to retain the proper perspective of a vast impersonal process that does not care about the outcome.

    With the proper perspective kept in focus, it is easier to see why metaphysics is primary, and the roles we attribute to genes are false.

  70. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    You know, if we adopt the genetic perspective, then none of this matters at all.

    Behaviors get selected for in a vast impersonal process that doesn’t care about the outcome.

    I do not see why the conscious *I* should give one whit about my genes.

    If someone has inherited a concern with his genetic transmission, or if someone has not, is a neutral fact with no significance from this point of view. If that person’s genes don’t make it to the next generation, that is a fact – it is without value. We have banished value, and created a world of impersonal facts.

    There can be no discussion, because there are no values, there are no reference points – it is all a vast impersonal process that is utterly blind.

    You cannot derive value from fact – and your attempt to do so is merely the metaphysical instinct hard at work, trying to derive meaning from the concepts available to you, even if those concepts cannot yield meaning.

    Such is the strength of man’s metaphysical instinct (the search for value and meaning) – finally, after much toil and effort, we arrive at a world view which banishes all metaphysics, yet we try immediately to sneak it in through the back door.

    Tell me, why *should* I care about my genes? Ah, but with that word “should”, we are back into metaphysics, and out of the genetic world-view.

    These double-binds and knots that Western thinking has finally tied itself into – if we cannot untie these knots, we are doomed to death.

    Because this talk of genetic transmission will not give us the motivation to save ourselves.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  71. Agent76 says:

    May 22, 2017 The Inconvenient Truth About the Democratic Party

    Did you know that the Democratic Party defended slavery, started the Civil War, founded the KKK, and fought against every major civil rights act in U.S. history? Watch as Carol Swain, professor of political science at Vanderbilt University, shares the inconvenient history of the Democratic Party.

  72. @AaronB

    Yet to anyone who isn’t a materialist, how obvious it is why Whites are committing suicide.

    Seeing as how the future of Western civilization is at stake, now may not be the best time to be keeping us in suspense.

    • Replies: @iffen
  73. SFG says:
    @Jason Liu

    Depends. I agree Moldbug and Nick Land are more fun for techies to read, but memes like Pepe and Based Stick Man are catchier and can reach more people. If they form a large counterculture some of them could eventually filter into people who might assume positions of power. One of Trump’s (or more accurately, Bannon’s) problems now is he doesn’t have populist-nationalists with any experience in government to carry out his plans, so he’s stuck with neocons and Obama holdovers.

  74. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Anon

    So one Jew speaks for the whole group? Does Ted Bundy speak for you?

    No, there’s Aaron B, too.

  75. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu

    I do not like the BS about gene survival.

    Genes do not survive, they replicate. Your genetic posterity, if you have one, will be yours because your genes are replicated in succeeding generations. That is not BS.

    An interesting consequence of that fact is that you can enhance your own genetic posterity without progeny of your own, by enhancing the reproductive success of those whose genes most closely resemble your own, hence nepotism and why JBS Haldane remarked, “I would die for two brothers, or four cousins.”

    But if you want to really maximize your gene survival try incest.

    That’s what royalty does or used to do, more or less, with somewhat mixed results, including hemophilia and madness. There must be some trade off between increased representation of one’s own genes in the next generation and the increased risk of homozygosity of detrimental recessive genes that reduce the chance of your immediate successors having successors of their own.

    In a closed community, however, where everyone is inbred, the inbreeding keeps a lid on the frequency of lethal of sub-lethal recessive genes. That is why outbreeding of inbred groups leads to hybrid vigor — homozygosity of detrimental genes is reduced, although the genetic load is thus allowed to grow.

  76. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Sean

    But, restricting immigration on the grounds he advocates is a terrible mistake from every point of view.

    Except, as you forgot to mention, the survival of the European people. But liberals, of course, are always ready to sacrifice European people for whatever depraved cause they may have in mind.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @utu
    , @Sean
  77. Alden says:
    @jilles dykstra

    You’re too intelligent to keep repeating Calvinist and enlightenment propaganda. Columbus and his sailors knew that the earth was round and if they just keep sailing west they would eventually run into Asia about 5,000 miles from The coast of Spain.

    What Columbus didn’t know was that the Americas are between Europe and Asia.

    Why is the calendar used today called the Georgian calendar? Because the calendar needs to be adjusted every 1, 500 years. It was adjusted around 40 BC when Juluus Cesear was Emperor. By 1500AD it needed further adjustment. That adjustment was done in the best observatory in the world at the time by the beat astronomers and mathmeticians in the world. The work was done in the Vatican observatory. The astronomers and mathematicians were Vatican priests.

    I very heard of the scientific method? It was created around 1100 AD by priests and monks at the Roman Catholic University of Paris Sorbonne.

    Your own country the Netherlands was under the North Sea in 500 AD. It was Roman Catholic monks who settled on the beaches and began a thousand year process of land reclamation that literally built the land now called the Netherlands.

    Every university established in Europe before 1800 was established by the church. During those 1600 years you cite the only libraries in Europe belonged to the church

    • Replies: @utu
    , @res
  78. iffen says:
    @reiner Tor

    could you come up with a rough back-of-the-envelope model where people would have a hardwired genetic predisposition to wanting to have many kids yet end up having a different number of kids under different circumstances?

    No.

    That’s my point.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  79. @CanSpeccy

    We have the force of attraction and the force of repulsion, the first is conservative, the second is dispersive, ”illibs” are the second group. Usually the attraction force is in the nuclei of the ”entity” as well in the its boundaries, this days dispersive forces are in the place where traditionally are the places of the attractive forces.

  80. Alden says:
    @iffen

    Don’t forget about reliable birth control.

    • Replies: @iffen
  81. iffen says:
    @Kevin O'Keeffe

    Seeing as how the future of Western civilization is at stake, now may not be the best time to be keeping us in suspense.

    We don’t believe in Jesus anymore. That’s all there is.

    • Replies: @Kevin O'Keeffe
  82. Alden says:
    @annamaria

    There is a theory that Hildabeast attacked Libya on orders from the bankers because Ghaddafi took Libya out of the international monetary system.

    America needs a leader like Ghaddafi, a leader who cares about his own people and nation.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    , @Wizard of Oz
  83. utu says:
    @CanSpeccy

    restricting immigration on the grounds he advocates

    I think it would be useful to go through all possible arguments in favor of controlling immigration. Why does it seem so that so many arguments are stigmatized and have negative connotations? Different argument will work with different people. Some arguments will fall on deaf ears in the US but might be persuasive in some European countries.

    Cultural arguments (destruction of cultures of both of the host and that of the immigrant, irreconcilable religious and cultural differences)

    Economic arguments (group and individual impact of immigration, who benefits and who does not)

    Legal arguments (sovereignty, ownership of land and country, national home, who can live in it and who can decide if every citizen is a part owner of the country, rule of reciprocity and 1st categorical imperative: what if everybody did this)

    Biological arguments (irreversibility of miscegenation, loss of natural biological diversity)

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  84. AaronB says:

    So iffen mocks me, and CanSpeccy fumes in silence, with his back to me.

    I get the sense committed materialists really do not like being challenged….

    Its unfortunate. If we cannot even tolerate challenges to materialism, we are without hope.

    Meanwhile, the rest of the world, full of faith, replaces us.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @CanSpeccy
  85. iffen says:
    @Alden

    Don’t forget about reliable birth control.

    Why would you use birth control if you have an ‘instinct” to reproduce?

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    , @Alden
  86. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Classic case of how PC can make white psychology stupid and gullible.

    https://altright.com/2017/05/24/blacks-mastermind-criminal-uses-white-guilt-to-steal-iphones-from-unsuspecting-liberals/

    Fact is blacks are more likely to lie, cheat, steal, and rob.

    They have less conscience and inhibition.

    Evolution made them that way. They had to survive in a world of competition with hyenas, leopards, crocodiles, and hippos.

  87. utu says:
    @Alden

    The anti Catholic propaganda was particularly strong in The Netherlands: “Liever Turks dan Paaps”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liever_Turks_dan_Paaps

    • Replies: @Alden
  88. MarkinLA says:
    @iffen

    There is no instinct for reproduction.

    Tell that to the average woman. She may have no instinct for sex but having a baby is another thing altogether.

  89. iffen says:
    @AaronB

    I get the sense committed materialists really do not like being challenged….

    I love a challenge, more than most.

    Faith failed.

    Case closed.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  90. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @AaronB

    I do not see why the conscious *I* should give one whit about my genes.

    Doesn’t matter whether you see why or not. The genes of those who do care are more likely to be represented in succeeding generations than the genes of those who do not. Caring about such things is largely a cultural matter. Hence, as
    Raphael Lemkin who coined the term genocide explained, genocide can be achieved by:

    a coordinated plan aimed at destruction of the essential foundations of the life of national groups so that these groups wither and die like plants that have suffered a blight. The end may be accomplished by the forced disintegration of political and social institutions, of the culture of the people, of their language, their national feelings and their religion. It may be accomplished by wiping out all basis of personal security, liberty, health and dignity. When these means fail the machine gun can always be utilized as a last resort.

    That is exactly what the European peoples are exposed to now. In arguing for the Islamification of Europe, through mass immigration you are promoting genocide of the Europeans, for whatever reasons, maybe hatred of Europeans, or maybe it pays — for you to raise a family and thus increase the representation of your genes in the gene pool.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  91. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @AaronB

    CanSpeccy fumes in silence…

    You call the thousand or so words I’ve addressed to you thus far “silence.” LOL

  92. MarkinLA says:
    @Alden

    I just think Hillary was looking to her Presidential run in 2016 and saw an opportunity to burnish her “foreign policy” bonafides. She thought it would be a cake walk and successful and could then brag in 2016 how she was head and shoulders above everybody else in foreign policy. Benghazi happened and everything was supposed to go down the memory hole.

    • Replies: @Alden
  93. MarkinLA says:
    @Jason Liu

    Except the left redefines “equality” to suit their argument. They want equality of opportunity when they think that I all that is necessary and when that doesn’t work equality is related to results.

  94. Alden says:
    @utu

    Better Turks than Papists? That must be why the Netherlands revolt against the Spanish Empire occurred just in time to distract the Spanish from the very important naval war against the Turks which culminated in the Catholic victory of Lepanto which made the Mediterranean and Atlantic safer for Europeans.

    I don’t know why Jilles Dykstra keeps injecting his trite 1700s diatribes against the Catholic Church. None of his allegations are true, just 400 yr old enlightenment propaganda. Columbus consulted the priests at the university of Salmonacca. The priests calculated the distance between Spain and Asia. They got the distance right. That’s quite an achievement for an anti science religion.

    Once Columbus realized that he could sail that distance he was able to raise funds from the Spanish crown. Of course Dysktra will heap scorn on the scientists of Salmonacca for not realizing the Americas were between Spain and Asia.

    Even American fundamentalists and Jews have ratcheted down the anti Catholic Calvinist rhetoric in the last 80 years.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @MarkinLA
    , @jilles dykstra
  95. dcite says:

    “Childless spinsters are often quite bitter, and most folk psychologists give at least two reasons why, with one of them being bitter about not having children. ”

    You sure understand more about the person using certain vocabulary, than the subject they are opining about. Chuckling at the images he’s conjuring up. To judge from what I’ve seen, those “spinsters” probably got more action than most properly married and childed women.
    There are lots of other reasons to be bitter than not having kids. Like having kids you wish you’d never had. Some of the bitterest people I’ve ever met have been parents. Both kinds.
    It is common to overestimate the desire of women to reproduce. I was flabbergasted at the young women I met years ago who declared with absoluteness, they wanted no children. That seemed so final and I couldn’t get why they didn’t see the potential in raising super-kids. They said it with absolute conviction and awareness that they would probably not die young and would be old without kids. Today, most are just fine. Most do not seem bitter. Maybe they should…for the good of society you want high quality people to reproduce. But these are the very types least concerned, and by and large they are just fine with the situation. What is convenient for the individual is not always good for society; but it does make for a happy individual.

  96. MarkinLA says:
    @iffen

    There are two instincts at play – the instinct to reproduce and the instinct too make sure your child survives to adulthood as healthy as possible. When children don’t survive the first instinct takes priority. When children can be assured of survival the second one does.

  97. Alden says:
    @iffen

    I had only 4 children, unlike all the commenters who urge other people to have big White families. But if I had not used birth control I could have had 15 to 20 kids between 20 and 45.

    For all you guys who don’t have kids and don’t seem to do what is necessary to conceive kids, birth control is the major reason for low fertility and low birth rates and 1 or 2 child families.

    For about 6 days a month a woman can conceive a baby. If she has sex without birth control in those days there is a good chance she will conceive. If she uses mechanical means such as diagrams and rubbers there is still a good chance she will conceive. If she uses the pill or an IUD there is a 95 percent chance she will not conceive.

    It’s difficult for me to understand how grown adult men don’t know that birth control prevents conception.

    Speaking of IUDs, there was something on Drudge about a month ago. A baby was born with the Mother’s IUD in its hand.

  98. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    I am not at all arguing for the Islamization of Europe – quite the opposite!

    I was merely pointing out that if we remain self-interested materialists, we will have no really compelling reason to make the necessary self-sacrifice to resist.

    “The genes of those who do care are more likely to be represented in succeeding generations than the genes of those who do not. Caring about such things is largely a cultural matter. ”

    So is it genetically determined, or a cultural attitude, subject to change? Since you distinguish between the two, I assume you do not think culture is genetically determined – otherwise the two sentences are identical.

    If it is genetically determined, then the European population is clearly composed of people who do not possess the gene that makes one care about the survival of one’s group – and then, what are you hoping for?

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  99. utu says:
    @Alden

    why Jilles Dykstra keeps injecting his trite 1700s diatribes

    I think he genuinely believes it. Several centuries of incessant propaganda and brain washing. In England it was not much better.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Seraphim
  100. AaronB says:
    @iffen

    Faith failed.

    Case closed.

    Tell that to the Muslims, the Chinese, the Indians, the Jews.

    And then, look at the West – I think it is rather that materialism failed. Case closed.

    • Replies: @iffen
  101. Alden says:
    @MarkinLA

    Could be right. What horrible people the Clintons are. It’s good that they only had one child, a woman who seems more interested in living the life of a rich lady than ruling the world. What if there were 2 or 3 Clinton boys. They’d be like the Kennedys.

  102. MarkinLA says:
    @Alden

    The priests calculated the distance between Spain and Asia. They got the distance right.

    Uh, no. The Atlantic is about 3000 miles, the Continental US is about 3000 miles and the Pacific is about 5000 miles.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Alden
  103. Alden says:
    @utu

    I know but the English stopped the anti Catholic nonsense when they stopped attending their Protestant churches. But Dykstra just keeps posting the same old same old.

    • Replies: @utu
  104. Alden says:
    @Anon

    Anon, if you want to know what atheist secular Jews, extremely to mildly orthodox, religious and non religious Jews think about unlimited legal and illegal immigration I suggest you subscribe to the largest circulation Jewish publication in America, the Jewish Journal. The address is 3250 Wilshire Blvd Los Angeles Ca. 90010.

    It’s a weekly publication. Every issue has articles advocating massive, expanded legal and illegal immigration. I’ve never read anything against immigration. For about a month after the San Bernardino massacre the Journal had numerous articles about the horrors of racism against Muslims and how most Muslims just live secular America and are harmless.

    Same thing after a Muslim army captain slaughtered 14 soldiers at Fort Hood. ” “Prejudice against Muslims is far far more evil than slaughtering 14 American soldiers ” preached the Jewish Journal.

    9/11, same thing, Orlando night club same thing.

    Go ahead, subscribe.

  105. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Hilarious.

    What Progs SAY is a means to cover up what they DO.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/black-farmer-calls-liberal-racism-191552524.html

  106. utu says:
    @Alden

    Various prejudices and misconceptions function in popular culture. Nobody really question them. You can find them in Monty Python.

    Arriving in England, I went from a country where religion was everywhere, but of little interest to me, to a country that had little interest in religion, but still defined me by my purported beliefs. Modern Britain is a country founded in large part on anti-Catholicism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/aug/22/pope-visit-catholic-prejudice

    And then you have this:

    Although there is a popular perception in Scotland that Anti-Catholicism is football related (specifically directed against fans of Celtic F.C.), statistics released in 2004 by the Scottish Executive showed that 85% of sectarian attacks were not football related. Sixty-three percent of the victims of sectarian attacks are Catholics, but when adjusted for population size this makes Catholics between five and eight times more likely to be a victim of a sectarian attack than a Protestant. (wiki)

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Philip Owen
  107. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu

    I think it would be useful to go through all possible arguments in favor of controlling immigration.

    Since all of the European majority nations are democratic, the people should surely decide for themselves how much of their living space they wish to share with economic migrants, rape-culture refugees, and settlers intent on imposing their legal, political and religious tradition on the country to which they migrate.

    How much of their living space are people willing to give up for the benefit of foreigners, most of whom, after all, have a homeland of their own?

    How many of their school places, maternity hospital beds are people willing to give up for the benefit of foreigners?

    How much in additional taxes are people willing to pay to cover the cost of the new infrastructure that mass immigration necessitates?

    How much of their taxes are people willing to have spent on the maintenance of unemployed immigrants?

    How much are people willing to see wages fall as a result of the increase in labor supply due to mass immigration?

    How much are people willing to see the cost of housing rise as the result of the increase in demand due to mass immigration?

    How willing are people to tolerate transformation of the religious, political, and legal traditions of their country to meet the demands of settlers from an alien, and highly authoritarian culture?

    Not every community will give the same answers. Countries like Canada and Australia have vast territories and it may thought that they need people in a hurry to secure the territory, although even so, they will surely not want to secure the territory at the cost of losing their religious, political and legal traditions.

    In fact, in most European majority countries, the democratic answer to the question of immigration is totally at odds with the policy followed. How many of the English, for example, would have voted to have their capital city, London, their second city, Birmingham, and sundry other cities and major urban areas taken over by a majority of foreigners, many of whom openly express their aim is conquest? A very small minority, as multiple opinion surveys over many years prove.

    Thus the process of mass immigration to most, if not all, European majority nations has been a betrayal of the democratic will of the people: a betrayal of the people opposed to self-destruction, a betrayal, in fact, of a value, a value that Aaron B says the European people cannot possibly have.

  108. utu says:
    @MarkinLA

    Columbus made three mistakes that compound to about 50% error. He thought that Asia keeps going further East but his main error was wrong definition of mile from some Persian writings:
    Here is interesting article:

    http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/at-work/test-and-measurement/columbuss-geographical-miscalculations

    Italian cartographer Fra Mauro (died 1464) estimated circumference 22,500 or 24,000 miglia.
    The globe with a map was ordered by Vatican already in 1477.

    http://www.crossingtheoceansea.com/OceanSeaPages/OS-55-ColumbusCalculations.html

  109. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @AaronB

    I am not at all arguing for the Islamization of Europe – quite the opposite!

    I was merely pointing out that if we remain self-interested materialists, we will have no really compelling reason to make the necessary self-sacrifice to resist.

    What is this self-sacrifice?

    What sacrifice is there in closing the door to rape-culture refugees?

    What sacrifice is there in closing the door to H1b visa entrants to the US who take decent jobs from Americans?

    What sacrifice is there to closing the door to people from Asia, Africa and the Middle-East — perfectly fine people for the most part, I am sure — who will take any job that a European has and do the work for a lower wage?

    The only sacrifice you are saying “we” have to make is actually the sacrifice that the greedy globalist shysters such as Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and all the other billionaire globalist bastards have to make. No more off-shoring of jobs to maximize profits, no more trade deals that override national law, and no more mass immigration either as a source of cheap labor or as a genocidal instrument of national destruction to make way for an undemocratic global governance regime.

    It is the greed and unconstrained ambition of the plutocracy and their paid agents, the Clintons, the Blairs, and all the other bought “representatives of the people,” not the materialism of the people themselves that is driving mass immigration and the destruction of the European peoples both racially and culturally. Indeed, it is only through the exploitation of the generosity of a gullible population that the crime of national genocide by mass immigration has been taken to the point of no return in many parts of the formerly European world.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @AaronB
    , @annamaria
  110. Alden says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Here is the real reason the Jews fled Russia in the 1880s. It was draft evasion.

    I forget the exact date, but around 1880 Jews got their full civil rights. Unfortunately that included civil
    obligations such as conscription. That’s why the Jews left, not programs, not affirmative action for the goyim, not crackdowns on usury.

    In the foreign affairs/ state department archives of every country in Europe and the Americas are reports from diplomats stationed in Russia that there was no persecution and that the stories about programs were just stories intended to get sympathy so as to facilitate immigration to other countries.
    That’s why the Russian Jews swarmed England, the USA and Latin American countries that did not have the draft.

    They didn’t go to Germany, Austria, France, Italy or Spain because all those countries had conscription.

    Russia’s draft was for 25 years which is horrible to contemplate unless one is down and out and desperate for 3 hots and a cot. But the other European countries had just a few years draftee enlistment and the Jews didn’t go to those countries, they went to draft free England and America.

    That’s why they left.

  111. Alden says:
    @utu

    When Bobby Sands was starving himself to death Scots football fans had a song celebrating his imment death.

    Modern Britian was indeed founded on anti Catholicism. Henry 8 and Thomas Cromwell imposed Henry’s religion of the week through executions and suspension of civil liberties. Henry himself personally signed 72, ooo execution warrants. He wiped out the remnants of his mother’s relatives the entire Plantagenet tribe on grounds of remaining Catholic.

    Are you watching The White Princess on Starz? The Lady Margaret de la Pole character was beheaded by Henry 8 when she was in her late 60s. The alleged grounds were that she was a Catholic. The real grounds were that as the daughter of the Duke of Clarence and niece of Edward 4 and Richard 3 she had more of a dynastic right to the throne than Henry 8.

    Then on to the Cecils father and son who controlled Elizabeth 1 by claiming plots against her.

    There is a lot of really deranged anti Catholicism in the American southern evangelical churches. They call the Catholic church the scarlet woman of Rome, the Whore of Babylon and the devil worshippers of ancient Babylon. They also claim that the church was behind Hitler, Lenin, Stalin and Mao.

    Southern evangelicals are pro Israel fanatics, much worse than most Jews.

    There is a theory that when Luther went to Rome as a Catholic monk he was contacted by Roman Jews and used by them to split European Christianity. I’m not interested in pursuing that theory.

    My interests are affirmative action discrimination, legal and illegal immigration and black and brown crime.

  112. Alden says:
    @CanSpeccy

    I think Araonb means that if only Europeans would start going to church and sincerely believing in religion again they could somehow withstand both mass Muslim immigration and the imposition of mass Muslim immigration by the upper classes.
    I think he substitutes materialism for atheism and agnosticism. His comments are not easy to understand.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  113. Alden says:
    @MarkinLA

    Whatever it is they got the distance between Spain and Asia right and Columbus didn’t start planning until the priest geographers assured him he could make it to Asia in a reasonable time. The Catholic Church preserved the science of the ancient Greeks who knew the earth was round and correctly estimated the circumference.

    Yet Dykstra keeps posting that Columbus and his sailors thought the earth was flat and that they would fall off if they went too. far. Dykstra is a weird combination of anti Catholic Puritan and leftist anti Catholic.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  114. @Alden

    How very interesting. Thanks. And so convincing I won’t bother following it up for credibility, only later when I have time, out of interest. Of course John Derbyshire may well be right about that little group of anti WASPs who live for revenge for the 1880 pogroms (c’mon there must have been one! When they all demanded membership of West Caucasus United FC perhaps…). That lot of twisted souls (assuming they exist) would be not unlike 2nd generation Anglo-Muslims who radicalise themselves.

    My sympathies are 100 per cent with the draft dodgers! Imagine what it would be like not just to be a poor conscript but a poor Jewish conscript with any class of Russian or Ukrainisn officers or NCOs you can think of – and dirty jobs to be done.

    • Replies: @Alden
  115. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    I understand your point of view, CanSpeccy. I don’t necessarily disagree with it – I think you do a very good job at explaining the top layer of the problem, but sometimes, I try and peel back a few more layers. Maybe I get a bit too philosophical, and abstract.

    I’m sure we can both agree the situation is bad, and any solution would help.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @CanSpeccy
  116. Alden says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Thanks, always glad to share.

  117. @Alden

    I never wrote that Columbus thought the earth was flat, his sailors did.
    That Columbus had no idea about the circumference of the earth is demonstrated by the fact that it took a long time for him to understand that he had not reached Asia, but something else.
    The catholic church postulated Aristoteles, his ‘science’ was the science.
    How difficult it was for independent thinkers to disregard Aristoteles is well explained in
    Jacques Merlau-Ponty and Bruno Morando, ‘The Rebirth of Cosmology’, 1971, 1976, New York

  118. @Alden

    Jews left Germany in 1870, because of Prussia’s militarism.
    For example, the father of Bernard Baruch.
    Translation: no inclination to fight.
    I must add that not all jews evaded fighting, it was the same in WWI.

    Why pogroms, some of them in any case because Russian serfs in 1860, hope the year is right, were set free.
    Jews often leased the right to sell vodka from the landlord.
    The former serfs never had been taught how to handle money.
    So they drank galore, on credit.
    When they could not pay, their houses were auctioned, by jews, often bought by jews.
    And then jews were blamed.

  119. @Alden

    The pope did not burn Giordano Bruno to death in 1600 in Rome ?
    A pope did not in 1860 or so declare that philosophy outside the church was wrong ?
    The pope was not declared infallible in 1880 or so ?
    Galileo did not get house arrest ?
    Servetius was not burned to death by Calvin ?
    Pietro Redondi, ´Galilei, ketter, De politieke machtsstrijd rond het proces tegen Galileo Galilei, 1633’, 1989, Amsterdam (Galileo eretico, 1983, 1989, Turin).
    Anacieto Verrecchia, ‘Giordana Bruno, Nachtfalter de Geistes’, 2009 Wien
    Giordano Bruno, ‘Über das Unendliche, das Universum und die Welten’, Stuttgart, 1994 (Venetia 1584).
    Goldstone, Lawrence & Nancy, ‘Out of the Flames, The Remarkable Story of a Fearless Scholar, a Fatal Heresy, and One of the Rarest Books in the World’, New York, 2002

  120. @annamaria

    Your opening two lines are certainly not supported by the blog to which you link as you clearly imply.

    Your blogger says I told them so, I knew and know how this home grown terrorism is the product of western foolishness, and worse, in making armed jihadism against tough but stabilising forces in ME possible and not realising that sad young local Muslims would get carried away by it.

    Not a word about greed or superiority complexes.

  121. @Alden

    You can’t mean what you say in your last par. Or, on reflection on what Ghaddafi’s character and actions were and the way he treated large numbers of “his own people” i.e. ordinary Libyans who weren’t in fact his people because of tribal or other ethnic or socisl differences, do you think Americans would benefit from being led by anyone like him?

  122. Harold says:
    @AaronB

    They’re not materialist, they get a spiritual, transcendent joy from their PC ideology.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  123. Randal says:
    @iffen

    There is no genetic imperative for reproduction.

    Seems pretty unlikely to me, based upon simple observation.

    The existence of a genetic imperative to reproduce seems to be inherent in the theory of gene selection and the consequence that the only reason people (or any species) exist is precisely in order to reproduce their genes. Any reason to deny the obvious presumption?

    Though of course it’s not really relevant to the point I was making, since “genetic imperative for reproduction” could as easily have been written “human urge to reproduce” without affecting the point, or indeed left out completely.

  124. @AaronB

    Europeans always were on avg materialists as well most of other human people’s. Indeed christianism and materialism are connected in not so noble ways since a long time.

    And most Europeans desire to have at least two children. There are some fraction of Europeans who are direct responsible for that lower fertility and they are those who have good conditions to have (more) children but simply no have. One of the reasons Europeans and east Asians have reduced their fertilities is economic. It’s too expensive rise a reasonably big family even because children and teenagers don’t work. You need to care and invest for two decades a son or a daughter before to expect they will go out of parent house.

    Materialism is always a problem not just today but always. Yes materialism become more influent but I think existentialism also have a role specially among some specific group of brighter people. Younger people has been nurtured in the short thinking term culture even I don’t believe only cultural influences that shape their behavior but themselves of course. The Pandora box was partially open in the west. Without all certainties, factual or not, “we” had in the past, people start to over think in divergent way. When a mainstream culture die many other little cultures born and start to fight one each other.

    • Agree: Philip Owen
    • Replies: @AaronB
  125. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @AaronB

    Have you been under the illusion that all that ‘genetic/evolutionary’ BS is anything else than a diversionary tactic?

  126. annamaria says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Agree that the “crime of national genocide” is not difficult to pinpoint on specific scoundrels, all of them rich and powerful thanks to the protection from Financial Squeed and MIC:

    https://www.rt.com/uk/389694-libya-abedi-lifg-cameron/

    “Manchester suicide bomber Salman Abedi and his father, Ramadan, had long-standing links to a violent jihadist group which may have had British backing for the 2011 Libyan war and a 1996 attempt to kill then-Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.”

    https://www.rt.com/usa/389643-amnesty-army-lost-billion-arms-iraq/

    “A newly released declassified audit from the US Department of Defense shows that negligent accounting by the military has resulted in the Pentagon not knowing what happened to more than $1 billion in arms and equipment meant for the Iraqi Army.”
    “It makes for especially sobering reading given the long history of leakage of US arms to multiple armed groups committing atrocities in Iraq, including the armed group calling itself the Islamic State.”

  127. woodNfish says:
    @Mark Green

    When used by leftists, “progressive” is the PC mask word for “regressive”. Regressive is what they truly are. Just like the fascist ant-fa are actually what they claim to be against. Stop helping them hide behind leftist lies.

  128. @utu

    There are Orange Lodges across Scotland and even in Newcastle and Liverpool (another city where soccer clubs split Roman Catholic/Protestant). The moment my friends tell me that they were Roman Catholic (The Anglican Church is also Catholic like the Orthodox) is always an awkward one for them even these days. Anti Catholicism was an underlying factor in the Brexit vote.

  129. iffen says:
    @AaronB

    Tell that to the Muslims, the Chinese, the Indians, the Jews.

    I will take the US, even in this decline and fall, with or without religion, over any of those.

  130. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @AaronB

    With only rare exceptions, people do not make themselves, either intellectually or morally. The values of a society are established top down. Those values determine the success or failure of the group, whether it survives or dies.

    The Jews, among others, understood that a long time ago and created an ethical code that promotes the perpetuation and dissemination of Jewish genes. The Jews also understood that by penetrating the government of other groups they could manipulate other groups to their own advantage.

    Today, there is massive Jewish influence within the power structures of the European nations, government itself, media, banks, entertainment, and publishing, and much of that influence is directed toward, or in any case has the effect of, destroying the indigenous people by undermining and debauching their cultural institutions. In this work, mass immigration has a major role, as stupidly blabbed by the Jew, Barbara Lerner Specter (see video above).

    The role of the Jews in destroying the European nations does not absolve the stupid, greedy, vicious and depraved members of the indigenous leadership many of whom participate in the destruction of their own people.

    The European nations, I believe, should double down on their commitment to the security of Israel*, and encourage unassimilated Jews to migrate there. At the same time, the European nations should emulate the Israelis in their fierce determination to preserve their own racial, religious and cultural identities.

    *The United States should show leadership in developing plans for settling the Palestinians in a homeland of their own. My own suggestion would be for the US and EU, Britain and Israel to jointly seek the purchase from Egypt of 20,000 square km of Sinai (the same as the area of Israel) to be called New Palestine. There, with several hundred billion in Western aid, the Palestinians could be comfortable settled in a modern cities surrounded by an oasis irrigated with water from solar-powered desalination plants.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  131. @AaronB

    Adam Curtis makes a convincing case that Individualism has destroyed any hope for the future, since mass individualism means that people cannot join up to make the world better. It also has knock-on effects, like people cannot fall in love anymore, because to be in love you have merge your soul with someone else. And the unhappy individualist cannot do that.

  132. Sean says:
    @annamaria

    It is as natural for countries to have dissatisfied groups and sometimes uprisings as it is for individuals to experience inner conflict. Of course countries blame outsiders for their troubles, just as individuals blame others when unhappy. Anyone who thinks the life of a nation is naturally peaceful should look in the mirror and ask if their life is like that.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  133. Sean says:
    @CanSpeccy

    I meant to say that advocating restriction of immigration on the grounds MacDonald does is a terrible mistake from every point of view, because if immigration is severely restricted, who cares what the rationale is? My point is it won’t actually get done if it is advocated on the grounds of genes or ethnic genetic interests. The open borders lobby WANT ethnic genetic interests to be the reason, and in fact they always bring that up as the real motivation.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @utu
  134. AaronB says:
    @Santoculto

    Yes, materialism has always been a problem, even in ancient times. It’s just much more of a problem now.

    The masses pursue comfort and pleasure, and the elite pursue power and wealth. All of society is organized around these goals. But they make life dreary and inane, so we develop a secret death wish. We want to die.

    A life that is worth living is based on transcendental values – truth, beauty, goodness, and a limitation of desire and individuality – a certain asceticism. These are non-material goals – they do not pertain to material objectives, like survival, or reproduction.

    A society based on these values, and limits desire, provides happiness, and will endure. A society based on comfort, pleasure, wealth, and power, will swiftly collapse.

    Our society is based on these four materialist values, sees nothing beyond animal survival and reproduction, encourages limitless desire, and unlimited individualism. It is a death cult.

    I do not mean we should return to organized religion, or the Church. I don’t think its possible to return to any known form of Christianity, but I believe the spiritual and moral vision of Christianity is essentially correct. This vision is found in Eastern religions as well.

    I also do not desire the West to be ‘great’ again – ‘greatness’ is a transitional stage toward decline, and is basically materialist in orientation.

    What I would like to see is a West re-oriented toward the transcendent, which would create happiness, free us from our death cult, and make us indifferent towards trivial things like ‘greatness’ . For various reasons, this would mean reversing immigration, and focusing inward.

    I hope this makes my position clearer.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Santoculto
  135. annamaria says:
    @Sean

    “It is as natural for countries to have dissatisfied groups and sometimes uprisings as it is for individuals to experience inner conflict.”
    This is a truly amazing post in response to that: http://www.globalresearch.ca/manchester-alleged-suicide-bomber-linked-to-libya-islamic-fighting-group-lifg-known-to-british-security-intelligence-lifg-was-supported-by-nato-against-gadaffi/5591732
    “As these terrorists filter out of Syria and back home, those hailing from LIFG are mainly returning to the UK where they have been known by US and British security and intelligence agencies for years to exist. With them they will be bringing back the technical knowledge and experience needed to carry out devastating attacks like the recent blast that targeted Manchester.
    It is terrorism that follows as a direct result of British foreign and domestic policy – supporting terrorists abroad and deliberately refusing to dismantle their networks at home – all as they feed fighters and resources into the US-UK [Israel] proxy war still raging in Syria.
    That the US and UK are using terrorists to expedite their respective geopolitical objectives should come as no surprise… What is surprising is that the Western public continues to react emotionally to each terrorist attack individually rather than rationally, seeing the much larger picture and pattern. And until the Western public sees that bigger picture and pattern, fear, injustice, murder, and mayhem will continue to dominate their lives and futures.”

    On the same topic, do you support an open immigration to Israel? Or it is antisemitic to ask this question? (on this site: http://www.unz.com/article/international-campaign-is-criminalizing-criticism-of-israel-as-antisemitism)

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  136. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Sean

    My point is it won’t actually get done [i.e., an end to the project for the genocide of the European nations by a combination of suppressed reproduction and mass replacement immigration] if it is advocated on the grounds of genes or ethnic genetic interests.

    So on what grounds would you advocate an end to the project for the genocide of the European nations by a combination of suppressed reproduction and mass replacement immigration?

    You comment is as fatuous as that of Aaron B, who says we should improve our metaphysics, or Frau Merkel who says (5 minutes +) Germans worried about mass immigration of single-male, rape-culture Syrians should “just go to church more often or look at a picture.”

    The open borders lobby WANT ethnic genetic interests to be the reason

    Bollocks. They never state that genocide is their reason. Traitors like Tony Blair will tell you “Mass immigration is good for the economy,” which is a lie if you think a good economy means an economy that is good for the people: Britain has one of the lowest rates of GDP growth per capita in the G2o, for the obvious reason that they have soaked up a vast quantity of cheap, low-productivity foreign labor.

    Your idea that people in Europe don’t care about being genocided is inane. That they have been made a minority in their own home by people of an alien race, culture and religion is the consequence of mass immigration that Europeans who remain in such places as London, Birmingham, Luton and Leicester are most acutely aware and mostly deeply angry about, as would be obvious to anyone who knew or even thought for a moment about what is happening.

    But naturally those plotting the destruction of the European peoples don’t want their work labelled for what it is, genocide, as neither, apparently, do you.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  137. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    The briefest survey of Western literature and philosophy will reveal that Western elites began to experience extreme disaffection beginning in the 18th century, and culminating at the turn of the 20th century. Deep pessimism was the keynote, the banality and pointlessness of life under capitalism and mechanization was the motif, a collapse of will was everywhere observed, and a yearning for escape to the exotic was characteristic. This entire elite intellectual movement – decadent, world-weary, self-hating – was composed of White gentiles.

    The ground was prepared for Jews by Whites themselves – Jews merely exploited a fortuitous opening.

    I basically agree with you about Jewish behavior, but I think its pathological. I don’t think its a ‘successful evolutionary strategy’, but a tragic mistake. Jewish behavior must be fought without compromise without losing sight of this fact.

    But that is because I am not a materialist – this is crucial.

    Power, wealth, and materialism, immorality, deceit – are a personal hell for anyone who pursues them. All happiness, all pleasure, all content – gone. Jewish culture creates incredible psychological pressure to pursue these goals, and Jews live in restless misery. Our of their own misery, they victimize other.

    Jewish behavior within society is mirrored in Western behavior on the world stage. The pursuit of wealth and power through violence and deceit is the chief characteristic. Society is organized around power and wealth (the IR, capitalism). The result – all happiness gone, a death wish at the highest levels, loss of will, and the brink of collapse.

    Jews, and the West, are historically the world’s great unhappy peoples – and for the same reasons. One group preys on society, the other group preys on the world – and itself, through capitalism. Both have chosen materialism and power, and sold their souls.

    The West is finally emerging from their great curse, and if they manage to avoid suicide and come to their senses in time – by no means certain – have a chance at regaining their soul – the Jews are still lost in their personal darkness.

  138. @AaronB

    I don’t believe most westerners are subconsciously suicidal, they are just addicted and distracted via materialism as always and reinforced by this existentialist vibe. Yes there are genuine cultural suiciders in west and they are maybe important portion of illibs but even among them there are many who don’t want western culture die specially that more secular culture, they are insanely optimistics that in the near future everything will be fine. This idea that regular people are spiritually bored and desire subconsciously that their mother-culture be eliminated seems interesting and appear to be logic in first instance but in the second instance they are just extremely distracted as they would be whatever the period. People are slowly awakening exactly because what only working classes suffered now it’s becoming democratic.

    I’m in smartphone I will answer your comment as must be done soon.

  139. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    The briefest survey of Western literature and philosophy will reveal that Western elites began to experience extreme disaffection beginning in the 18th century

    dis·af·fec·tion,
    noun.
    a state or feeling of being dissatisfied with the people in authority and no longer willing to support them.

    So forget your first sentence.

    … beginning in the 18th century … Deep pessimism was the keynote, the banality and pointlessness of life under capitalism and mechanization was the motif, a collapse of will was everywhere observed, and a yearning for escape to the exotic was characteristic.

    Quite wrong. The beginning of the 18th Century, marked in England, the beginning of the new era of post-monarchical government, which followed the Glorious Revolution and the expulsion of James II. It was the beginning of an age of huge optimism, at least among the upper classes, which was sparked by rapidly expanding trade and industrial development. Hence the Whig view of history, as exemplified by Thomas Macaulay’s History of England from the Accession of James II, a work so popular that it made Macaulay the World’s first literary millionaire.

    I basically agree with you about Jewish behavior, but I think its pathological. I don’t think its a ‘successful evolutionary strategy’, but a tragic mistake. Jewish behavior must be fought without compromise without losing sight of this fact.

    But that is because I am not a materialist – this is crucial.

    I can respect your opinion, but the fact is what you refer to as “Jewish behavior” goes back thousands of years as one finds from reading the Torah. Moreover, whatever its consequences for human happiness, it is strictly aligned with what a Darwinian would consider adaptive behavior. Adaptive, anyhow, so far as it succeeds in its objectives. To a Darwinian, whether such behavior makes a person happy is immaterial. Apparently Jews haven’t worried too much about that either, hence their persistence as a nation and their extraordinary material successes.

    The West is finally emerging from their great curse, and if they manage to avoid suicide and come to their senses in time – by no means certain – have a chance at regaining their soul

    The problem for ordinary folk in the West is not avoiding suicide rather it’s avoiding having their kith and kin being suicided. Should they somehow dodge the program of racial and cultural extermination for which they are surely targetted, then will be a time to think about the state of their souls.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @AaronB
    , @dfordoom
  140. utu says:
    @Sean

    You might be right about it that the arguments “on the grounds of genes or ethnic genetic interests” have no legs. And they will not fly.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  141. res says:
    @Alden

    Why is the calendar used today called the Georgian calendar? Because the calendar needs to be adjusted every 1, 500 years. It was adjusted around 40 BC when Juluus Cesear was Emperor. By 1500AD it needed further adjustment. That adjustment was done in the best observatory in the world at the time by the beat astronomers and mathmeticians in the world. The work was done in the Vatican observatory. The astronomers and mathematicians were Vatican priests.

    You left out a key aspect of the Gregorian calendar. In addition to the shift to remove accumulated error it was changed so it no longer has to be adjusted every 1500 years. This was done by removing 3 leap days every 400 years. For more detail see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_calendar

    Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_calendar which has a nice summary:

    The Julian calendar gains against the mean tropical year at the rate of one day in 128 years. For the Gregorian the figure is one day in 3,030 years.[2] The difference in the average length of the year between Julian (365.25 days) and Gregorian (365.2425 days) is 0.002%.

    The change by Caesar beginning the Julian calendar was much more dramatic. The Gregorian calendar just added a small tweak.

    Current reality is a bit more complex with irregularly spaced and unpredictable leap seconds being added (27 since 1972): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_second

  142. @AaronB

    The masses pursue comfort and pleasure, and the elite pursue power and wealth. All of society is organized around these goals. But they make life dreary and inane, so we develop a secret death wish. We want to die.

    Maybe you are want to say: ” ”we” conquer everything and ”we” are fatigued now”. Seems you are leaving this METAPHOR too far, as if in fact we want to die.

    A life that is worth living is based on transcendental values – truth, beauty, goodness, and a limitation of desire and individuality – a certain asceticism. These are non-material goals – they do not pertain to material objectives, like survival, or reproduction.

    Many of this transcendental/evolutionary* values has been materialized, thanks for scientific advancement as well mathematical domination on explanatory narratives. I don’t think how this values lost their meaning, they just become more pragmatic, accessible and yes, maybe it make people even more conformative.

    Our society is based on these four materialist values, sees nothing beyond animal survival and reproduction, encourages limitless desire, and unlimited individualism. It is a death cult.

    Again, but still many if not most people want constitute families but economic barriers make them cautious about it. Post modern narrative affect different people in different levels, only leftists who really don’t care about their fertility or worry about no have kids. You forget the modern phenomena of enlarged adolescence, but i think it’s always happen with some subgroups of individuals, it’s not a modern thing, it’s always happen, the great difference is that today we have the possibility to understand, to have data about all human behavioral dispositions, but ”imatured” people always exist, in my pretend-to-be logical view.

    It’s a death cult by

    economic reasons that inhibit people who want have kids

    anti-white/anti-native culture + open border insanity.

    I do not mean we should return to organized religion, or the Church. I don’t think its possible to return to any known form of Christianity, but I believe the spiritual and moral vision of Christianity is essentially correct. This vision is found in Eastern religions as well.

    Fatal contradictions is essentially wrong. Yes, it’s not everything on christianity that is wrong, of course.

    What I would like to see is a West re-oriented toward the transcendent, which would create happiness, free us from our death cult, and make us indifferent towards trivial things like ‘greatness’ . For various reasons, this would mean reversing immigration, and focusing inward.

    I hope this makes my position clearer.

    This death cult is slowlying trying to convince most people as possible to engage in their dirty dance. I think technological-predominance + capitalism would be the final victory of materialism*

  143. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu

    You might be right about it that the arguments “on the grounds of genes or ethnic genetic interests” have no legs. And they will not fly.

    Perhaps you live in a society so deracinated that no one really cares who they live among, but in most parts of Europe I would say that the great majority of those indigenous people who are forced to live cheek by jowl with immigrants intent on establishing the dominance of their own culture and bloodlines in the land they have settled, feel strongly about the displacement of their fellow natives, and their fellow natives are those with whom they share the most culturally and genetically. What terminology people use, whether it’s “kith and kin,” co-ethnics, fellow countrymen, or whatever, underlying the connection is biological relatedness or shared genes.

  144. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    I think you seriously need to read a history of European philosophy and literature. Yes, there were pessimists and optimists, especially at first. But it would be futile to deny that by the end of the 19th century, pessimists dominated, talk of decadence was everywhere, and a creeping malaise was spreading over Europe. Spengler did not pluck his history out of thin air. Especially after 1914, everyone was talking about how Europe was finished.

    That this widespread European pessimism, this collapse of will, played no role in the rise of the Jews beggars belief – and it indisputably predated the rise of Jews to prominence in Western intellectual life.

    Contrast this with, say, China – there simply is no comparable phenomenon. There were no pessimistic Chinese writers, thinkers, or philosophers. There was no yearning for the exotic. They all thought their culture, people, religion, and way of life, was fantastic.

    What happened in Europe? If you can’t answer this, you will never break free. The Jews surely exploited European pessimism, but to say they created it is simply a-historical.

    I am not, of course, a Darwinist, and do not view things from the perspective of material success – but there are few pertinent remarks that can be made here.

    The pursuit of material success is curiously self-undermining – societies who do so, flourish for a while, but burn out.

    Europe’s star burned bright for a few centuries, but is now in eclipse. The Jews – they have striven mightily for power and success for the past 200 years, and made a dramatic showing, but their most talented members are assimilating at over 50%, and as Ron Unz has documented, their intellectual brilliance is one the wane.

    There are indications that Jewish intellectual prominence may well be a thing of the past, and we are dealing with a time lag.

    So from the POV of Darwinian material success, both Whites and Jews would *seem* to have developed the best “killer apps”, in their different domains- but a closer inspection reveals the rot that lies just beneath the surface.

    Compare to Egypt which lasted 5,000 years, or China with its 3,000 or more. Modern Europe lasted, what – 500 years. Jewish prominence, what – 200 years? Since it isn’t over yet, but just declining, lets say 250 years.

    Secondly, the Jewish will to survive as a separate people has a spiritual basis. This is obvious from the fact that Jewish education, and Jewish religion, focus so heavily on maintaining a separate identity, and creates so many strict laws against it. This wouldn’t be necessary if this behavior was reliably genetic.

    Our genes always push towards misceganation and assimilation – which is always why laws, social shaming, and other drastic measures have to be taken to counteract it. If it was reliably genetic this wouldn’t be so.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  145. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    You know, CanSpeccy, what I am saying is really not so outlandish.

    Consider that life displays a strange duality – our wants and desires often conflict.

    For example, we want safety, and excitement. Yet they conflict – you have to choose one, or at least balance them out.

    Is it really so crazy an idea that if you choose to maximize technology and science, you might have to sacrifice other good things? That maximizing technical efficiency might make life so colorless and unemotional, so mechanical and dull, that it leads to a radical loss of enthusiasm?

    That doesn’t really sound so implausible to me. It seems to obey the basic rule of how our life works – that we are conflicted beings who often desire incompatible goods.

    Now consider this – Europe is distinguished for two unique things beyond all others; technology (rationalism, empiricism, materialism – the whole package), and pessimism.

    Is it really so far-fetched that the two might be related?

    At the very least, this seems like a fruitful field of inquiry, to search for Europe’s unique loss of enthusiasm for life (which clearly predates the Jews), where we also find the source of Europe’s unique power.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  146. @Alden

    Now I have followed up and I am afraid your convincing coherent account isn’t supported by the first substantial seeming article I read when I Googled for “when were Jews emancipated in Russia” (the answer seems to be only in 1917 fully though 1905 got a mention and earlier initiatives from the non Hasidic Haskalah Jews of the parts of Eastern Europe grabbed by Russia in the late 18th century where Jews lived before any significant number lived in Russia). Jews had been grabbed for military service in the 1820s! Of course I can accept that the pogroms of the early 1880s were exaggerated for the obvious reason you mention and it seems plausible that countries without compusory military service would be more attractive to Jews with young boys in their families.

  147. @annamaria

    My glance at your long quote suggests it is out of date and partly misguided. To be sure a lot of the terrorism and the expense of dealing with it in the UK is a product of foolish although not *entirely* evilly motivated adventures in the Muslim world since 9/11. But Tony Blair has a long history of genuine Christian self delusion with only later necessary (for any PM) connections to big business or other influential lobby groups. I am personally acquainted with people close to his first (Oxford) clergyman mentor and also with an older contemporary at his Oxford college who was surprised to find (as I to hear) that the freshmen had a charismatic leader called Tony Blair. (Well Australia has had several Rhodes Scholar PMs and only one a resounding success, one managing to sound stupid occasionally!)

    How the great increase in domestic terrorist numbers and their dangerous skills resulting from Blair and co’s misbegotten support for US ME policies has been dealt with shows unsurprising mixtures of sound thinking, incompetence, poor information, judgment calls, good and bad luck, and needs no conspiratorial explanations.

  148. annamaria says:

    More on the Manchester event: http://www.voltairenet.org/article196455.html

    “According to Scotland Yard, the attack has been perpetrated by Salman Abedi. A bankcard has been conveniently found in the pocket of the mutilated corpse of the ‘terrorist’.
    Salman Abedi was born in the UK of a family of Libyan immigrants. His father Ramadan Abedi is a former officer in [Gaddafi’s] Libyan Intelligence Services. He specialised in the surveillance of the Islamist movement, but two decades later has failed to notice that his son has joined Daesh (IS).
    In 1992, Ramadan Abedi was sent back to Libya by Britain’s MI6 and was involved in a British-devised plot to assassinate Muammar Gaddafi. The operation having been readily exposed, he was exfiltrated by MI6 and transferred back to the UK where he obtained political asylum. … In 1994, Ramadan Abedi returned again to Libya under MI6’s direction. In late 1995 he is involved in the creation of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), a local branch of Al-Qaeda.. Ramadan Abedi has linked LIFG members to the formation of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and, in 2011, he takes part in MI6’s ‘Arab Spring’ operations, and in LIFG’s role on the ground in support of NATO.
    … Daesh has claimed responsibility for the Manchester attack, but without describing Salman Abedi as a ‘martyr’. After the assassination, Ramadan Abedi has declared his opposition to jihad in a telephone conversation with journalists. He has also claimed that his son had intended to spend the month of Ramadan [beginning 26 May] with him in Libya and that he is convinced of his innocence.”

    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
  149. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @AaronB

    But it would be futile to deny that by the end of the 19th century, pessimists dominated …

    And no one is denying it. You were talking of pessimism from the “beginning in the 18th century …” two hundred years earlier, which is what I commented on. As for after 1914, that’s the 20th Century about which neither you nor I had said anything. So don’t play fast and loose with the facts or lecture me on what I history I should read when you don’t know the difference between the age of reason, and the periods of classical and late modernity.

    That this widespread European pessimism, this collapse of will, played no role in the rise of the Jews beggars belief – and it indisputably predated the rise of Jews to prominence in Western intellectual life.

    What are you saying? Europeans got discouraged and said: “Oh WTF, lets allow the Jews to take over and screw us all”?

    That’s preposterous. The emancipation of Jews in Europe was due to the rise of liberalism and the concomitant decline in Christian religious faith. But loss of faith or adoption of liberalism are not usually taken to have resulted from pessimism. Rather, liberalism arose in association with the growth of global trade, which required dealing in good faith and with mutual respect with people of all kinds both at home and abroad.

    The pursuit of material success is curiously self-undermining – societies who do so, flourish for a while, but burn out.

    That’s all wiffle waffle. The Chinese who you seem to think have always been deliriously happy, are among those most ardent in the pursuit of material success, not only today, but throughout their history. Oh, sure, there was some icing on the cake, an elite who cultivated the literary arts, but that is true of every society. But for most Chinese, throughout the ages, material success was a matter of life of death by starvation, and the struggle to survive has given the Chinese a culture that inculcates the value of endless hard work for material success.

    Compare to Egypt which lasted 5,000 years, or China with its 3,000 or more. Modern Europe lasted, what – 500 years. Jewish prominence, what – 200 years?

    This is more hand waving. The Egyptians have been around a long time, but not necessarily the same people are Egyptians today as were Egyptians in the time of Narma. There were the original Egyptians of undetermined racial origin, who were infiltrated by Nubians, Berbers, Syrians, Greeks, Romans, and Arabs, a history no less tumultuous than that of the Jews or the Europeans. The Jews have been an identifiable group for at least 2600 years, and the Europeans of the British Isles have existed in the Isles, with only small additions, since the retreat of the ice, thousands of years ago.

    the Jewish will to survive as a separate people has a spiritual basis. This is obvious from the fact that Jewish education, and Jewish religion, focus so heavily on maintaining a separate identity, and creates so many strict laws against it. This wouldn’t be necessary if this behavior was reliably genetic.

    What has maintaining a separate identity got to do with spirituality? That’s not obvious, it’s bunk. Jews prefer Jews to other people. Jews prefer their own kith and kin to other people. Jews have a legal code which favors Jews and places Jews in a privileged position over non-Jews. That all makes sense in terms of self-serving behavior, but what’s spiritual about it? Nothing. And that Jews have the inclination to serve their own interests at the expense of others is a manifestation of a universal human trait: indeed a universal mammalian trait, a product of natural selection, a consequence of the action of genes in concert with culture.

    Our genes always push towards misceganation [sic] and assimilation

    Hah! Here comes the hard sell bullshit from the guy who isn’t a Darwinist, telling us what our genes do to destroy our own posterity. That’s some Chutzpah.

    which is always why laws, social shaming, and other drastic measures have to be taken to counteract it (i.e., racial mixing)

    Which is what that Jewish invention, political correctness is all about. Right? Er, well, um, no. That has to be Chutzpah squared. Well played Aaron B.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  150. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @AaronB

    Now consider this – Europe is distinguished for two unique things beyond all others; technology (rationalism, empiricism, materialism – the whole package), and pessimism.

    My dear fellow, you really should do some fact checking. Europe you say is distinguished for pessimism. On what evidence? You offer none. So here I offer you world suicide stats. With Sri Lanka holding the highest ranking at 35 per 100 K, we have to go 22 places down the list to find the first West European nation, Belgium, which has only half Sri Lanka’s suicide rate. As for the US and Britain, they are way down the list at 48 and 123, respectively, Britain with a rate only one fifth that of Sri Lanka. As for those miserable Jews, Israel is at 143 with hardly any suicides at all. Does that suggest deep Jewish/Western pessimism?

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @dfordoom
  151. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Schopenhauer has observed that suicide is an affirmation of life. One loves life so much one feels it is only worth living under certain conditions. Those truly indifferent to life wouldn’t care enough to commit suicide. The Romans in their strongest period loved to commit suicide, and the Japanese, as well.

    Anyways.

    CanSpeccy, what are we gonna do with you…you have not been following my arguments closely, and thus make many avoidable logical mistakes. But it is not your fault – I am verbose, and you do not wish to see.

    I will leave with an interesting reflection that occurred to me, but I don’t think you’ll be able to appreciate it. Its subtle, and goes against the grain of your thought.

    Optimism creates misery – the more optimistic you become, the more unhappy you become. The West became optimistic – i.e optimistic about this world, which means seeking one’s happiness in material conditions – but since man cannot find happiness in materialism, “optimism” ultimately leads to nihilism.

    It is why a “pessimistic” religion like Christianity – which was optimistic about man’s ultimate destiny, and pessimistic about this world – coincided with the West’s greatest period.

    And its why Buddhistic countries are so cheerful and happy – Buddhism being a religion of profound pessimism about this world, but believing an escape from this world is possible, thus not nihilistic.

    Well – I can tell this was already to much for you, so I will leave off. Let those who have ears hear.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @Talha
  152. Seraphim says:
    @utu

    To much brain washing results in brain damage. It flattens the brain circonvolutions which starts behaving like a broken record. Now wonder they believe the myth of the ‘Flatten Earth’ or that Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake because of his ‘ Copernicanism’ and not for heresy: his utterances that Christ was not God but merely an unusually skillful magician, that the Holy Ghost is the soul of the world, that the Devil will be saved, etc.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @utu
  153. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @AaronB

    Schopenhauer has observed that suicide is an affirmation of life.

    Proving that those Sri Lankan Buddhist offing themselves at a world record pace, are really optimists. Obviously we need to up the rate of suicide in Israel: it’d cheer them up a bit. But after you.

  154. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Seraphim

    Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake because of his ‘ Copernicanism’ and not for heresy: his utterances that Christ was not God but merely an unusually skillful magician, that the Holy Ghost is the soul of the world, that the Devil will be saved, etc.

    Was Bruno burned because he made all of those utterances, or would just one of them have been enough. And if it was right for the Catholic Church to burn Bruno for one or all such heresies, why don’t they keep the bonfires burning to deal with like heresies now?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  155. Eagle Eye says:
    @annamaria

    Bottom line – published accounts indicate clearly that U.S. government entities and politicians (John McCain) have for many years been working hand-in-glove with IS, furnishing IS with money and matériel, and other types of “facilitation.”

    What is harder to gauge is the extent to which major terror incidents in the U.S. and UK are attributable to agents who are or appear to be under the control of intelligence agencies.

  156. reiner Tor says: • Website
    @iffen

    That’s an argument from incredulity.

    You just claimed people have an instinct to have sex. How come people have way more recreational sex now than a hundred years ago, if that instinct is genetic?

  157. @CanSpeccy

    When people are well informed about racial issues they become more inhibit to mate people of other race of even ethnicity. Today because many people are stupidly {{{bad informed}}} they are more prone to choice people of other race but not exactly because they know what they are doing. The most well informed people about racial or collectively evolutionary issues are usually on the “hard’ right wing while those who are insanely wrong at least about very central or holistic racial issues (even because they are not too wrong at all, only in the most important issues) are on the left wing lunacy.

    Interestingly the most conservative of all Jewish sectors: orthodox, look quite mixed with Slavic “neighbors”, ;) original joos maybe no have that fair skin and at least 30% of mixed light eyes.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @Corvinus
  158. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    There is no instinct for reproduction.

    There is an instinct to have sex.

    I think women have an instinct for reproduction. It can be suppressed and a lot of women these days do suppress it. That’s one of the reasons they’re so messed up.

  159. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Alden

    I think Araonb means that if only Europeans would start going to church and sincerely believing in religion again they could somehow withstand both mass Muslim immigration and the imposition of mass Muslim immigration by the upper classes.

    I think he’s correct up to a point – if Europeans did start going to church and sincerely believing in religion again they could resist the evils of both mass immigration and cultural marxism.

    The problem is not that faith has failed. Christianity has failed. It is now a small and steadily declining religion and what’s left of it is now so infected by cultural marxism that Christianity as it exists today is itself a dire threat to western survival.

    If Europeans could be persuaded to once again embrace the Christianity of the Middle Ages they’d survive. But they aren’t going to do that. I’d be happy if they did but they won’t.

    Materialism and atheism are clearly dead ends.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  160. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Harold

    They’re not materialist, they get a spiritual, transcendent joy from their PC ideology.

    I’ve never seen much sign of joy among them. Followers of the PC cult seem to be mostly angry, bitter and miserable. They do have a sense of self-righteousness though. It still doesn’t seem to make them happy.

  161. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    So on what grounds would you advocate an end to the project for the genocide of the European nations by a combination of suppressed reproduction and mass replacement immigration?

    I agree that any argument against immigration based on genetic/racial grounds is likely to fail. It’s too easy to demonise such a position.

    There are plenty of other extremely good reasons to oppose immigration. Cultural, economic and environmental arguments are more difficult to demonise.

    I always like to point out that mass immigration destroys diversity. Real diversity requires the survival of distinctive racial, ethnic and cultural groups. The only way to maintain real diversity is to have strict border controls. A globalist world will be a world with zero diversity.

    The good thing about this particular argument is that you can point out that there is a country that is trying very hard to maintain the survival of its own ethnic/religious/cultural group and that country is called Israel.

    If you’re genuinely in favour of open borders you’re antisemitic!

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @Sean
    , @utu
    , @Corvinus
  162. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    Quite wrong. The beginning of the 18th Century, marked in England, the beginning of the new era of post-monarchical government, which followed the Glorious Revolution and the expulsion of James II. It was the beginning of an age of huge optimism, at least among the upper classes,

    True. But the pessimism was certainly becoming obvious in the 19th century and was widespread by the end of that century.

    That was one of the causes of the First World War – an irrational belief that war would somehow restore Europe’s vitality.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  163. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    we have to go 22 places down the list to find the first West European nation, Belgium, which has only half Sri Lanka’s suicide rate. As for the US and Britain, they are way down the list at 48 and 123, respectively, Britain with a rate only one fifth that of Sri Lanka. As for those miserable Jews, Israel is at 143 with hardly any suicides at all. Does that suggest deep Jewish/Western pessimism?

    It’s possible that those who attempt suicide in western countries mostly fail and are saved due to competent medical intervention. In Third World countries suicide attempts might be mostly successful. So those figures might be very unreliable.

    We also need to take into account slow gradual suicides – suicide by alcohol or drug use can take years and isn’t going to show up in official statistics. Suicide by cop also doesn’ts how up in official statistics but it’s very very common in the US.

    Westerners are also very heavily medicated these days. Taking antidepressants is an alternative to suicide. A very poor alternative but possibly better than blowing one’s brains out.

    So the statistics almost certainly do not show a true picture of the actual levels of happiness vs misery in different countries.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  164. @dfordoom

    The risk to be dependent on any ”church” is that people become bovinized, if church say ”diversity is good” A LOT OF people and worst, a lot of FERTILIZABLE people will follow without more criticism. Yes, by now the only way to to stanc off European demographic haemorrhage is seeking for the stray sheep but with some chance to return to the old cult, but for the future, this crap must cease to exist, real/rational kindness and artistic beauty can survive without having these Semitic leeches or even any other cultural allegory taken as the factual reality. Myths can exist, but people need to be smart enough to know how to differentiate the myth from a fact.

  165. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @dfordoom

    I agree that any argument against immigration based on genetic/racial grounds is likely to fail. It’s too easy to demonize such a position.

    Well obviously you demonize your opponents strongest argument. But the Jews have done pretty well demonizing those who deny the Holocaust. Why are Europeans so sure to fail in demonizing those who deny the present-day, ongoing Holocaust of the European nations?

    Obviously the megalomaniac Jews for rule over the nations of the earth, as commanded in the Torah by that old fucker YHWH, and the Treason Party Plutocrats for global governance in place of sovereign state democracy will demonize those opposed to the genocide of their own people. But so what? They will demonize any one and any argument that gets in their way.

  166. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Santoculto

    What constitutes the most adaptive breeding strategy, or rather the most adaptive set of breeding strategies can be a complex issue.

    Before the modern age of ready migration within and between nations, breeding patterns were less complex and much easier to assess for adaptive value than is the case today.

    Then, for males the main objectives were to mate with, and invest in the children of, a the highest-status healthy, well-formed and mentally sound female available, while impregnating any other females available, where to do so entailed little risk of economic cost or legal sanction (e.g., Fyodor Karamazov, in Dostoevsky’s the Karamazov Brothers, who fathered a son by the mentally defective “Reeking Lizaveta”).

    For females, the objective would be to mate with the most dominant economically or socially advantaged males they could attract and bind in wedlock. That all made sense in Darwinian terms and was consistent with normal human impulses as constrained by prevailing legal codes and religious strictures.

    Today, in the West, given the combination of mass migration and racial mixing together with PC bullshit and universal compulsory sex “education,” it might take a Nobel Prize winning evolutionary geneticist with a good grasp of geopolitics to figure out the most adaptive breeding strategy.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Corvinus
  167. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @dfordoom

    But the pessimism was certainly becoming obvious in the 19th century and was widespread by the end of that century.

    Yeah, well Thomas Carlyle was certainly pretty cranky about industrialism and other developments. Still, he might not have been so pessimistic had his marriage not gone unconsummated.

  168. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    And if it was right for the Catholic Church to burn Bruno for one or all such heresies, why don’t they keep the bonfires burning to deal with like heresies now?

    The decline of the Church does roughly coincide with the decline of the practice of burning heretics.

    So burning heretics seems to have worked.

    And no, I’m not advocating the practice, merely observing that it was successful in achieving its aims.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  169. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @dfordoom

    Sure, the suicide rate cannot be a perfect measure of national optimism/pessimism, although judging by this Gallup survey there seems to be some connection. And just about any measure is surely better than the ravings of some 19th Century German philosopher.

    What the Gallup data indicate is that the people of countries with rapid economic growth and relative independence of the US hegemon are generally optimistic. For example, China, India and Bangladesh have 76, 60 and 81% of the population rated optimistic, whereas those with stagnant economies and that are subordinate to US/NATO are generally pessimistic. For example, in the UK, Israel, Palestine, Bulgaria, Belgium, Japan, Italy and Greece only around 20% of the population are optimistic.

    It seems that at the emotional level, at least, people know when they are being pissed on by their elites or are being led in the right direction.

  170. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @dfordoom

    So burning heretics seems to have worked.

    And no, I’m not advocating the practice

    Well what about droning people? That’s the modern equivalent to burning, as on a bonfire, of those who challenge the Globo-Plutocratic-PC order.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  171. @CanSpeccy

    I know it’s also that way but it’s accessible fact that well-informed people and specially about racial issues tend to be more cautious to mate with people who are of racial, ethnic groups.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  172. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Santoculto

    Better informed people, i.e., the better educated, probably have more freedom of choice.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  173. Corvinus says:
    @Santoculto

    When people are well informed about racial issues they become more inhibit to mate people of other race of even ethnicity. Today because many people are stupidly {{{bad informed}}} they are more prone to choice people of other race but not exactly because they know what they are doing. ”

    You are a Fascist. People today are well versed about race and culture. They make their own decisions as to who to date and mate. We don’t need you to shame us, at best, or put us at the gulag, at worst, because of your alleged superior insight into these matters.

    “The most well informed people about racial or collectively evolutionary issues are usually on the “hard’ right wing while those who are insanely wrong at least about very central or holistic racial issues (even because they are not too wrong at all, only in the most important issues) are on the left wing lunacy.”

    Fake News Story.

    “I know it’s also that way but it’s accessible fact that well-informed people and specially about racial issues tend to be more cautious to mate with people who are of racial, ethnic groups.”

    They are not “well-informed”, they are merely exercising the liberty. If a white person wants to have children with only white people, fine. Whatever. Same for a white person who wants mate with a non-white person. That is their freedom, their choice. We don’t need to be bludgeoned by your virtue signaling here.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  174. Corvinus says:
    @CanSpeccy

    “What constitutes the most adaptive breeding strategy, or rather the most adaptive set of breeding strategies can be a complex issue.”

    Most human beings do not take this approach. People generally do not consciously lay out a step by step “breeding plan”. They find someone attractive who has attractive qualities to them, date for an extended period of time, get married, and have children.

    “Then, for males the main objectives were to mate with, and invest in the children of, a the highest-status healthy, well-formed and mentally sound female available, while impregnating any other females available, where to do so entailed little risk of economic cost or legal sanction (e.g., Fyodor Karamazov, in Dostoevsky’s the Karamazov Brothers, who fathered a son by the mentally defective “Reeking Lizaveta”).”

    Yes, the glorious past.

    “For females, the objective would be to mate with the most dominant economically or socially advantaged males they could attract and bind in wedlock. That all made sense in Darwinian terms and was consistent with normal human impulses as constrained by prevailing legal codes and religious strictures.”

    Yes, the glorious past.

    “Today, in the West, given the combination of mass migration and racial mixing together with PC bullshit and universal compulsory sex “education,” it might take a Nobel Prize winning evolutionary geneticist with a good grasp of geopolitics to figure out the most adaptive breeding strategy.”

    The most adaptive breeding strategy is for each individual to decide for themselves. Mass migration and race mixing are inevitable. I suggest you be an adult and deal with this phenomenon.

  175. Jake says:

    “why don’t these White people become vocal opponents of the current multicultural zeitgeist that is actively selecting against European genes? How can they just watch or even applaud the demise of their own people?

    This for me is the hardest to understand. Careerism over their obvious genetic/evolutionary interests.”

    I think it makes sense, but then I start from a place that you, Dr. McDonald, do not. The bleeding, stinking Jesus thing changed the world. It can never be simply ignored by those who have been bound to it. Jews by definition are anti-Christ. That guarantees that Jews in every country and every period of history will try to fill their spiritual void with 2 things: ill gotten wealth and revolution against everything that is connected to Christian morality and identity. Jews in rejecting Christ instead took the bribe that Satan had offered Jesus in the desert.

    That means, of course, that any European people that become decidedly focused on helping Jews, uplifting Jews, saving Jews from those tired of being cheated by Jews, will prepare the bed of their subsequent decadence, which will feature their Elites allying with Jews against their own poorer people.

    Jews in choosing anti-Christ do not have a death wish, in part because they are the special race to serve the cause of anti-Christ. But white Gentiles deciding to brush off Christendom and then to prove they could make something better? Well, they, at least the most powerful among them, are examples of gaining the whole world and losing your soul. England did that. So did Germany. So did France. So did Switzerland, the Netherlands, Italy, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, eventually even Spain, Portugal, Scotland, and Ireland. And the USA certainly has done it.

    Whites began the process of cultural and genetic suicide with their rebellion against Christendom. Are you aware that Jews printed the vast majority of early Protestant tracts, often at cost? Jews knew how much trouble the Reformation would cause to Christendom and thus to whites and their cultures. They knew it would fracture Christendom, and perhaps that the fracturing of Christendom would lead to individual atomization.

    The process will not stop, much less reverse, save in nations that go against the tide of secular Modernity to back track toward Christendom. Russia seems to be started on that road, as does Hungary. Poland as well.

    I have my doubts that any WASP nation will survive. The Anglo-Saxon Puritans were the biggest, most vicious, Judaizers of the Reformation. Their cultural fruit is hardcore philoSemitism. The English language will survive, however degraded, but all WASP run countries seem dead-set on replacing their genetics with the blacks and browns of the world. The sheer insanity can be seen best, I think, in whites working overtime to make certain that no truly conservative Christian revival gets a sound footing, while simultaneously lauding the rise Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Santeria, African animism in their backyards.

    They are culturally suicidal, which leads inevitably to genetic suicide. They are insane, and you will never cure their insanity with talk of white pride. Mainline Protestantism is absolutely central to the problem. As is genteel agnosticism. As is wallowing in the sexual revolution. As is continuing indulgence in traditional Germanic sense of the inferiority of ‘Other’ whites (the way the English see Celts and the Germans see Slavs).

    No WASP-inspired plan will achieve more than a brief treading of water. The only thing that can work is a return to the values and basic identity of pre-Modern, of medieval, Christian Europe. Russians know that. It is the reason the novel Laurus immediately became beloved by moderate and traditional Russians. They know what they must recover in order not to murder their culture.

    But those os us in the WASP controlled world? We may well prefer cultural and genetic suicide.

  176. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Jake

    all WASP run countries seem dead-set on replacing their genetics with the blacks and browns of the world. The sheer insanity can be seen best, I think, in whites working overtime to make certain that no truly conservative Christian revival gets a sound footing, while simultaneously lauding the rise Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Santeria, African animism in their backyards.

    What are these WASP-run countries?

    Most of the Western nations are run not by WASPS but by indigenous atheists offering a vague pretence of Christian faith (spirituality, as Phony Bliar calls it), plus Jews, Muslims, Indians, Pakistanis, Africans and all the rest of the PC-advantaged crew. The great majority of the indigenous people of those countries, 70% at least, are dead against mass immigration, as opinion polls in Britain, for example, have shown for many years.

    So, it”s not difficult to see what is happening. The people are being genocided by there own government, best understood as a Treason Party.

    That Hungary and Poland have a Catholic tradition is surely unrelated to the fact that their governments are resisting the US-driven European genocide, since the Pope, like Obama, is an outspoken opponent of walls — except of course around his own place.

  177. Sean says:
    @dfordoom

    Is demonisation the reason genetic arguments don’t work? I think people have an innate propensity (social identity theory) to seoing themselves as members of a group. and defending it. Evolutionary arguments are like pointing out the objectively superior reproductive potential of a woman (waist to hip ratio ect) . Be that as it may such knowledge is a poor motive compared to lust or love.

    I always like to point out that mass immigration destroys diversity. Real diversity requires the survival of distinctive racial, ethnic and cultural groups. The only way to maintain real diversity is to have strict border controls. A globalist world will be a world with zero diversity.
    The good thing about this particular argument is that you can point out that there is a country that is trying very hard to maintain the survival of its own ethnic/religious/cultural group and that country is called Israel.

    The bad thing about that particular argument is that is assumes that
    1) People in power will not be capable of violating the Golden Rule for Israel’s sake.
    2) People in power won’t destroy both the West and Israel

    I think 2 is the real problem, because if Israel ran the West the two state solution would not be US State department policy, and subscribes to be almost every politician including Clinton and Obama–who called a palestinian state inevitable. Many of anti Israel occupation of the WesBank activists are W.E.I. R.D. WHITE GENTILE social justice warriors who want to save the immigrants and hate white nationalists more than anything.

    Brexit was an anti European immigrant vote. National feeling was as offended, and nationalism not evolutionism (or white nationalism which is a totally different beast–UK WNs welcome Poles ect) . Nationalism is the key to mobilising the population.

    Theresa May has gone from being mocked in 2015 as an over the hill politician with no future, to becoming the most popular of modern times http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-more-popular-than-the-tory-party-conservatives-jeremy-corbyn-labour-poll-orb-tim-farron-a7735091.html

    How has she achieved this level of popularity? A good example is the way she accused the EU (Germany) of interfering in UK’s general election

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/02/germany-interfering-general-election-undermine-theresa-may/

    Speaking outside Downing Street, Ms May also tore into some EU leaders and officials and said Britain would not allow the “bureaucrats of Brussels to run over us”.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  178. @Corvinus

    Huuum
    No.

    Try tomorrow

    It’s a illusion to think people today have chance to choice. Only real capacity to choice is via knowledge and understanding. We can say there are a lot of mixe racers who are aware about REAL racial issues and not (((ZOMBIE))) ones. But majority of mixed racers are stupidly bad informed that races don’t exist or it’s not relevant, racism is pure and irrational evil and everyone is the same. In mein view stupid ILLIBITARDS can mix freely!! Before it’s just take control again, ;)

    If you “hate” the word fascism ok it’s what I’m.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  179. @Jake

    Because evolutionary narrative or perspective look so essential most people here seems believe regular ones think in the same way.

  180. @CanSpeccy

    No. Better informed people and about racial issues are not necessarily better educated, otherwise or quasi otherwise, a lot of better educated people are very bad informed about this issues.

    What I said. They, the illibs are not wrong in everything about this issues, the difference is that they are peripherally correct but the simple fact they stubbornly believe that human races don’t exist they already are essentially wrong about this stuff.

  181. utu says:
    @Seraphim

    It is pretty impressive that the enemies of the Catholic Church managed to get so much mile ache out of poor Giordano Bruno. Catholic Church in Catholic countries did not have to defend itself too much and perhaps because of for this reason Church did not go to the counteroffensive or at least it was not very effective. The disgusting aspects of British history are not widely known. PBS keeps coproducing British miniseries that never touch the actual reality of history and life in Britain. CanSpeccy recently wrote that in Britain there was a tradition for aristocracy to be concerned with the fate of poor. Brits believe that nonsense. And if you watch PBS you may end up believing that too.

  182. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Sean

    Evolutionary arguments are like pointing out the objectively superior reproductive potential of a woman (waist to hip ratio ect) . Be that as it may such knowledge is a poor motive compared to lust or love.

    I always thought that the right “waist to hip ratio, etc.” was what evoked lust, thus confirming that emotions are adapted to maximize evolutionary chances.

    Theresa May has gone from being mocked in 2015 as an over the hill politician with no future, to becoming the most popular of modern times …

    That’s yesterday’s news. Today Labour are in it with a chance, while May’s popularity is eroding fast:

    The dramatic YouGov poll for The Times had the Conservatives down one point on 43 per cent, while Labour gained three points since the end of last week to reach 38 per cent of the vote. The Liberal Democrats were up one point on 10 per cent, and Ukip gained a point to reach four per cent. …

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Sean
    , @Sean
  183. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    Well what about droning people? That’s the modern equivalent to burning, as on a bonfire, of those who challenge the Globo-Plutocratic-PC order.

    Agreed.

    And while heretics are no longer burnt in western countries heretics against PC know that they can have their livelihoods taken away. Which can result in their losing their families as well. So they’re effectively destroyed. The intention is the same. And in Britain and some European countries they will actually send you to prison if your heresy is serious enough.

    The Catholic Church might have ceased hunting down and destroying heretics but the Church of Political Correctness is very very enthusiastic about rooting out heresy.

  184. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Jake

    Whites began the process of cultural and genetic suicide with their rebellion against Christendom.

    That makes little sense in view of the fact that Christianity is a universalist religion, and the Catholic Church a Roman invention designed to bind together a multi-culti, and multi-racial empire. The Catholic church is playing that same game today in the service of the Globo elite.

    The Anglican church is no better. It is a rather feeble instrument of state, headed by a former oil company money man and probable security service operative, to bind the multi-culti and multi-racial British Empire turned Commonwealth.

    It is time for Europeans to ditch Christ and return to the worship of national pagan gods. The Brits could begin by sacrificing some disgraced puppet of the deep state, Tony Blair for example, at exactly 12 noon on midsummer’s day on an altar of national unity to be erected at Stone Henge.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  185. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu

    CanSpeccy recently wrote that in Britain there was a tradition for aristocracy to be concerned with the fate of poor. Brits believe that nonsense.

    Yes, and I provided examples. Here are some more examples of noblesse oblige among the British aristocracy at the beginning of the 20th Century.

    Altogether 24 British peers died in combat during WW1. By the end of 1915, the British death toll included 95 sons of peers. Among sons of the peers who died in combat during WW1 wereNeil James Primrose, the second son of Prime Minister Lord Roseberry, and Raymond Asquith, oldest son of Prime Minister H.H. Asquith, later Earl Asquith.

    Among members of the aristocracy who served in the trenches during WW1 and survived, was Winston Churchill, who spent six months (four times the life expectancy of a front line officer) in the mud and squalor near the Belgian town of Ypres, winning over the respect and confidence of the tough but traumatised 6th Battalion, Royal Scots Fusiliers.

    • Replies: @utu
  186. Seraphim says:
    @utu

    Did you know that Giordano Bruno was a spy (like other ‘magi’ like John Dee) for the Elizabethan Secret Service of Sir Francis Walsingham, signing his reports in which he uncovered Catholic plots (which led to the beheading of Mary Stuart) with the suggestive name Henri Fagot? And that one of the charges brought against him was his friendship with the heretical Queen of England?
    The whole ‘occult philosophy’ of the Renaissance was a convenient cover for a vast network of espionage, psyops, plots against the Catholic Church.

  187. Seraphim says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Hurry, before minarets are erected at Stonehenge.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  188. utu says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Aristocracy’s and gentry’s job was to fight in wars. This was the only thing that was required and expected from them. Anyway, I said they were not concerned with theft of lower classes.

  189. utu says:
    @dfordoom

    I always like to point out that mass immigration destroys diversity. Real diversity requires the survival of distinctive racial, ethnic and cultural groups. The only way to maintain real diversity is to have strict border controls. A globalist world will be a world with zero diversity.

    Yes, that is the best argument.

  190. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Corvinus

    People generally do not consciously lay out a step by step “breeding plan”.

    Of course not. The point is that, dictated by genetically determined drives, behavior nevertheless usually approximates to what, in evolutionary terms, is an optimum reproductive strategy.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  191. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Seraphim

    Yeah. Should check. They may already be there.

    But the cunning agents of this other great universalist religion are proposing mosques without minarets, the better to sneak them in across the English landscape.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  192. […] good article by Kevin MacDonald on why academics fear alternative […]

  193. Corvinus says:
    @Santoculto

    “It’s a illusion to think people today have chance to choice.”

    ???

    “Only real capacity to choice is via knowledge and understanding.”

    Exactly, by way of our own personal preferences.

    http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/05/13/what-makes-people-choose-a-mate-god-and-politics

    “But majority of mixed racers are stupidly bad informed that races don’t exist or it’s not relevant, racism is pure and irrational evil and everyone is the same.”

    Thank you very much for your opinion on this matter.

    “Before it’s just take control again”

    All your lies are belong to us.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  194. Corvinus says:
    @CanSpeccy

    “The point is that, dictated by genetically determined drives, behavior nevertheless usually approximates to what, in evolutionary terms, is an optimum reproductive strategy.”

    Evolutionary processes are still at work when men and women choose mates, but that is blunted by environmental and personal factors.

    “It is time for Europeans to ditch Christ and return to the worship of national pagan gods.”

    What gives me tremendous comfort is knowing you are way outside the norm here, and that tens of millions of white Christian men and women will continue to believe in and embrace our Lord and Savior.

  195. Corvinus says:
    @dfordoom

    “I always like to point out that mass immigration destroys diversity. Real diversity requires the survival of distinctive racial, ethnic and cultural groups. The only way to maintain real diversity is to have strict border controls. A globalist world will be a world with zero diversity.”

    There has never been such a thing as “zero diversity”, given the fact that ethnic groups have historically bred with one another.

    You also have a peculiar way of defining “real diversity”. Racial, ethnic, and cultural groups are surviving and thriving by intermingling with one another.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3146070/Mixed-race-relationships-making-taller-smarter-Children-born-genetically-diverse-parents-intelligent-ancestors.html

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  196. @CanSpeccy

    The great paradigm is that people regularly think evolutionary and moral choices are not just divorced but mutually excluded. One of the fundamental reasons is that the first has been based on non human living beings behavior in other words “chain food morality”: Hyper pragmatism, utilitarianism, emotional coldness and force over reason. Yes it’s a common view and it’s also a common reality (also) in non human natural world but almost living beings no have enlarged set of choices about how operate or behave, they no have many choices because their world has been intense and direct. Humans have overly engaged in escapism to avoid confront”food chain” morality. Escapism is not only about natural evolutionary realism but also existentialism, a new border of only humans because their reason levels can reach.

  197. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Corvinus

    Yes, the glorious past.

    And future.

    Emotional drives will remain the same. Thus, in impulse, men will remain polygamous, women monogamous, and both men and women will, all other things being equal, prefer partners of their own kind rather than of another kind. Thus, mating behaviors will still tend to approximate to optimal strategies for achieving genetic representation in future generations.

    Meantime, the Treason Party will continue its efforts via the media and compulsory sex “education” to disrupt normal adaptive behavior by promoting pornograpy, queerdom, onanism, and every other form of non-reproductive sex, while disparaging every defense of the indigenous population as a racial and cultural entity.

    You, I take it, are in full accord with the Treason Party.

    But as for your Lord and Savior, was he really a member of the Treason Party? Or was he a Jew, preaching to Jews. A man insistent that:

    until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law.

    A law ingeniously designed to promote the evolutionary success of one small Semitic tribe.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  198. Sean says:
    @CanSpeccy

    I always thought that the right “waist to hip ratio, etc.” was what evoked lust, thus confirming that emotions are adapted to maximize evolutionary chances.

    Yet explaining to a man why he should find a certain waist to hip ratio and bodily proportion in females sexually attractive is maybe not the best way of getting him to do so.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  199. @Corvinus

    I like people who understand evident things and thoughts quickly to reach other levels of debate and understanding. Clearly it’s not your case.

    If true freedom must be based on factual understanding why your sick mind would think illibtards as well most people has been well informed about race issues for example criminality rates than in the “glorious past”??

    Many if not most race mixers today are bad informed about racial stuff and their errant behavior is just a result of their stupidity and when humans internalize something in their minds it’s very difficult to put off.

    Personal preference is not real understanding of something. That’s one of the fatal mistake of your pp.

    It’s not just my opinion, but yes when intrinsic preferences and essentially correct understanding match perfectly so it’s create a strong feelings about their subjective contrarianess. This explain why a white nationalist tend to be more intensely contrary to mixing race and someone as Charles Murray or Derbyshire is less. Other great problem of human mind: the bitch personal convenience.

    As always most ganzuo are self reflectors. Every gratuitous insult can be easily found among themselves. Completely useless and pathetic creatures.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  200. @Corvinus

    Yes he believe in bullshit easily ;-)

    So so called IQ measure something in the end…

  201. Corvinus says:
    @CanSpeccy

    “Emotional drives will remain the same.”

    As men and women mate within and outside of their race.

    “Thus, in impulse, men will remain polygamous…”

    But in actual behavior, they will generally sire offspring with one woman.

    “women monogamous…”

    Not according to the PUA crowd.

    “and both men and women will, all other things being equal, prefer partners of their own kind rather than of another kind.”

    Own kind, as in personal preferences. They may or may not prefer members of their own race.

    “while disparaging every defense of the indigenous population as a racial and cultural entity.”

    You’re way behind the curve and the times.

    “You, I take it, are in full accord with the Treason Party.”

    God is on our side. He will judge accordingly. And there is no observable thing called the “Treason Party”.

    “A law ingeniously designed to promote the evolutionary success of one small Semitic tribe.”

    With other “tribes” deciding for themselves how to pursue their “evolutionary” success.

    Praytell, how many children have you in your brood?

  202. @iffen

    We don’t believe in Jesus anymore. That’s all there is.

    I still believe in Jesus, but that’s no longer the norm, alas.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @iffen
  203. joe webb says:
    @Captain Willard

    I was limiting my comment to the Left character of the general insanity. There is of course the liberal component which, like Fox News type conservatives, agree with the liberals about the Jews as holy, and go on to embrace globalism, and internationalism in general.

    This the Left does not completely embrace, given the Bernie Sanders type relative pro-labor orientation. Still, because the Left Believes in racial equality, their opposition to globalism is limp, as they Believe in Open Borders and One World. Any opposition to such is Racist! in their eyes and accounts for the Sanctuary cities, states, and soon the whole country will be promoted by the Left, just as it opposes Israel’s Apartheid character, as a Sanctuary Country.

    That is what is happening in Europe and the nationalist Right is starting the counter-revolution in protest. This will probably end in lots of bloodshed as the liberals are fundamentally communist…Trotsky variety…world revolution or Pimping little sisters of communism, per Wilmot Robertson…The Dispossessed Majority.

    The Left has abandoned its defense of the white working class. That is the historically fundamental truth about the Left.

    The Left has become essentially an anarchist force…with its championing of Social Justice for All the low-life of the planet. Social Justice means Equality for all…socially. Political equality in the West has never meant anything more than equality before the law.

    Social justice is impossible. There is no possibility of any Standard or Principle to measure Social Justice…just leveling, and theft, and resentment of anybody more competent, better looking, smarter, etc. Social Justice movements are totalitarian and can only lead to anarchy.

    The Left is dead as a legitimate political force, dead in the sense of a rational and reality-based politics. It is totalitarian and will die, either a natural death, or a violent death, at the hands of more rational people.

    Joe Webb

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @CanSpeccy
  204. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Sean

    Yet explaining to a man why he should find a certain waist to hip ratio and bodily proportion in females sexually attractive is maybe not the best way of getting him to do so.

    Correct. Explaining to a fellow that he finds a broad-hipped woman attractive because those among past generations who preferred narrow-hipped women as mates had fewer progeny, won’t affect his feelings about women, one way or another. He likes what he likes, his preference inherited from ancestors who succeeded in passing their genes to his generation. It will, however, enlighten him as to the evolutionary springs of human emotion, and confirm for him the truth of Shakespeare’s line that love is “a wise form of madness.”

    • Replies: @Sean
  205. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Kevin O'Keeffe

    I still believe in Jesus, but that’s no longer the norm, alas.

    What does it mean to “believe in Jesus”?

    He lived most people surely believe.

    He said some things that seem revolutionary in the context of not only the society in which He lived, but in the context of the modern world. And in his revolutionary sayings many people find comfort, moral strength, and hope. Does that not constitute belief?

    Then there is St. Paul’s story of his interviews with the risen Christ, which became the basis of the great churches, and which I suspect most people, if they gave the matter any serious thought, would find unbelievable.

    But in any case, what does believing in Jesus have to do with protecting the European people from genocide? Self-proclaimed Christians like Corvinus are all for the genocide of the European people by suppressed reproduction and mass replacement immigration. The Archbishop of Canterbury is all for the genocide of the English race by suppressed reproduction and mass replacement immigration. The Pope is all for genocide of the European people by suppressed reproduction and mass replacement immigration.

    The idea that Christianity in its Anglican, Catholic or any other well known form will save the European people or the culture of Christendom is absurd. That is why I advocate a return to paganism. Pagans would have a much better idea than the Archbishop of Canterbury or Teresa May about what to do with a bunch of traitors in the church and government.

    Corvinus could watch as the Pagans sort things out. Then he would likely find the Treason Party made manifest, in heaps of corpses or severed heads.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Corvinus
  206. Corvinus says:
    @Santoculto

    “I like people who understand evident things and thoughts quickly to reach other levels of debate and understanding. Clearly it’s not your case.”

    Except what you tout is other than evident. From your point of view, there is no debate. Anyone who believes differently is a race traitor. How convenient.

    “If true freedom must be based on factual understanding why your sick mind would think illibtards as well most people has been well informed about race issues for example criminality rates than in the “glorious past”??”

    Irrelevant. We’re not talking about race and criminality. We are discussing how white and non-people need not be virtue signaled into submission when they exercise their freedom to date and mate across the racial spectrum.

    “Many if not most race mixers today are bad informed about racial stuff and their errant behavior is just a result of their stupidity and when humans internalize something in their minds it’s very difficult to put off.”

    Doubling down on idiocy. Race mixers are not “badly informed” or engaging in “errant behavior”. They are living their life how they want. You are compelling people to only have children among their “own kind” and shaming them into biological submission.

    “Personal preference is not real understanding of something. That’s one of the fatal mistake of your pp.”

    Personal preference is predicated upon observation and participation. People experience a phenomenon and make an informed decision by way of their ideological, social, and religious thought processes. People gain a real understanding of something through this process. Along the way, they may encounter different things, and as a result, they adjust those preferences.

    “It’s not just my opinion, but yes when intrinsic preferences and essentially correct understanding match perfectly so it’s create a strong feelings about their subjective contrarianess. This explain why a white nationalist tend to be more intensely contrary to mixing race and someone as Charles Murray or Derbyshire is less. Other great problem of human mind: the bitch personal convenience.”

    Thank you for your opinion on this important matter.

    “As always most ganzuo are self reflectors. Every gratuitous insult can be easily found among themselves. Completely useless and pathetic creatures.”

    If they are so “useless and pathetic”, why not pull a Breivik? Are you that impotent?

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  207. @joe webb

    No. Social justice is completely possible.

    “(left) abandoned (white) working classes”

    Example of “social justice is possible”

    Only impediment is that any goal is dependent on the level of certain potential. So social justice is dependent on level of wisdom of people, on the masses and on the social control.

    And wisdom is also genetic.

    • Replies: @joe webb
  208. Sean says:
    @CanSpeccy

    There are places where fat women are celebrated as desirable. The best way to alter the female body shape preference of men from those chubby chaser cultures is …

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  209. @Corvinus

    Firstly I’m not white… Maybe your pre assumptions about me will be destroyed after this my un-revelation. Mixed race is something that always happened…in lower frequencies with some periods of great mélange.

    Stupid is not necessarily the same than race traitor. Someone who found a love out of your race but defend REASONABLENESS is still less traitor than someone who marry a person of the same race and even have a big family but defend the biological extermination of their”own” people.

    Your second prototype of reply make me rationally comfortable to stop waste my time with a person who simply lack on basic reading interpretation. Now you will blame my English because you seems incapable to understand why I use this example. …

    This is what that evil bitches in the super power want…that we lost our time with this drones… I will not try anymore to put some reason in your pretend to be brain.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  210. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Sean

    The best way to alter the female body shape preference of men …

    You cannot. It’s hard wired, the end result of a process of natural selection.

    In Uganda fat women are, or use to be prized, and the king kept a bunch fed on large quantities of milk to keep them enormously fat and sleek.

    Perhaps among the Ugandans a penchant for fat women is hard wired. More likely, though, fattening up the wives of the King was like loading the aging wife of a Duke with diamonds. It’s a demonstrates wealth, or a form of conspicuous consumption in a land where food is the chief form of wealth.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  211. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @joe webb

    Social justice is impossible. There is no possibility of any Standard or Principle to measure Social Justice…just leveling, and theft, and resentment of anybody more competent, better looking, smarter, etc. Social Justice movements are totalitarian and can only lead to anarchy.

    “Social justice” is being pushed not only, and perhaps not mainly, by the left but by the Globo plutocracy. Hence, Zuckerberg’s plan for a universal income scheme. It would mean that everyone is assured of a reliable trickle of crumbs from the bankers’ tables, and can thus be dismissed from further consideration.

    Then jobs can be off-shored, cheap Asian brains and Hispanic muscle can be imported, and people replaced by robots without limitation, while the white working class pass more or less idle lives distracted with porn, sports, crap TV and drugs (marijuana has already been legalized in Canada), until they die off. A diet of junk food and a sedentary life will insure that they die off sooner rather than later. Ready availability of condoms, vasectomy, and abortion and the abysmal prospects for a further generation will ensure widespread reproductive failure. That way will the white mass be disposed of.

    • Replies: @joe webb
  212. Sean says:
    @CanSpeccy

    May to the rescue of Trump

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-security-manchester-idUSKBN18L0QU

    President Donald Trump said on Thursday that “deeply troubling” leaks to U.S. media about the Manchester suicide bombing would be investigated, after irate British police briefly stopped sharing information with U.S. agencies.

    Prime Minister Theresa May raised British concerns with Trump at a NATO summit in Brussels, telling him intelligence shared between their two countries had to remain secure, in a rare public show of dissatisfaction with Britain’s closest security ally.

    After a suspension that lasted about a day, Britain’s most senior counter terrorism officer said late on Thursday that the police had resumed sharing information with the United States after receiving “fresh assurances”.

    Trump had called the leaks “deeply troubling”.

    “I am asking the Department of Justice and other relevant agencies to launch a complete review of this matter, and if appropriate, the culprit should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” he said in a statement released after his arrival in Brussels.

  213. Seraphim says:
    @CanSpeccy

    So, they might accommodate and some ‘national pagan’ deities as well.

  214. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    That is why I advocate a return to paganism.

    I can see the attraction but the danger is that neo-paganism would end up being hundreds of tiny sects. That’s one of the things that made Protestantism so deadly to civilisation – the fragmentation of Christendom.

    Also neo-paganism would attract a lot of New Age types, and lots of over-emotional females. And lots of perverts as well. You’d have to find a way to create a masculine paganism.

    Of course it could be done if it were to be imposed from the top down by a benevolent authoritarian government. But first you’d have to find your benevolent authoritarian government!

  215. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    You cannot. It’s hard wired, the end result of a process of natural selection.

    In he 1950s the ideal female body shape was the Marilyn Monroe shape. Within forty years the ideal female body shape was that of an anorexic teenaged boy. And have a look at the body shapes the Victorians found attractive.

    This is something that might well be mostly cultural. I know that it seems to defy belief that it could be so, but…

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  216. @dfordoom

    Why people think masculine-based western civilization has been a gigantic successful?? Why masculine-like here never call pervert capitalists??

    In the end I don’t advocate for neo paganism based on old forms. I no have problem people worship the sun as their god, make more sense than worship a bizarre fantasy as official religion. But without animal “sacrifice” and purposeful confusion between reality and cultist narrative.

  217. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @dfordoom

    Within forty years the ideal female body shape was that of an anorexic teenaged boy.

    I think that was an anomaly. Known as “heroin chic,” it seems to represent a decadent and gender-confused age. All the other models in that video, from Pharaonic Egypt to the current age, were more or less well endowed with well shaped boobs and butts. The plumper examples, from the Renaissance and the Victoria era, probably reflect the fact that artists were paid to paint the somewhat overweight wives of wealthy patrons.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  218. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @dfordoom

    Apparently, we are both a bit behind the curve. According to the Yorkshire Post, Paganism may be the fastest growing religion in Britain.

    However, the article indicates that neo-Paganism is, as you predicted, comprised of many different sects, some of which meet in a bar and sound more like a social club that a serious kick-ass religion.

    Druidry seems to have been a serious business. An ancient sect of Druids in France, worshipped Astarte, an ancient middle-eastern goddess with a lovely hour-glass figure, and Herakles, a son of Zeus.

    but unfortunately a bunch of Christians burnt the Druid university in France and thus destroyed all their records so it’s not so clear what they were about.

    Some people think Jesus visited England and was taught by the Druids at Glastonbury. Is that what William Blake had in mind when he wrote Jerusalem (music by Hubert Parry)?

  219. utu says:
    @dfordoom

    Pagans of Roman empire could not go back to more paganism to save themselves from the impeding cultural transformation. They looked forward and embraced Christianity instead.

    What can we embrace now? Judaism? To get the missing part of the code that was not included in the original program we purchased from Jews 2000 years ago? We need a patch.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  220. Seraphim says:
    @dfordoom

    ‘Neo-paganism’ is a circus. All the ‘druids’ and ‘witches’ are simply the clowns and mountebanks of a grand carnival, following a script written by the very people they think they fight against.

  221. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    The plumper examples, from the Renaissance and the Victoria era, probably reflect the fact that artists were paid to paint the somewhat overweight wives of wealthy patrons.

    Have a look at photographs of actresses and music hall stars of the late Victorian era. They’re huge!

    I think that was an anomaly. Known as “heroin chic,” it seems to represent a decadent and gender-confused age.

    Even in the 50s the skinny waif look was starting to appear. Audrey Hepburn for instance. And then in the early 60s Twiggy.

    And what about the 1920s? The flapper? Flat-chested with no hips. Which followed the Victorian hyper-voluptuous look. And was followed by the 50s voluptuous love goddess look which was followed by the anorexic boy look.

    As much as it seems incredibly counter-intuitive our tastes in female beauty seem to be cultural. They’re determined mostly by fashion.

    I don’t want to believe it either.

  222. dfordoom says: • Website
    @utu

    Pagans of Roman empire could not go back to more paganism to save themselves from the impeding cultural transformation. They looked forward and embraced Christianity instead.

    The thing about history is that it isn’t always inevitable. Sometimes it’s just dumb luck. Like the Emperor Julian getting himself killed in battle after only a couple of years on the throne. Given another quarter of a century he might have succeeded in reviving paganism. He was a young man when he died and in normal circumstance could reasonably have expected another twenty-five years of life.

    If Mary Tudor had lived another twenty years and produced a son England might well be a Catholic country today.

    • Replies: @utu
  223. joe webb says:
    @Santoculto

    this is a very important issue. The inability to see the difference between public and private, social and political, leads to chaos, which is the state of mind of all liberals and lefties today.

    In the 60s there was this: “Everything is political.” This is a mindless and leveling position.

    The Social invades the Political Realm and the result is chaos.

    What is Political is the general affairs of a city, or nation, which are understood by everyone to be a common concern. When one “special interest” as the term goes these days, seeks special status, or privilege…that is an attack on the General Interest. This kind of attack is anti-political and is a representation of some social group demanding special status, out of the generally agreed social norms.

    It is usually a utopian demand as well, as in impossible to implement without major disagreement from the general population, as well as having no chance of success even if implemented.

    The general black social demands on the state these days are utopian and disruptive.

    The general demands by the Social Justice folks are likewise, an attack by social groups on the larger community of the state, which has established for itself a set of norms that are considered legitimate socially.

    Politics can accomplish goals compatible with equal justice in the legal system, equal voting, equal access to education, and so on. Politics does not privilege any group. Thus, while the aristocrat may have received the dispensation of a silken rope, he was still hanged until dead just like a commoner, or the King. That was the major accomplishment of the “bourgeois” revolution.

    The state getting into social matters like the family is another possible mistake…

    The only legitimate reason for family law is the protection of children, inasmuch as they are unqualified for political participation, and cannot protect themselves.

    The libertarians recognize all of this and they are correct up to a point. The point wherefrom they are in error, is the State intervening or not in the economy. The economy is not a social affair.
    -
    The other social phenomenon that is beyond the reach of any state tampering is social class.
    People are radically unequal, both within a particular race and certainly in comparisons of the various races. I am reminded that Ceausescu of Romania, when the counter-revolution came and he found himself very dead…he had been a representative of the Workers and Peasants coming to power thru the agency of the USSR. He was a shoemaker! that tells it all , a shoemaker that had as a model of social class…his shoe-making ‘last’..how to hammer people into shape. This is the result of The Social invading The Political.

    Race is Social, racial difference showing up in unequal rates of economic success, etc. is not a Political matter. It is Social.

    Any attempt to meddle in Social life by the state, is very dangerous. Another way of putting it is that Private life includes free association and no state intervention, except for obvious law breaking. Public life is political life, the realm of common affairs, to be addressed by speaking and acting.

    The ancient Greeks valued Speaking and Acting as the highest of human activities.

    Our slide into the swamp of Equality of Outcome is a disaster, an attack on The Political, and finally an attack on Social Life as manifested in traditional adjustments over the course of time to various realities and challenges…which are managed and accommodated without the force of law and the State.

    All of the Democratic Party factions are pressing for anti-political outcomes, that the majority of folks here is the US consider more or less insane. ditto Europe.

    There is no social equality. The only equals socially in this world are identical twins.

    Everywhere there is inequality, everywhere…and the traditional way of dealing with it is love.
    One does not love anybody, one’s relative equals or one’s unequals. We can love folks only when there is general acceptance of inequality, and the details of social life can be negotiated and respect as a form of love, is present and certainly superior folks (objectively) do not lord it over the lesser, and lesser do no resent their betters.

    This was the social contract that used to work in South with blacks and whites getting along.

    Now that Equality fever has been unleashed…The Social Non-negotiable Demands have been asserted. This can only result in bullets.

    These theoretical distinctions are real and not to be tossed aside with the usual Whatevers.

    So, the inability to recognize distinct realms of life, private vs. public, Social vs. Political and varieties of the same basic Principle…the principle that only Whites have invented…leads to chaos and war. And war is coming.

    Joe Webb

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  224. joe webb says:
    @CanSpeccy

    good points…it takes a kind of Jewish Totalitarian to come with this nonsense. The Jews never invented politics in the bourgeois form, election, free speech, etc.

    The Jews, like the Arabs, all of course semites, lack the genes for political life, as opposed to social life.

    The jews got this thing about social justice…they were always fighting with jehovah about everything. Meanwhile they never freed themselves from their Wordniks…the rabbis.

    Words, words, words, endless.

    This tendency suggests a lack of what zen or Heidegger was trying to get to…just letting the genes speak, and going about matters quietly. Carry water, chop wood, and let the thinking slowly emerge from one’s guts , with special care not to allow excessive emotions to get in the way.

    Ever see a Jew meditate? No…they jabber on like my blue-jays…squawk, squawk squawk. I terminate them with extreme prejudice.

    Joe Webb

  225. joe webb says:

    story from a couple days ago…relevant to my last post.

    RE: TKO in Montana as Anglo-Saxon looking maybe Italian, slams jew-boy-reporter from commie rag. And, Innocent Israelies abroad.

    Subject: TKO in Montana as Anglo-Saxon looking maybe Italian, slams jew-boy-reporter from commie rag. And, Innocent Israelies abroad.

    Never Again I tell you! It is Happening here, and now, with this congressman, who got votes for beating up a jew-boy in Montana today….frightening.

    Visions of the Holocaust! White Males (!) attacking jews! And now a member of Congress….who should be expelled. Jewish Nightmares conjured

    This could or may or might be the tip of the jackboot….Montana style. Cowboy Jew Hate. Call the SPLC ACLU, and write letters to your congress people.

    This how it starts, little acts of terrorism against jews, and pretty soon, Kristal Nacht, and long knives used on our congress people who have been to the Wailing Wall, and cried for us and accepted our money too.

    Trump has set the tone for this incipient anti-semitism,,,,yes he says he’s for us, but wait and see…following Putin’s line of jewish neutralization in Russia…and may be doing so here. This is another matter for investigation by the FBI. And you know how many anti-semites are still in there. J Edgar Hoover’s legacy.

    ——–

    I went to San Francisco today and stopped at a coffee joint. Proprietor looked middle eastern, He was effusive and wanted to talk. He announced that he could straighten me out on various matters, and further developed his theme that all you need is to Go After It…Heart health with walnuts I suggested? He said , No, all you need to do determine to get healthy. Various topics all of which he poured forth his personalistic self-determination to Just Do It, in our American way these days.

    I let him run on to try to figure him out. I then remarked that he was personalizing everything and that what was needed , in addition to his self-help, was objective consideration of facts outside one’s immediate ken. That Standards or Principles, whether in personal behavior or politics was needed. I told him I voted for Trump, expecting some negativity, but he too voted for Trump, or liked it that I did. OK, Right On Brother!

    I asked him if he was from the ME and said Israel. So I asked if he was Palestinian or Jew. He winced. I am a Jew!…OK. he then commenced a Jewish chauvinist spiel that was like something a comic, like Lenny Bruce, might have done. Jews have done this and that and lead the world to peace and happiness, and other folks should thank god jews are here.

    I needed to get to my dentist, but let him have it just a bit, not wanting to nix the whole thing cuz he has great coffee…I bought a pound of it… moderation in all things coffee…which I just heard today , two cups of which a day based on a study of a couple million folks…imagine that!… reduced one’s risk of liver cancer by about one third. why did I think of cancer?

    So I asked him if his jewish peace was what all these wars were about in the ME and did he know how many millions of Arabs we have killed over the last 20 years or so , never mind the Israeli conquest in the first place, and did he know who the neocons were?, etc.

    He dug in under his shirt and pulled out his mogen david medallion, and kissed it. (not making this up ) Imagine whites kissing a White Nationalist emblem…that would solve the problem lickety split. Its a religious deal for him, race and nation. But don’t try this at home…., you will be a nazi.

    He finally shut up. Which is rare for this kind of character, jewish or goy….but goyem are rare here. The Jew shuts up. I said I had to go to my appointment and would see him in a week or so. And, did he appreciate how arrogant he was? that the jews would bomb the world for the sake of 16 million jews? bye, have nice day.

    —— meanwhile a new talking point has emerged for the Dems. White Racist Trumper! In league with a Montana computer and oil man now congressman…possible with ties to Russia. Investigate !

    Joe Webb

  226. @joe webb

    I think everything is possible to be done without gross mistakes with reason and/or wisdom. The simple fact great majority of leftists, crowd and elites, lacks absolutely self awareness, already make them impossible to understand not only politics but most of other important things that define and govern the dynamics of life. What I like to say: leftist arguments are mostly right in their first statements, this is one of the reasons they has been so successful, because they sound deadly right, and yes, they are but only in the beginning. When they develop this statements, they introduce their stupid ideology and what would appear very right lose their trust. Example: racism. Racism is the systematic discrimination against certain population via generalization of their individuals. What’s happening with whites today as if every individual whites were guilty by black slavery or by middle east wars. The first statement is not wrong, it’s unfair a decent black be treated as a thug black or any other person be treated as if it were in the way it isn’t. The justice of interpersonal treatment is exactly the same the justice of intelligence or factual understanding, look for things and give them their right description. It’s what happened in the past not all non blacks who acted like that but no doubt it’s wasn’t a isolated phenomenon. Do you see? The statement is right, the development of this statement is totally wrong.

    What you wrote is interesting, I don’t know if is factual but it’s interesting, Europeans “are” more politically smart, middle easterners “are” more socially smart. I don’t know if politics is so different than social issues, I think politics is the organization in the space and time that social issues than be a different entity, so I think the first is a very important tool to organize with laws and agendas all the diversity of social issues.

    • Agree: CanSpeccy
    • Replies: @joe webb
  227. utu says:
    @dfordoom

    I do not think that “dumb luck” played a role in the spread of Christianity. I think that Paganism at this stage in Rome had no chance with young, aggressive and intolerant religion like Christianity. It is possible hat Romans felt very lukewarm about their religion at this stage, just like most Europeans feel about Christianity nowadays.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  228. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    The CBC reports that, in Canada, a Liberal MP, Adam Vaughan, criticized the newly appointed leader of Canada’s Conservative Party, Andrew Scheer, for his pledge to withdraw funding to universities that restrict free speech on campuses. Vaughan called Scheer’s commitment an attack on academic freedom.

    What does this mean?

    That liberals are taking authoritarianism in the university to the next level?

    That liberals recognize that their propaganda no longer sells as scholarship and so will have to be crammed down kids’ throats in the name of “freedom”, academic or otherwise?

    And will Scheer or Trump or any other supposed conservative actually kill off the liberal–left–totalitarian hoard that has occupied academia by cutting off their tax-payer funding?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  229. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu

    So having become lukewarm, at best, about Christianity, the Europeans are, you are saying, ready to believe in just about anything, and the intolerant liberal-left are on a roll, pushing a totalitarian scheme with which they fully expect to fill the gap.

    • Replies: @utu
  230. geokat62 says:
    @Corvinus

    Mass migration and race mixing are inevitable. I suggest you be an adult and deal with this phenomenon.

    If this phenomenon is inevitable, as you suggest, do you believe Israel will fail in its mission to be a Jewish state? Moreover, since you are a self-declared progressive, do you believe that Zionists are racists for wishing to establish an ethno state – i.e., are you an anti-Zionist because you believe in the inevitability and goodness of the mixing of all peoples and all races?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  231. Veritatis says:
    @utu

    You have a good point. But you see, the counter reformation did work, the Jesuits did work, but after Elizabeth I, that work happened mainly in non-english speaking countries. Catholic thought and practice did have a resurgence in England/US at the beginning of the 20th century. But the ‘new’ assault on the Catholic Church has happened some years after WWII (say, “Hitler’s Pope”), much strengthened by the cultural bulldozer of mass media and mass publishing. Which is very much in English, and either “anti-popish”or jewish. And very, very liberal.

    But after a while, and even understanding the value of apologetics, it is up to Catholics and Christians to show a worthwhile way to live. Who do we stand with, what do we stand for.

    • Replies: @utu
  232. Corvinus says:
    @Santoculto

    “Firstly I’m not white”

    Then your parents were race traitors. What say you, CanSpeccy and Rurik?

    “Someone who found a love out of your race but defend REASONABLENESS is still less traitor than someone who marry a person of the same race and even have a big family but defend the biological extermination of their”own” people.”

    A traitor is a traitor. You are trying to justify how you are less of a traitor compared to others. Sorry, no. Furthermore, there is no “biological extermination” taking place.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Santoculto
  233. Corvinus says:
    @geokat62

    “If this phenomenon is inevitable, as you suggest, do you believe Israel will fail in its mission to be a Jewish state?”

    What is this obsession with people here on this fine blog with Jews? America is not Israel. The United States is a mutt nation. Always has been, always will be.

    “Moreover, since you are a self-declared progressive, do you believe that Zionists are racists for wishing to establish an ethno state?”

    First, I am a moderate. Second, if Israelis want their own “ethno state” given their unique history, so be it. Again, America is not Israel.

    We don’t care.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  234. @Corvinus

    You arrogantly believe I’m a typical neonazi, sad how ignorance & arrogance make people as you so stupid…

    My last words for such pathetic creature…

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  235. @Corvinus

    You arrogantly believe I’m a typical neonazi, sad how ignorance & arrogance make people as you so stupid…

    My last words for such pathetic creature…

  236. geokat62 says:
    @Corvinus

    Second, if Israelis want their own “ethno state” given their unique history, so be it…

    So, do you agree your previous statement:

    Mass migration and race mixing are inevitable.

    needs to be amended to:

    Mass migration and race mixing are inevitable for European and European-derived countries.

    to more accurately reflect your views?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  237. utu says:
    @Veritatis

    Jesuits were successful. Perhaps too successful. Their suppression is really a peculiar affair. It seems that the “forces of progress” (which included British interests) could not stand Jesuits.

  238. utu says:
    @CanSpeccy

    The religion in the West with few exceptions (Poland to some extent) is no longer an identity that can be fallen back on in a political discourse. On the other hand the”intolerant liberal-left” filled up the gap left by the fissure of the state and church. The key word here is intolerant. Intolerance is the attribute of political strength which traditional religions lost by means of being forced to become more tolerant.

  239. iffen says:
    @Kevin O'Keeffe

    Sometimes I wish that I did too.

  240. joe webb says:
    @Santoculto

    “…so I think the first is a very important tool to organize with laws and agendas all the diversity of social issues.”

    This is precisely what I am arguing against. “The diversity of social issues” cannot be addressed with law. That is what leads to big trouble.

    You need to go back and read again my text on The Social as opposed to The Political. They are separate spheres, or areas of life.

    IF you think social life can be set by law, you are a totalitarian. How about a law that requires intermarriage between the races? Sounds like a good idea? Sounds like Peace?

    Joe Webb

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  241. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    And will Scheer or Trump or any other supposed conservative actually kill off the liberal–left–totalitarian hoard that has occupied academia by cutting off their tax-payer funding?

    No they won’t. They won’t, not because they’re gutless but because they don’t want to. Because those supposed conservatives are not conservatives in any meaningful sense of the world. They’re liberals. Right-wing liberals. They support the liberal social agenda in its entirety.

    Supporting capitalism does not make you a conservative. Capitalism and liberalism are two sides of the same coin. Capitalism is anti-conservative.

    That’s why the Religious Right in the US was so ineffectual. They never did understand that capitalism is the enemy of Christianity.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  242. dfordoom says: • Website
    @utu

    The key word here is intolerant. Intolerance is the attribute of political strength which traditional religions lost by means of being forced to become more tolerant.

    Yes, I strongly agree. A tolerant religion is a weak religion and it will soon become a dying religion.

    The intolerance of liberalism is a sign of its strength and vitality. Liberalism is evil – a belief system can be strong and vital and still be evil.

    Liberalism can only be opposed by a religion that is equally strong and intolerant. That’s why Christianity failed. Christianity’s opposition to liberalism took the form of a retreat followed by a surrender followed by another retreat followed by another surrender. A guaranteed losing strategy.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  243. @utu

    (((Leftist))) tolerance

    ^.^

  244. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @dfordoom

    Yes, we have two parties, one globolist money-power agenda.

    And for anyone who thinks spelling is important, I meant horde not hoard!

  245. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu

    Liberals like to say, or they used to, that the only answer to intolerance is intolerance. Time now for intolerance of genocidal liberal intolerance of the European people’s, Western civilization and the Western ethical tradition.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  246. Corvinus says:
    @geokat62

    It is accurate to say that mass migration and race mixing are inevitable. European and non-Europeans themselves are the result of mass migration and race mixing.

    Some would argue that Israel is not yet an “ethno state”, given that it is 75% Jewish and 25% Arab, that some people who live there practice Judaism but lay ancestral claim to Ethiopia or Hungary. or wherever, and that some people who live there say they are a “separate, unique race”.

    Regardless, the United States is a mutt nation.

  247. Corvinus says:
    @dfordoom

    “Liberalism can only be opposed by a religion that is equally strong and intolerant.”

    Except that liberalism is NOT a religion and that Christianity remains a viable faith to tens of millions of people. It is hardly “failed”.

    • Replies: @bomag
  248. Corvinus says:
    @Santoculto

    “You arrogantly believe I’m a typical neonazi, sad how ignorance & arrogance make people as you so stupid…”

    Strawman. I never directly or indirectly made that claim.

  249. Corvinus says:
    @CanSpeccy

    “Self-proclaimed Christians like Corvinus are all for the genocide of the European people by suppressed reproduction and mass replacement immigration.”

    You are falsely equated Christianity with European genocide. God loves all people. He granted us free will to pick and choose our own mates. It is up to us to honor Him by teaching our children love and compassion. He does not pick “racial favorites”.

    “The Archbishop of Canterbury is all for the genocide of the English race by suppressed reproduction and mass replacement immigration. The Pope is all for genocide of the European people by suppressed reproduction and mass replacement immigration.”

    Here is a virtual brown paper bag for your hyperventilation.

    “The idea that Christianity in its Anglican, Catholic or any other well known form will save the European people or the culture of Christendom is absurd.”

    European people save themselves when they are believers in Christ.

    “That is why I advocate a return to paganism. Pagans would have a much better idea than the Archbishop of Canterbury or Teresa May about what to do with a bunch of traitors in the church and government.”

    Thank you so much for your opinion on this matter.

    “Corvinus could watch as the Pagans sort things out. Then he would likely find the Treason Party made manifest, in heaps of corpses or severed heads.”

    You assume that the Pagans will emerge and dominate AND seek to put heads on pikes for those who allegedly committed treason. Why do you support the death of people who choose to practice a particular faith?

  250. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    Time now for intolerance of genocidal liberal intolerance of the European people’s, Western civilization and the Western ethical tradition.

    Time now for National Conservatism:

    We will embrace immigrants, we will embrace Jews, we will embrace Muslims, we will embrace Hindus, Buddhists and all the world, provided only that those who live in our country embrace our nation, our national cultural tradition and our Christian ethical tradition.

    We embrace capitalism, the capitalism of competitive free markets regulated in our national interest, not the interests of global corporations, and we will destroy all monopolies, and will tear-up all international trade agreements that override our national law or our national interest.

    We will end mass immigration and return phony refugees whence they came. We will restore the fertility of our nation, by restoring housing affordability, income security and the traditional concept of marriage and family. We will provide incentives for married couples to raise children, which incentives will provide married women with children economic security without the necessity of pursuing a career.

    We will clear out the corrupt, hating, intolerant liberals, Commies and perverts from our schools and universities and restore to those institutions their proper function of educating our young people and motivating the most able and creative among them to fulfill their potential in the service of our nation. We will eliminate quotas on hiring and student recruitment and restore merit as the sole criterion for academic appointments, and selective school admissions. We will end the promotion of perversion in schools under the guise of sex “education” and we will encourage chastity among the young and life-long marital status among adults.

    That, it seems to me, was the Trump manifesto. Whether Trump comes through or not will not alter the fact that the NatCon agenda has been set. In the future, ordinary people opposed to the destruction of their families and their nation will judge those running for office according as whether they are for national genocide or national regeneration.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  251. @joe webb

    “The diversity of social issues” cannot be addressed with law. That is what leads to big trouble.

    Why not* How society have been based*

    You need to go back and read again my text on The Social as opposed to The Political. They are separate spheres, or areas of life.

    Why* I know you said but you do not explain.

    IF you think social life can be set by law, you are a totalitarian.

    External and human-made laws just reflects our ”internal behavioral laws”, more or less, culture works like a collective mirror.

    How about a law that requires intermarriage between the races? Sounds like a good idea? Sounds like Peace?

    What law*

    • Replies: @joe webb
  252. bomag says:
    @Corvinus

    Except that liberalism is NOT a religion

    The practice and application of modern liberalism certainly shares many similarities with religion.

    Christianity remains a viable faith to tens of millions of people. It is hardly “failed”.

    It has markedly declined from what is was and what it could be. Churches are being sold while Mosques and Progressive sectarian orthodoxy expands.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  253. joe webb says:
    @Santoculto

    your are correct about culture in the long run, but the short run, as in right now, is another matter. Religious and Political, and Social deviations from the normal are frequent in history.

    Durkheim, the late 19th C. sociologist started the current lunacy of sociology. This , like marxism, was an attempt “to get to the root of the matter”, the matter being politics. The problem with Durkheim and all the sociologists up to the present is that they are without any fundamental guide, like human nature for starters. This Durkheim or Marxist thread runs thru all the Schools of sociology right up to the present…except for the renewed challenge by socio-biology, or HBD.

    “….sociobiology [which is based on the fundamental of genes ] violates Durkheim’s injunction— which is bedrock in the training of social scientists in this country–that social phenomena can only be explained in terms of social variables.” Gerald Holton of Harvard history dept. (from Carl Degler’s In Search of Human Nature, 1991, Oxford. page 318.

    This late 19thC. intellectual movement toward The Social, and opposed to The Political, as expressed in old-fashioned terms, like The Body Politic, The Commonweal, or The Nation was
    flight from politics, and rationality. Politics means , in part, the management of conflict.

    The left and sociology claims that conflict can be eliminated if Capitalism, or Racism, or Religion, or Male Chauvinism, or White Privilege, can be eliminated…especially now that all of the above have stubbornly refused to give way….do way with White People, is the latest Devilry of the “Socialists..”.

    Socialism…look at the word itself and contemplate it. Or communism…an even more assertive demand for community. Conflict is Denied, and thus more conflict is guaranteed. Community is not created with law or guns.

    In our case today, like in ancient Greece, community was guaranteed by race and tribal membership, demanding 2 or 3 generations of Athenian local residence. At the gate were barbarians who were kept out. Similar thruout Greece.

    Once community is established by the passage of time and genetic similarity..one can get on with political matters…and bring Reason and Respect to bear on political debate. There was no Cultural debate, not Racial Debate. No Sociology except Sociobiology…implicit of course.

    We are being overwhelmed by Social debate….a debate that should never happen because it cannot be solved…in its present form, race, or something else, like extreme religious difference..like muzzies…get two insanities for the price of one….civil was as in soon, or later.

    Joe Webb

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  254. Corvinus says:
    @bomag

    “The practice and application of modern liberalism certainly shares many similarities with religion.”

    Liberalism and conservatism are ideologies whose adherents may be “devout” or “religious” to its principles. But religious belief is based upon faith. Each faith has its foundations based on essential holy books, generally inspired by a deity, with its followers serving as a vehicle for divine revelation. Liberalism and conservatism are NOT religions.

    “It has markedly declined from what is was and what it could be.”

    The congregations of 2017 are markedly different from the congregations of 1917, who were markedly different than the congregations of 1817. Humans progress. It is other than surprising that competing faiths and individual congregations argue about religion and “what it could be”.

    “Churches are being sold while Mosques and Progressive sectarian orthodoxy expands.”

    There will always be consolidation among congregations. But there are numerous efforts being made to build Christian places of worship.

    https://www.samaritanspurse.org/what-we-do/construction

    http://www.africanindy.com/culture/mega-church-to-seat-160-000-5287582

  255. joe webb says:

    Durkheim was jewish, as have been nearly all the World Revolutionaries, whether marxists…espec. Trots, Marx, Freud, sociologist leaders like Franz Boas, and on and on into Sociology today, still a jewish science.

    There is a totalitarian Outlook that tries to theorize the World…Totalism. It is religious. This Jewish subversion of Reason in the West by the osmosis of jewish religious traits into their putatively secular thinking, is a large factor in their ‘theory’. Jews, like Semites in general, are totalitarian in their impulses…hence they are theocratic by nature, like Arabs. No room for disagreements. Off with their Heads!

    It was the Israeli Israel Shahak, that so remarked in his Jewish History;Jewish Religion many moons ago.

    Religion thinks globally and acts perversely. Cabala permeates Freud for example. Communism was huge in Boas and the sociologists of the 20s and into the present. Thank god Freud is totally dead, and Marx is comatose. The Revolutionary stragglers should be mopped up and thrown out with the trash. The Social is private relations. Politicize that and inherit the wind of, in our case, White Bullets flying commieward.

    CULTURE is the ghost in the machine, which the lunatics worship since they have no
    Standard or Principle, except…well nothing really. Cultural Relativism leads to Nihilism, which is what the revolutionaries today are. They assert their right to Believe Anything, usually self -serving of a racial nature, or ‘workers and peasants’ nature. Color Good, White Bad.

    Any theorist or activist must respect Limits…first to his or her own abilities, and then generally to any and all making claims. That includes socio-biologists too. Limits.

    Joe Webb

    • Replies: @joe webb
  256. @joe webb

    All this social issues debate is solvable if or when socio and bio become mutually auxiliary. What make this social issues problematic is not its intrinsic nature or because it is naturally unsolvable but (((those))) ones and their shabbo goys who, respectively, purposefully and subconsciously, are complicating instead knowing, understanding and solving that paradoxs and paradigms.

    Even in racially homogeneous places that social issues is a constant, omnipotent and omnipresent because its essential, founder or structural nature, it’s impossible deny or avoid them.

    (((they))) identified, take all western faults and change them to work for them. It’s not just a unnecessary chain of social debates, it’s completely opposite, but instead we have wiser people at least on the west blood and or with the best of intentions we have the worst of humans debating and manipulating this fundamental debates to reach their totalitarian/ psychopathic goals.

  257. joe webb says:
    @joe webb

    correction; Ghost in the machine is the wrong example. It is deus ex machine, which means a god is introduced to solve the problem, starting with ancient drama that had a cherry- picker device swing a greek god replica into the dramatic action.

    “Culture” today is a god for the cultural relativists/social scientists. This god is more or less inscrutable except for the High Priests Keeping the Faith, like priests/rabbis in the University. Thru De-construction, or whatever the Method du Jour is, they find the sources of your unhappiness and alienation, etc. These days it is not capitalism, or patriarchy, etc. it is White People. Kill the Pig.

    You ask Emperor’s Clothes like, what the hell they are talking about and they can only splutter and of course call you a nazi.

    The Ghost in the machine seems to be from Descartes and Dualism…which means I guess that there is no compatibility between part A and Part B, like mind and body. Different realms. So, the ghost in the machine of the brain, is like a little devil , part of our evolutionary past, and with its own realm that does not relate to higher functioning.

    That all seems very quaint to us today. With biology today, never mind socio-biology, it is clear to us that the brain has functions and structure that we have mapped. How’s that for Structural Functionalism! hee hee.

    A brief look at wiki had another jewish rabbi/social commentator state a while back that the human brain in like part A and part B. That our higher functions of deliberation, etc. are Part A while our alleged lower function like hate, are Part B and never the twain shall meet…hence a kind of dualism of the mind….the ghost of the past, etc.

    Let me get back to this after reviewing the wiki story.

    Joe Webb

  258. joe webb says:

    Here is a review of Arthur Koestler’s The Ghost in the Machine. wiki… including this:

    “Arthur Koestler provided pioneering studies of scientific discovery and artistic inspiration, the twin pinnacles of human achievement. The Ghost in the Machine looks at the dark side of the coin: our terrible urge to self-destruction.”

    Well, Koestler is the part A and part B guy from above. He claimed that the brain was divided into two parts, etc. We know that the brain has many parts, and that they are wholly integrated, with among other things, the capability for emotion and Reason to combine with mixed success, let us say.

    Freud proposed a Death Wish in the human psyche, which may have been a bit of projection on his part, or on his sense of the Jewish Mind..

    That seems to have shown up in Koestler. Self Destruction is kind of passe these days, you don’t hear it bandied about much.

    There is no Manichean Dark Side in humans. There are just evolution designed aggression and defense impulses that have aided staying alive, both individually and collectively. Arguably some races have different ‘amounts’ of same. And yes, it can be problematic, like life itself.

    What are the “Pinnacles of human achievement?” How about living together in peace and living with Others behind other borders..in Peace?

    The Jews do not know what peace is. It is not in their genetic make-up. War is their permanent obsession. Old Testament warrior God, etc.

    Build their national house in a neighborhood that hates jews…get someone else to fight their wars.
    But I digress.

    The Jews, never having invented a political realm in which conflict can be conducted peacefully, know nothing of western political forms really. Israel is basically a one-party state, with military hero rabbis as their Big Men.

    It is jews against the world, and right now they organize the “special interests” to assault us. Social Movements are the name of the game and those social movements are racist and hate whites…. Soros and countless others

    Saul Alinsky as the Agitator from Israel leading the Hate Whitey Darkies of the Night. etc.

    WE have been living in a time of Social Movements, both economic and racial, but the economic in terms of class, has been eclipsed by Race. This all seems normal to us. But it is not.

    No country on Earth has experienced the immigration/movements of many millions of Others like we have had over the last century or so. It is totally disruptive. We are approaching the boiling point.

    The “New Normal” that the liberal apologists deploy for ( learning to love the bomb in the 50s ) Adjustment to low intensity civil war….., the price of Globalism’s riches-for-all is also as unheard of as the whole catastrophe of multi-racialism of the last few decades.

    This is a case of the frog placed in the gradually heating-up pot of water. Immediate immersion in hot water and it jumps out. But…it seems that we are going to jump out but where are we going to land? Civil War is where. and at least we got guns and organization.

    Thank the Jews and White Fools for it. When you see the words “social program,” get out your revolver. Your genes designed for Survival are about to be, ghostlike, materializing into Real White Men and tough women.

    Joe Webb

  259. Corvinus says:

    “Civil War is where. and at least we got guns and organization.”

    All you are doing is talking. I get it, that’s all you are capable of since you are impotent. It makes you feel better about your condition. Thankfully, you will not pull any trigger, you realize the consequences are disastrous. We are concerned but relieved.

    “Your genes designed for Survival are about to be, ghostlike, materializing into Real White Men and tough women.”

    Thankfully, we do not expect you on the front lines leading the charge, even though everyday goes by and the globalists and elitists secure their authority even more.

    • Replies: @joe webb
  260. joe webb says:
    @Corvinus

    cor, you are a fool. jw

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  261. Corvinus says:
    @joe webb

    The fools are those individuals who talk about jack booting their opposition but never following through with their objective. As I correctly stated earlier, you are merely upset and just saying things, you have no intention of carrying out something that you know will get you arrested. You may be weak minded but you are not stupid.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  262. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Corvinus

    Corvy back in agent provocateur mode, today.

  263. Talha says:
    @AaronB

    Hey AaronB,

    Another brother and I immensely enjoyed the exchange. Thanks much for your insights.

    Since genes aren’t intelligent, and this entire process is “blind” – genes that confer a survival advantage get selected for, but don’t themselves choose – then those genes which are peripheral to survival, like hair color, probably do not exert strong selective pressure.

    Which is why blond hair is also found in Melanesians independently of Europeans – apparently it is simply an “accident” that was selected for:
    “But a new study fingers a random mutation instead, suggesting that blond hair evolved independently at least twice in human history. And other novel genes, including ones with serious health consequences, may await discovery in understudied populations….The mutation, which has no obvious advantages, likely arose by chance in one individual and drifted to a high frequency in the Solomon Islands because the original population was small…”

    http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/05/origin-blond-afros-melanesia

    You mentioned this…

    A society that becomes materialist, loses contact with the spiritual and transcendent, loses the will to live.

    Beautiful words – and I would add, that – if that which is transcendent has a will – turning your back on It is small beans compared to It turning It’s back on you.
    “…God is free of need, while you are the destitute. And if you turn away, He will replace you with another people; then they will not be the likes of you.” (47:38)

    However, this is of concern only for metaphysical reasons – on the genetic level, as long as survival is ensured, it matters not at all.

    There it is.

    The historian Toynbee stated; man’s nature abhors a spiritual vacuum.

    Peace.

    As an aside, you may enjoy this about what is truly rich and truly poor:

    • Replies: @AaronB
  264. AaronB says:
    @Talha

    Thanks, Talha, much appreciated! And thanks for your comments.

    Haven’t seen you around these parts for a while…seems we dropped out around the same time!

    Good to have you back.

    • Replies: @Talha
  265. Corvinus says:
    @CanSpeccy

    “We will embrace immigrants, we will embrace Jews, we will embrace Muslims, we will embrace Hindus, Buddhists and all the world, provided only that those who live in our country embrace our nation, our national cultural tradition and our Christian ethical tradition.”

    Remove “our Christian ethical tradition”. In the States, we have freedom of religion. Our government does not impose a particular faith system on its citizens. Furthermore, those groups you listed have proven immerse themselves America’s cultural heritage.

    “We embrace capitalism, the capitalism of competitive free markets regulated in our national interest, not the interests of global corporations, and we will destroy all monopolies, and will tear-up all international trade agreements that override our national law or our national interest.”

    The problem here is that corporations are controlled by individuals who have the liberty to promote their own interests. How do you propose to limit their ability to generate profits while protecting their property rights?

    “We will end mass immigration and return phony refugees whence they came. We will restore the fertility of our nation, by restoring housing affordability, income security and the traditional concept of marriage and family. We will provide incentives for married couples to raise children, which incentives will provide married women with children economic security without the necessity of pursuing a career.”

    These incentives are essentially socialist policies, which in the States is considered by a number of conservatives as “anti-free market”.

    “We will clear out the corrupt, hating, intolerant liberals, Commies and perverts from our schools and universities and restore to those institutions their proper function of educating our young people and motivating the most able and creative among them to fulfill their potential in the service of our nation.”

    Advocating the use of force in this regard is other than desirable. Furthermore, what you are doing here is sanitizing information similar to SJW’s. It would appear that favor the suppressing of information and certain ideas from being discussed publicly. People can decide for themselves at a college what topics and issues they want to debate.

    “We will eliminate quotas on hiring and student recruitment and restore merit as the sole criterion for academic appointments, and selective school admissions.”

    OK.

    “We will end the promotion of perversion in schools under the guise of sex “education”…”

    Each individual community will make that decision.

    “and we will encourage chastity among the young and life-long marital status among adults.”

    A noble goal.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  266. Talha says:
    @AaronB

    Hey AaronB,

    I’ve been around, but apparently not discussing the serious core stuff you’ve been discussing. More power to you.

    “There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.” – Thoreau

    Again – much thanks for the insights. I especially like how you mentioned that once one brings “values” into the picture, they have inadvertently crossed a line that makes no sense unless someone appeals to something transcendent.

    You will like this article, by an expert on global jihadis. He talks about how what we are seeing today is a jihadi movement that is nihilist to the core:

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/apr/13/who-are-the-new-jihadis

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  267. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Corvinus

    In the States, we have freedom of religion.

    The States? Who cares about the States? I’m not talking about States. The States can go to Hell for all I care, and indeed, to all appearances, are doing so.

    And anyhow, the First Amendment to the US Constitution was formulated at a time when freedom of religion meant freedom to worship or Lord and Savior, Christ Jesus, in our own way. It was never envisaged that America would become a nation of Hindus, Muslims, and followers of Voodoo and witchcraft. Since the social function of religion is to maintain social cohesion, it is hard to see America surviving long under a multi-religious regime. And in fact, the intention, clearly, is for Political Correctness, the new religion of the West, to supersede, or at least override, all other religions, including first and foremost, Christianity.

    The problem here is that corporations are controlled by individuals who have the liberty to promote their own interests. How do you propose to limit their ability to generate profits while protecting their property rights?

    The state giveth the state taketh away. Property rights do not exist except as protected by the state. Likewise, the liberties of individuals. The state can and should smash monopolies just as as it should protect property owned and employed in accordance with law, including anti-monopoly law.

    These incentives are essentially socialist policies, which in the States is considered by a number of conservatives as “anti-free market”.

    Again, who cares about the States? America is finished. It’s simply the playground of globalist monopolists. (In truth, I hope I’m wrong, but I doubt that I am.) But in any sane society, regulation of the economy, which for Smithite free marketeers means maintaining competition through all necessary legislation, is merely one of several functions of government. Thus, if your national community is being destroyed by mass immigration and social disintegration as a result of cultural conflict with alien groups, then the function of government, indeed the first function of government, is to defend the nation, and damn the business community if it gets hurt.

    Otherwise, it seems we agree on a couple of things. As you say, that’s good.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  268. Seraphim says:
    @Talha

    @what we are seeing today is a jihadi movement that is nihilist to the core:

    Are you implying that the ‘yesterday’s’ jihadi movement had some values?

    • Replies: @Talha
  269. Talha says:
    @Seraphim

    Hey Seraphim,

    Define “yesterdays jihadi movement” and then we can talk intelligently. I suggest reading the article first for context.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  270. Seraphim says:
    @Talha

    “The Imam and Shahid (Martyr) [Hassan al-Banna] writes in his Treatise on Jihad: “All of the sages, the earlier and the later ones… agree that Jihad is a religious public duty to spread Da’wa (Islamic missionary activity) incumbent upon the Islamic nation, and is a personal duty to fend off the infidels’ attack on the nation… The Muslims today, as you know, are humiliated by others, dominated by infidels, their land is overrun and their holy places are desecrated… Therefore there exists an unavoidable personal duty for every Muslim to equip himself and prepare and gear-up towards Jihad until the opportunity arises and Allah will determine His word.”
    “Allah is our goal, the Prophet is our leader, the Quran is our constitution, the Jihad is our way, and the death for Allah is our most exalted wish.”
    The symbol of the [Muslim] Brotherhood is the book of Allah [the Quran] between two swords. The swords symbolize Jihad and the force that protects the truth represented in Allah’s book…

    • Replies: @Talha
  271. Corvinus says:
    @CanSpeccy

    “The States? Who cares about the States? I’m not talking about States. The States can go to Hell for all I care, and indeed, to all appearances, are doing so.”

    We certainly have our difficulties and troubles, no different than your neck of the woods.

    “And anyhow, the First Amendment to the US Constitution was formulated at a time when freedom of religion meant freedom to worship or Lord and Savior, Christ Jesus, in our own way.”

    No, freedom of religion meant freedom of state control over religion and the liberty to practice, or not practice, ANY faith.

    “It was never envisaged that America would become a nation of Hindus, Muslims, and followers of Voodoo and witchcraft.”

    Actually, the Founding Forefathers had the vision that American citizens would not be subject to religious persecution by the State. A few months after penning the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson returned to Virginia to draft legislation about religion for his native state, writing in his private notes a paraphrase of the English philosopher John Locke’s 1689 “Letter on Toleration”:

    “[he] says neither Pagan nor Mahometan [Muslim] nor Jew ought to be excluded from the civil rights of the commonwealth because of his religion.”

    “Since the social function of religion is to maintain social cohesion, it is hard to see America surviving long under a multi-religious regime.”

    Social cohesion is not squarely dependent upon the citizens of a nation to practice a particular faith, to believe in different faiths, or to not practice a faith at all. There are many factors involved.

    “And in fact, the intention, clearly, is for Political Correctness, the new religion of the West, to supersede, or at least override, all other religions, including first and foremost, Christianity.”

    PC is an ideology, not a religion.

    “The state giveth the state taketh away. Property rights do not exist except as protected by the state. Likewise, the liberties of individuals. The state can and should smash monopolies just as as it should protect property owned and employed in accordance with law, including anti-monopoly law.”

    Remember, the state is not an entity in and of itself. Property rights were created by the people who consist of the state. Certainly special interest groups have played a key role in developing rules that benefit their own pursuits.

    Again, how do you propose to limit their ability to generate profits while protecting their property rights? You talk about “smashing monopolies” without being specific.

    “Again, who cares about the States? America is finished. It’s simply the playground of globalist monopolists. (In truth, I hope I’m wrong, but I doubt that I am.)”

    America certainly is ill, but it is not on its death bed. You are being overly dramatic here.

    “But in any sane society, regulation of the economy, which for Smithite free marketeers means maintaining competition through all necessary legislation, is merely one of several functions of government.”

    Specifics?

    “Thus, if your national community is being destroyed by mass immigration and social disintegration as a result of cultural conflict with alien groups…”

    Fake News Alert.

    “then the function of government, indeed the first function of government, is to defend the nation, and damn the business community if it gets hurt.”

    Is not the business community part of the nation? Do they not have a say in laws?

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  272. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Corvinus

    I won’t argue with you about the meaning of the American Constitution except to say that when the First Amendment was adopted it was never conceived that the European nations (and the American settler state was a European nation) would acquire large populations of radicalized Muslims brandishing placards with words such as “Europe is the Cancer, Islam is the Answer.” and including in their midst thousands of potential terror bombers. A mentality such as that is incompatible with a democratic nation state, or the Western cultural and religious tradition.

    I will also not argue about the role of religion versus ideology in maintaining national coherence except to point out that there are many institutions that affect social cohesion, but that either a religion or an ideology is essential and, furthermore, what may start as a religion, for example the beliefs of the early followers of Jesus, readily becomes an ideology when administered by an authoritarian church. Whereas, conversely, an ideology such as Communism or Political Correctness can rapidly acquire the uncritical acceptance that characterizes religious faith, a faith that must be accepted by all, without mechanisms for the correction of error, without the possibility of acknowledging error, without toleration of dissent.

    As for breaking monopolies, that’s simple. Anti-monopoly legislation. I don’t know the details but that is basically how the Rockefeller oil trust was busted, and the Bell system. All that’s required is a Department of Justice given the direction to act. Trump may well, and should act to break up the media monopolies so that the United States once again has a free press.

    As for the rights of business interests, I don’t know why you keep harping on this. Their interests are well protected by 100 bought Senators and however many representatives there are in Congress. That is why business has no trouble profiting from mass immigration, illegal immigration, pornography, a corrupt drug administration, and monopolies or oligopolies in numerous commodities and services.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  273. Talha says:
    @Seraphim

    Hey Seraphim,

    The Muslim Brotherhood is not my cup of tea, but; 1) I benefited in my youth from some of the writings of Hasan al-Banna (ra) and 2) to compare them to Daesh is ludicrous.

    When Daesh starts establishing hospitals that serve the poor for free or other social services, then I’ll think of making a comparison:

    http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/videos/muslim-brotherhood-hospitals/

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/revolution-in-cairo/inside-muslim-brotherhood/piety-and-politics.html

    Let me tackle some of the points one by one:
    “agree that Jihad is a religious public duty to spread Da’wa (Islamic missionary activity) incumbent upon the Islamic nation”

    This is a fardh kifayah (public duty) – it is incumbent upon at least a group of Muslims otherwise all Muslims are sinful. Now – given that military jihad in an offensive sense is interdicted by international protocols of which Muslim nations are all signatory to – the jihad (struggle) to do dawah is in missionary activities. If international order breaks down, Muslim nations might or might not go on the offensive or Britain or France may re-establish her empire – that’s how it works. That’s why we have international law.

    is a personal duty to fend off the infidels’ attack on the nation

    This is fardh ayn (personal duty) – to repulse invaders as long as one has the means to do so. Nobody argues with this – this is self defense.

    dominated by infidels, their land is overrun and their holy places are desecrated

    Check out when the Muslim Brotherhood was founded – European colonialism was in full swing. This text may need to be updated.

    Therefore there exists an unavoidable personal duty for every Muslim to equip himself and prepare and gear-up towards Jihad

    Which follows logically from the previous two situational circumstances. Again, probably could use updating.

    The swords symbolize Jihad and the force that protects the truth represented in Allah’s book

    Yeah – spears and swords are what physically guards a people and the symbols of the religion from attack. Is there something wrong with this? Do you recall reading about what happened to early Christians under the Romans before Christianity went Imperial? How many of your libraries and manuscripts did the Romans burn? How many early Christian men of learning were martyred?

    We don’t play that game.

    Again – the Muslim Brotherhood has made political moves that I don’t personally agree with and I don’t subscribe to a good number of their operational philosophies, but I’m not going to throw them under a bus to make people happy. They do excellent work trying to better the lives of some of the most vulnerable people.

    One thing they obviously need to do is get the message out loud and firm; that they will not support beating up on the Coptic community due to the Sisi coup.

    Peace.

  274. Corvinus says:
    @CanSpeccy

    “I won’t argue with you about the meaning of the American Constitution except to say that when the First Amendment was adopted it was never conceived that the European nations (and the American settler state was a European nation) would acquire large populations of radicalized Muslims brandishing placards with words such as “Europe is the Cancer, Islam is the Answer.””

    I’m sure that the Indian nations (feather, not dot) felt the same way. Listen, if European nations want to restrict immigration, its citizens have that liberty. But targeting one exclusive group of people because it has a radicalized element seems ludicrous. The same reasoning was given by nativists in the States towards certain Europeans because of their ethnicity and their practices which would bring about the death of “Anglo society”.

    “and including in their midst thousands of potential terror bombers.”

    Overstated.

    “A mentality such as that is incompatible with a democratic nation state, or the Western cultural and religious tradition.”

    Radical Islamists, yes.

    “I will also not argue about the role of religion versus ideology in maintaining national coherence except to point out that there are many institutions that affect social cohesion, but that either a religion or an ideology is essential and, furthermore, what may start as a religion, for example the beliefs of the early followers of Jesus, readily becomes an ideology when administered by an authoritarian church.”

    Sure, such as the Puritan work ethic. But Enlightenment ideas were borne out of opposition to the Roman Catholic Church.

    “Whereas, conversely, an ideology such as Communism or Political Correctness can rapidly acquire the uncritical acceptance that characterizes religious faith, a faith that must be accepted by all, without mechanisms for the correction of error, without the possibility of acknowledging error, without toleration of dissent.”

    All the while in the case of religious and political zealotry are people who bitterly contest those doctrines that are harshly imposed.

    “As for breaking monopolies, that’s simple. Anti-monopoly legislation. I don’t know the details but that is basically how the Rockefeller oil trust was busted, and the Bell system.”

    The laws are already in place. They just have to be enforced if and when those laws are broken. And there are no “media monopolies” in the States. There is significant competition between these companies. Perhaps there is a “monopoly” on the airwaves, but that is an entirely different ball of wax.

    “Their interests are well protected by 100 bought Senators and however many representatives there are in Congress.”

    That’s another overblown statement. Certainly Congress has the attention of big business. But companies have liberties in our capitalistic system. When there has been concerted efforts made to significantly control company property, there are accusations of socialism and anti-free market. When there is scant regulation on company property, there are accusations of “crony capitalism”. The struggle is trying to find that balance.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  275. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Corvinus

    “and including in their midst thousands of potential terror bombers.”

    Overstated.

    Trouble with you, Corvinus, is you don’t know the facts:

    According to the Times of London, UK intelligence Agencies believe that there are 23,000 Jihadis in Britain of whom 3,000 are an imminent threat.

    Your ignorance about what the media consists in or how concentrated and overlapping its ownership is is too deep for correction in a comment here.

    When there is scant regulation on company property, there are accusations of “crony capitalism”. The struggle is trying to find that balance.

    LOL. You’re the first person I’ve ever come across so openly committed to the Money Power as to argue for “crony capitalism,” if only in the right proportion.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @Corvinus
  276. @CanSpeccy

    Relax, it’s just another Deep State hoax. Look, here are some “police” caught changing clothes and becoming “terrorists”.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  277. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Relax, it’s just another Deep State hoax.

    While false flag terrorism is now a regular feature of opinion management in the Anglosphere, 9/11, the June 7 Tube bombings, and Sandy Hook, being among notable examples, it is unjustified to assume all terrorism to be fake.

    To sustain the charge of fake terrorism one needs at least some evidence plus a plausible motive. In the case of the London attacks this weekend, I am aware of neither convincing evidence of a false flag nor credible motive, unless the motive was to make PM Theresa May look stupid. But false flag attacks are generally assumed to serve, not undermine, the interests of the ruling elite.

    Certainly, Theresa May’s declaration today that “Enough is enough” marks her out to be a feeble-minded leader, who failed to take advantage of the wonderful opportunity that the violence in London provided to demonstrate a capacity for strength in leadership (by rounding up the 23,000 British Jihadis, and interning them prior to deportation).

    There is also a lack of credible evidence. The video you link to has no convincing provenance, and all it shows is a bunch of guys changing clothes: could be police officers donning bullet-proof underwear, or preparing for a soccer match.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  278. Corvinus says:
    @CanSpeccy

    “According to the Times of London, UK intelligence Agencies believe that there are 23,000 Jihadis in Britain of whom 3,000 are an imminent threat.”

    So, we are to trust the numbers given by the government regarding those immigrants who are lawbreakers, but not trust the numbers given by the same government regarding those immigrants who are law-abiding.

    ‘Your ignorance about what the media consists in or how concentrated and overlapping its ownership is is too deep for correction in a comment here.”

    What is ignorance here is that people simply call the media “Fake News”. That is intellectual dishonesty and laziness. Informed people vet any and all sources, cross reference those sources, and figure out what are those facts, all while trying their best to keep an open mind and to minimize their own prejudices. It is challenging given the minefield of subjective narratives and confirmation biases that the media right and media left harbor.

    “LOL. You’re the first person I’ve ever come across so openly committed to the Money Power as to argue for “crony capitalism,” if only in the right proportion.”

    I merely put crony capitalism in quotes. To me, crony capitalism is another made up meme. It’s just capitalism.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  279. @CanSpeccy

    … 9/11, the June 7 Tube bombings, and Sandy Hook, being among notable examples, it is unjustified to assume all terrorism to be fake.

    Actually, I am satisfied that the above is completely wrong, about 180 degrees away from the correct stance.

    At this stage of history, what is completely unjustified is just to assume (as you are doing here) that ANY of these events are real!

    And, actually, I would go further than that even. I would state that it is quite right and proper for one’s default working assumption to be that any of these events are fake. In fact, based on my current understanding of these things, the likelihood that this and the other recent events in England (the thing in Manchester or the previous thing on a bridge) are NOT synthetic events is, to all intents and and purposes ZERO.

    In any case, your stance is completely anti-intuitive. You are saying that they have lied to us about this and that and the other thing, yet our stance, when presented with yet another such event, is to assume that they are telling the truth about it.

    WTF??? Does that make any sense?

    To sustain the charge of fake terrorism one needs at least some evidence plus a plausible motive.

    Well, to argue that this is real terrorism also requires a plausible motive, no? We’re close to the anniversary of the Orlando event. What is the motive for some political movement in the Middle East to want to kill a bunch of random pansies in a bar in Florida?

    I guess the typical response would be to beg the question and say “That’s what those ‘terrorists’ do!” Well, fine, but it works both ways.

    Why would organs of the Deep State set up synthetic narratives and bolster said synthetic narratives with these sorts of synthetic events? Same answer. That’s what these people do. Right? And you have already admitted that they do it. You brought up 9/11 and 7/7 and the rest of it. I did not.

    to demonstrate a capacity for strength in leadership (by rounding up the 23,000 British Jihadis, and interning them prior to deportation)

    Excuse me, where does this 23,000 British Jihadis figure come from? You did not provide a reference.

    In any case, regardless of whether there are really 23,000 British jihadis or not, there are two basic reasons why this will never happen:

    A. If they are British jihadis, i.e. they hold British citizenship, so they cannot be expelled from Britain, and certainly not without any sort of due process.

    B. The 23,000 (I doubt that figure but okay however many…) Jihadis running around comprise a patsy milieu. The patsy milieu is key to the Deep State operations. It’s where you recruit your patsies from and how you construct your narratives. The people really behind these events would never eliminate the patsy milieu that they have invested so much energy and resources into creating, so as to be able to carry off these synthetic events.

    Of the above two reasons, B. is probably more important even than A, though A is already a big deal!

    The video you link to has no convincing provenance, and all it shows is a bunch of guys changing clothes: could be police officers donning bullet-proof underwear, or preparing for a soccer match.

    The video I linked is not a sine qua non by any means. As best I understand, it was taken in the vicinity of where the event took place. But regardless, maybe there is some innocent explanation of why these individuals are changing from police uniforms to clothing quite similar to what the “terrorists” were wearing. However, I was quite convinced that this was a synthetic event based on my understanding of these sorts of things prior to ever seeing that video. You can rest assured that, as the days go on, plenty of other information is going to seep out such that anybody who is paying attention will be able to see that this is yet another synthetic event.

    So… I suggest you start paying better attention…

    In closing, I was wondering about something. You wrote a short comment under one of my articles, entitled “The Show must go On”. That was here:

    http://www.unz.com/article/the-show-must-go-on/#comment-1468922

    Quite flattering. You said the article was “brilliant”.

    Why did you write such a comment under an article that you obviously (it’s obvious now anyway) did not understand? Why? Just curious…

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  280. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Corvinus

    To me, crony capitalism is another made up meme. It’s just capitalism.

    i.e., all capitalism is crony capitalism, which is to say all capitalism relies on a mutually advantageous relationships between business leaders and government officials.

    In that you are wrong as usual. Small business is capitalistic but it benefits from no crony relationship with government. On the contrary, it is damaged by crony capitalism.

  281. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Jonathan Revusky

    … 9/11, the June 7 Tube bombings, and Sandy Hook, being among notable examples, it is unjustified to assume all terrorism to be fake.

    Actually, I am satisfied that the above is completely wrong, about 180 degrees away from the correct stance.

    You’re completely satisfied are you? And do you suppose by virtue of the fact that, you, the uncelebrated non-entity, Johnathan Revusky, is completely satisfied, everyone else should be completely satisfied too, without reference to any actual evidence or argument?

    This web “zine” sure attracts some weird comments.

    In fact, based on my current understanding of these things, the likelihood that this and the other recent events in England (the thing in Manchester or the previous thing on a bridge) are NOT synthetic events is, to all intents and and purposes ZERO.

    ZERO.Yeah, right, ZERO, EMPTY, VACUOUS, like your argument.

    In any case, regardless of whether there are really 23,000 British jihadis or not, there are two basic reasons why this [deportation of jihadis and terrorists] will never happen:

    A. If they are British jihadis, i.e. they hold British citizenship, so they cannot be expelled from Britain, and certainly not without any sort of due process.

    Confirming you know nothing about the British constitution. Parliament is sovereign. It can do what it wants. It could have you taken to the Tower of London and your head severed from your body with an axe. Mere revocation of citizenship and deportation would be a a technical matter readily solved if it were the will by Parliament to do it.

    However, I was quite convinced that this was a synthetic event based on my understanding of these sorts of things prior to ever seeing that video.

    I personally think it’s a good idea to judge events by the evidence not according to my preconceptions.

    You can rest assured that, as the days go on, plenty of other information is going to seep out such that anybody who is paying attention will be able to see that this is yet another synthetic event.

    I will note any evidence in support of your hypothesis. I will certainly not rest assured on your assurances.

    So… I suggest you start paying better attention…

    Just confirming what a prick you are.

    You wrote a short comment under one of my articles, entitled “The Show must go On”.

    Confirming that your nose for a false flag terrorist attack is about as good as your nose for sarcasm.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  282. @CanSpeccy

    And do you suppose by virtue of the fact that, you, the uncelebrated non-entity, Johnathan Revusky, is completely satisfied, everyone else should be completely satisfied too, without reference to any actual evidence or argument?

    Ah, sarcasm, eh? Attempted sarcasm, I guess. I mean, you’re not very good at it. For starters, for somebody who is hiding behind a cloak of anonymity (as most do here) to be saying that somebody who forthrightly signs his name to what he writes is a “non-entity” — that’s kind of a joke, isn’t it? I’m no celebrity, granted, but if you don’t even sign your name to what you yourself write, how can you go about calling somebody else a non-entity? It doesn’t make any sense. Well, okay, fine, almost nothing you write makes any sense, so…

    Anyway, this all reflects such a puerile mentality. This all has nothing to do with me personally. There is a body of literature on all this synthetic terrorism. It goes way back before 9/11, of course. There is operation Gladio in Italy back in the seventies. And there are false flags before that. And then, of course, there is a massive literature on 9/11. Anyway… tell me… is there some terrorist event that you have studied deeply where, after a close study, you have concluded that the official version of what happened is really what happened?

    I haven’t studied all of these things. There are too many of them, but any of them I have studied, it has become clear very quickly that the official version is completely untrue!

    So, based on that, why would I think that the official version on this most recent event is truthful?

    But this seems to be your stance. Never mind 9/11 or 7/7 or Operation Gladio or any of it, where it’s been proven to a 1000% level of overkill that the authorities were lying. We must assume that the authorities are telling the truth about this one.

    That’s just stupid, isn’t it?

    Confirming you know nothing about the British constitution. Parliament is sovereign. It can do what it wants. It could have you taken to the Tower of London and your head severed from your body with an axe. Mere revocation of citizenship and deportation would be a a technical matter readily solved if it were the will by Parliament to do it.

    Well, okay, Mr. Anonymous Dipshit. Maybe you are a lawyer and maybe the British Parliament can arbitrarily revoke a person’s citizenship and kick them out of the country. I have my doubts frankly, but maybe. Maybe they can do that to 23,000 people even. Theoretically….

    But can you cite a precedent for that?

    But here is another problem with all of this. There is no legal difference between a British citizen who is a Pakistani ethnic and one who is an anglo-saxon, is there? Now, you doubtless believe you are a real Brit and Ahmed X, despite being a citizen, is not. Well, fine, but there is no legal difference, right? So, if they could strip Ahmed X of his citizenship and kick him out of the country without the person having any recourse, couldn’t they do that to you, John Jones or whatever your name happens to be?

    You know, by the same token, if the U.S. government can put some Ahmed guy in Guantanamo and torture him endlessly, well, they can put you there too, no? I wonder whether this occurs to people like you when you advocate that your fellow citizens be stripped of any due process or rights….

    It doesn’t occur to people like you that you are advocating tyranny, does it? Why is that? I guess it’s just a lack of thoughtfulness. Also, a kind of vicious, nasty streak too, but again, it doesn’t occur to you that the viciousness could ever be brought to bear against you.

    I mean, in principle, if they could do that to some Muzzies, they could it to you too, no? You are, I believe, a 9/11 Truther (unbelievably…) so why can’t the state just decide you’re an undesirable on that basis, strip you of your citizenship and send you packing? The Parliament can do anything, no? Or so you say…. And you seem to be A-OK with that?

    I mean to say, what kind of brainfucked idiot are you really?

    I personally think it’s a good idea to judge events by the evidence not according to my preconceptions.

    Wow, that’s a strange comment. You don’t seem to be bringing any evidence into the conversation at all, just attacking me personally. In a rather idiotic way as well, an anonymous commenter calling me, somebody who signs his name and has written several articles on the site a “non-entity”… well, fine, but if I’m a non-entity, then WTF are you????

    Nothing of what you say makes any sense.

    There is currently something of a dearth of evidence on this specific case because it is so recent, but there is a host of other cases that are basically quite similar, where independent researchers, like with 9/11 and 7/7 and the rest of it, have proven every which way to Sunday that the thing is a synthetic event. So it just stands to reason that this is the way it’s going to turn out with this one as well.

    Or maybe not, but that’s not where I, as a betting man, would put my money!

    You wrote a short comment under one of my articles, entitled “The Show must go On”.

    Confirming that your nose for a false flag terrorist attack is about as good as your nose for sarcasm.

    Well, okay, I suppose you meant the comment sarcastically. It was far from obvious. It was just a one-word comment. “Brilliant.” I guess since in your own mind it was obvious to you that it was sarcastic, that you assume it was obvious to anybody else. I don’t think so.

    None of that matters anyway. Could you address two questions I have for you:

    A. I posed this above. What terrorist attack have you ever studied deeply where you concluded that the official version of events was truthful?

    B . What specific evidence do you have that the official version in this specific case? Surely you’re not arguing (though you seem to be) that the authorities are saying that X happened, therefore X happened.

    I mean okay, that’s the typical shit-eater type approach. They say that’s what happened, so that’s what happened, but I have noted that you are somebody who seems aware of 9/11 Truth issues and also realize that 7/7 was some sort of false flag and so on. So, for somebody who realizes this to then turn around and argue that the government version of events has to be accepted by default — that is an entirely impressive level of obtuseness. It’s world champion level obtuseness. Heck, intergalactic champion….. It’s…. unbelievable….

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  283. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Revusky is, apparently, to false flag terrorism what Humphrey Davy’s mine safety lamp was to firedamp: an infallible sniff test, requiring not facts or arguments — although apparently a bunch of insults is needed to cram the unquestionable truth down some throats.

    Revusky is also either dim or dishonest.

    He quotes me thus:

    … 9/11, the June 7 Tube bombings, and Sandy Hook, being among notable examples, it is unjustified to assume all terrorism to be fake.

    Thus implying that I deny 9/11, 7/7 and Sandy Hook to be false flag attacks. He then says:

    Actually, I am satisfied that the above is completely wrong, about 180 degrees away from the correct stance.

    But in fact, Revusky quoted me out of context. What I said was:

    While false flag terrorism is now a regular feature of opinion management in the Anglosphere, 9/11, the June 7 Tube bombings, and Sandy Hook being among notable examples, it is unjustified to assume all terrorism to be fake.

    Surely no room for misunderstanding there on what I think about 9/11 and 7/7 or Sandy Hook. But Revusky has set the grounds for attacking me for denying 9/11, 7/7 and Sandy Hook were false flag attacks.

    Unless there is some remarkable misunderstanding here, what point can there be in further discussion?

    And no, I do not answer questions from people who address me with coarsely worded insults.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @CanSpeccy
  284. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    Where I said “Revusky is dim or dishonest” I should have said “seems to be dim or dishonest.” The liklihood that anyone will understand anything one has said, however clearly one has said it, is rarely more than fair at best, and in political debate, near zero. I am prepared to acknowledge, therefore, that however carelessly, Revusky may have quoted me out of context unintentionally and not due to either stupidity or dishonesty.

  285. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    But as for calling false flags on vague evidence, I think this should always be resisted, since there are those who would muddy the water through either incompetent or clearly bogus analysis, with the consequence that all claims about fake terror may come to be viewed as nutty conspiracy theories.

    In fact, proving a false flag beyond reasonable doubt when one lacks police powers and resources is difficult. Nine-eleven was exceptional in many ways, not least the failure of the US Government to conduct a forensic investigation or a judicial inquiry, while it acted without delay to destroy much evidence. Moreover, the disowning of the 9/11 Commission Report by its authors pretty well confirms, what many technical analyses indicate, that the three WTC towers that fell (of which only two were struck by aircraft) were prepped for demolition before the event and were brought down on 9/11 by explosives.

    Sandy Hook was even more certainly a false flag because of various otherwise inexplicable facts, e.g., that the interview with Dawn Hochsprung as reported by the Newtown Bee appeared on the Internet the day before the events described in the interview occurred, and was in any case impossible since Dawn Hochsprung was said to have been among the first victims of the shooting and could not therefore have been around afterwards to give an account of it.

    Seven/seven as a false flag is more difficult to prove, although there is a mass of circumstantial evidence and inconsistencies in the official account that leave little room to doubt that it was indeed a crime against the people by the Government of Tony Blair.

    More generally, the fact that few alleged terrorist attacks kill or even inconvenience the political leadership is strongly suggestive of government involvement to control public sentiment, as exemplified in Joseph Conrad’s novel, The Secret Agent. Real terrorists normally go after the big targets, princes and prime ministers, people like the Russian Prime Ministers, de Wit and Stolypin, or the Austrian Arch Duke Ferdinand. When British and American leaders start going down like nine pins, we’ll know for sure its real terrorism.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  286. @CanSpeccy

    There are implicit things that don’t make sense, instead some gross isolated evidence like that below

    Explain me why a man who just lost your daughter in miserable way is laughing before ”press conference”**

    That guy seems a actor preparing to act/perform a movie…

    Because to lie AND in front of million people seems a complicated task for someone who are not professional liar))) so we have found this type of situation.

    That shitty ”people” who are in the power are capable to do anything to reach their equally miserable goals. It’s what they have done.

    Yes it’s doesn’t mean if this attacks are fakes so islamist ”immigration” is acceptable or ”so muslims are 99,99% fantastically good people”.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  287. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Santoculto

    Yes, much about Sandy Hook is extremely bizarre, suggestive of a fraud staged with monumental incompetence.

    But it is the watertight logical arguments based on undeniable facts that are critical to winning the public debate. All the other evidence will be sloughed off by slick defenders of the Obama White House/State police/FBI account.

    Why was Robbie Parker, father of a just murdered child laughing? Oh, don’t worry about it. There will be someone with some kind of psychiatric or psychological credential to tell you in the most authoritative way that hilarity is a normal reaction to bereavement, etc.

    Why did someone identical in appearance to Dawn Hochsprung appear at the Boston Marathon?Oh just photo fakery, or whatever.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  288. @CanSpeccy

    Unfortunately humans are that special creatures who believe what we want to believe, for their/our well being or not, and usually, it’s work against ourselves.

    Regular people are too absorbed in their trivialities even slowly many them are waking up but too late or to disorganized.

    We don’t need necessarily to prove if certain ”event” was/is fake or not if we can prove at least for our consciousness that entire cultural landscape is fake and that most of their narrative are toxically liar and malignant.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  289. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Santoculto

    Or to sum up, only the paranoid are truly sane!

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  290. @CanSpeccy

    I think there are, for most of this undesirable traits, their rational version. Maybe the rational ”paranoid’ are the most sane and not exactly the only-sane of all.

    Indeed, even we have a correlation between ”intellectual honesty + higher sensibility to environment + higher perceptiveness” and vulnerability to some form of psychosis or at least in moderate levels, when we show truisms and many people simply deny them so, it’s not exactly a type of paranoia, even because when normie/mundane people are persuaded to believe in something, they start to accuse anyone who don’t share the same views as ”crazy”, ”mad”, ”paranoid”.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.