The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Jared Taylor Archive
What I Like About Blacks
shutterstock_128110412

Like some other writers for this website, I have a reputation for writing rude things about blacks. I have written rude things about whites, Hispanics, Asians, and Muslims, but being rude about blacks is one of our era’s unforgivable sins. Of course, what I write about blacks is true, but as Mark Twain pointed out, nothing astonishes people more than to tell them the truth. Deep down, everyone knows the truth about blacks, but a vital requirement for respectability is to pretend you don’t.

The fact is, there are things to like about blacks—and I like them. They mostly have to do with lack of inhibition, a kind of cheerful spontaneity you don’t often find in whites. I have a half-Asian friend—a connoisseur of stereotypes—who thinks blacks and whites differ in that respect even more than they do in average IQ. As he puts it, whites act like Asians who have had a few drinks and blacks act like whites who have had a few drinks.

You see this in the easy way blacks talk to strangers. Sometimes I wear a hat—a black fedora in the winter or a panama in the summer—and I can count on compliments from blacks: “Love yo’ hat.” “Cool lid, man.” Mostly it’s from men but sometimes from women, too.

Blacks also have a knack for turning a moment with a stranger into a friendly exchange. If you are waiting for a bus in the summer, someone will turn to you and say “Sho is hot,” or “When izzat damn bus gonna come?” Educated blacks learn to be aloof, like whites, but lower-class blacks like to talk to whoever will listen, and there is charm in the way they share bits of their lives with you.

For a few weeks not long ago I walked to a job in the Tenderloin, which is San Francisco’s worst ghetto. Most whites never go there. The bum shelters empty early, so even at 8:30 in the morning the sidewalks were full of layabouts and panhandlers, most of them black. Some were clearly crazy—they looked straight through me and talked to themselves—but they never seemed dangerous. There was always banter among the regulars; some called each other by name, but there was a lot of “Hey, nigga,” too.

I wore a suit every day, and the federal courthouse was down the street, so after a few days, I was greeted with “Heah come de judge.” The panhandlers quickly learned I was a dry hole, but one tall, skinny black man refused to give up. “Any spare change today?” he would say, with a smile. And, of course, everyone liked my hat.

I had one awkward moment. A middle-aged woman with shocking blonde hair walked up and opened her jacket, revealing great, pendulous breasts. She then wrapped her arms tightly around me, as a happy cackle went up and down the sidewalk. I was stuck. I didn’t want to force her arms apart, and she wouldn’t let go. I was saved by another black woman who came up and said, “Stop yo’ playin,’ nigga, or I’ll beat yo’ ass.” I don’t think it would have worked if I had said that.

I realize that not everyone would have enjoyed that commute through the Tenderloin, but I did. Those “niggas” were poor and would always be poor. They were about as down and out as Americans get. But I admired the way they got every possible drop of amusement out of their lives. I was a bit of fun walking through their neighborhood, and they made the most of it—and in a way that made it fun for me, too.

It’s hard to imagine a bunch of whites in quite the same predicament, but I think they would have an angry sense of failure that those blacks did not. They would be surly; these people were cheerful. A long-forbidden stereotype is the happy-go-lucky Negro. Sorry, but that’s what I found in the Tenderloin.

Part of the spontaneity of blacks is the uninhibited way they pay compliments. Once I was walking back to my hotel room after a workout in the gym. My shirt was off and I was glistening. Two black chambermaids coming down the hall eyed me with interest. “Nice!” one of them said softly. I smiled, and the other said, much louder, “Very nice.” No white chambermaid would have said that.

I know women don’t like too much of that sort of thing when it goes the other way, especially when it doesn’t stop with “Baby, you look so fiiiiiiiiiiine.” I’ve heard black men proposition complete strangers in broad daylight on the streets of Washington, and I suppose girls get tired of that. Even so, to an onlooker, there’s something compelling about such guileless spontaneity.

The way blacks speak English is entertaining. A black man once explained to me the difference between “He sick” and “He be sick.” “He sick” is chronic—someone who is bedridden or in a wheelchair—while “He be sick” is a temporary condition like the flu.

I got a dose of creative black rhetoric one day when I fell off my bicycle in Manhattan. I had been going fast, and though I wasn’t injured, I was in a mild state of shock. I sat on the curb to pull myself together, and a black bicycle messenger who had seen me go down stopped to see if I was alright. I told him I was fine, but that I was feeling queer, shaky. “Dass right,” he said. “You go off yo’ wheels; it fucks wi’ yo’ mind. It fucks wi’ yo’mind.” I wouldn’t have put it that way, but he got it exactly right.

Jesse Jackson ran for president in 1984 and 1988 on a campaign of doggerel: “From the outhouse to the white house.” “They got dope in their veins, not hope in their brains.” “From disgrace to amazing grace.” A white candidate with idiotic lines like that would be laughed out of politics; Mr. Jackson carried it off.

Like it or not, slang goes mostly from the ghetto to the mainstream: bling, booty, high five, dead presidents, dissin,’ get down, ho, hottie, player, phat. “Black lives matter” is so limp a white guy must have come up with it.

My observations about blacks aren’t science, but science supports them. According to personality tests, blacks are more gregarious than whites, which is exactly what you would expect. Their IQ profile is more heavily weighted to verbal than to mathematical ability.

And ever since people have done surveys of “self-esteem,” they have been surprised to find that blacks have more of it than whites. This is true for both sexes and at every age. In one study, for example, 60 percent of black high school seniors “agreed” with the statement, “I take a positive attitude toward myself,” while only 31 percent of whites did. (The differences even out some when you include the people who “mostly agreed.” Eighty-eight percent of blacks “agreed or mostly agreed” while 76 percent of whites “agreed or mostly agreed”—but that’s still a significant difference.)

Are blacks just lying about self-esteem? Probably not, judging from statistics on suicide. Whites are 2.5 times as likely as blacks to kill themselves.

Blacks are also more impulsive. Give a black and a white child the choice of one candy bar now and three in 15 minutes, and the black child is more likely to want just one now. (One test found that black children were more likely to delay gratification if a black person rather than a white promised the reward, which was to come three weeks later. They had more trust in a black person, but they were still significantly less likely than whites to wait.)

A follow-up study found that people who were good at waiting as a child not only were still good at it 40 years later but had differences in brain activity from people who can’t wait. They were also thinner, handled stress better, had better friendships, were less likely to be addicts, and had gotten higher SAT scores.

Gregariousness, high self esteem, impulsiveness—I think that pretty much accounts for what made those Tenderloin blacks amusing rather than depressing. Of course, there’s a dark side to uninhibitednesss: the smash-and-grab mentality that puts so many blacks behind bars. But so long as it’s a heartfelt, unexpected compliment rather than an overwhelming compulsion to become the owner of your iPhone, it’s endearing.

At the same time, the self-esteem and suicide-rate findings are a great annoyance to anti-racists. If blacks were knocking themselves off at twice the white rate, it would be rock-solid proof of “racism.” The priests of orthodoxy almost never try to explain why the facts run the other way, so I will.

We know that personality is largely inherited, and each race probably evolved an “average personality,” just as it did an average height and IQ. Groups that evolved in climates where they didn’t have to worry about storing food for the winter could afford to eat one candy bar right away. If they didn’t need to cooperate to bring down big game, maybe they could all afford to think they were big shots.

Whatever the case, for blacks to have higher self-esteem than whites despite lower accomplishments suggest a certain level of delusion—and this is something you often see in blacks. It is striking how often young blacks who attend miserable schools and speak Ebonics tell interviewers they expect to become astronauts or lawyers. You see the same thing when a young black is picked up for a gruesome crime. His mother is adamant that her baby would never do such a thing—despite gang tattoos and a rap sheet as long as your arm.

All this contributes to low suicide rates. If you think highly of yourself and don’t worry about the future you won’t kill yourself. But if you have a lot of ego and impulsiveness you might kill someone else. There is good and bad in all these traits.

One of the great, historic frustrations of liberalism is the failure of blacks to behave like whites, no matter how many role models we set up, laws we pass, racial preferences we hand out, or welfare programs we pay for. Blacks are not going to change, so we have to treat with them as they are. And just as the blacks of the Tenderloin saw me as a source of fun—as a potentially amusing fellow human being—we should make the most of their good qualities.

Jared Taylor is the editor of AmRen.com and author of White Identity.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Blacks 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[Filtered by Reply Thread]
  1. Tips from someone who grew up with blacks, who attended a fifty-percent-black high school, who has dealt with blacks for 40+ years:

    Blacks are:
    –more emotional–quick to anger, quick to laugh;
    –impulsive, deficient in self-control;
    –compelled to act out feelings, to dramatize their emotions;
    –unable to distinguish reality from fantasy;
    –in need of a strong authority to enforce proper behavior.

    In other words, blacks are more like children.

    Keep that in mind when you interact with a black: you’re dealing with a large, strong, potentially unruly and destructive child.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    They need to read this - Erik Rush has the answer http://superstore.wnd.com/Negrophilia-From-Slave-Block-to-Pedestal-Americas-Racial-Obsession-AutographedHardcover
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    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.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/article/what-i-like-about-blacks/#comment-872327
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Jared speaks the truth. I, too, wear nice hats (including a real Panama during the summer) and blacks regularly give me complements. Moreover, in my many years of teaching I always got along splendidly with individual blacks despite my well-known “controversial” views on race. We shared lots of jokes and laughs much to the chagrin of my up tight liberal colleagues. I was also a regular at a local black owned rib joint where much of the black clientele looked like the people whose pictures decorate the post office. My liberal colleagues where terrified to go there despite my assurances that it was totally safe. These were the same “experts” who would insist that black crime resulted from white racism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Penguinchip
    "Compliment". Complement is a different word.
    , @Anonymous
    Excellent piece and excellent response from Bob. This is all true. My experience exactly.

    ps You will never find such unvarnished truth on a liberal website. They are not about truth, they are about comfortable fairytales. The definition of an intelligent person in my opinion is someone who notices things that other people cannot or will not notice. Liberals whole program is that you cannot notice certain things. On liberal organs like NPR, they make a big show about noticing some things (usually silly things), but it is just a camouflage for an over-arching anti-intellectualism.

    Non-Liberal: "that person is insane". Liberal: "You cannot say that! There is at least a .001% chance that he is not insane. Therefore you are to say nothing".
  3. Hey Man don’t you know you are not supposed to talk about this s**t?

    While the rest of us have undergone incremental orchiectomies over the years (see Theodore Dalrymple on Political Correctness), Mr. Taylor has not.
    His AmRen organization is unabashedly pro-wh**te. And why not? After all we do live in the land of the fr** and the home of the br**e.
    Right?
    Our media masters usually describe AmRen as ‘supremacist’ but I would say it is ‘equalicist’. Mr. Taylor simply wants whites…err wh**es to be treated with equality, just like other groups. Mr. Taylor just cannot subscribe to the new tacit amendment to our Constitution, the New Double Standard Amendment that holds that whites should be held to a different standard than all others.

    As far as the Big Lebowski attitude to life discussed in the article I would say it originates when you are young and realize you are bad. A psyche thing, like if you can’t be a great accountant, at least you can be the baddest bad guy on the block. Our media plays into this (Morgan Freeman might be God but hey…’He still bad.’).
    I think it comes from this poem I wrote:

    Where’s my Dad?
    I must be bad!
    So…why try?
    Let’s get high.

    It also pays bennies on the block. Better to be a graduate of four years at Lorton(the old DC prison) than four years at Yale(like Mr. Taylor). You will get far more respect at the Mom and Pop store with Lorton behind you than a four year degree in Philosophy (again like Mr. Taylor).
    Many inner city Blacks live in a different world. It is not as light hearted as the Big Lebowskis’ world (or Mr. Taylor’s portrayal) and sometimes that impulsiveness he discusses can have deadly consequences.

    http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-885209.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Garand
    tombarnes If your assertion is correct, it's a self imposed hardship.
  4. It’s an interesting decision for Ron Unz to add Jared Taylor to his stable of columnists. Great exposure for Taylor to get outside his echo chamber at AmRen. It will be interesting to see how the subject of anti-Semitism is handled since there tends to be about the same level here as there is at Taki’s. It will also be interesting to see how comments are moderated since I’ve had at least a dozen of my comments at AmRen disappeared when I challenged anti-Semites and their typical “blame the Jew” victimology by pointing out the blame for our (ie the West collectively and white America specifically) plight is far more the result of white Christian activism than that of Jews. At AmRen, pointing out that Jews have as much to lose as whites from subsuming western culture into muslim, negro, or mestizo “culture” has been enough to get censored. Likewise, pointing out that America’s (and Europe’s) adoration of the negro predates any major Jewish cultural influence (eg hard to blame the Jews for Reconstruction) has gotten other comments flagged and vanished down the memory hole.

    I used to visit and comment at Taylor’s site pretty often, but gave up due to the crazy amount of censorship. For a guy who publicly claims he’s not anti-Semitic, his comment moderation sure sends a very different message. Of course it’s also possible I offended another sacred cow since I’d usually accompany my argument against the anti-Semites with a rejoinder showing that the blame lies primarily with white Christian (primarily although increasingly with secular) elites. Maybe Taylor is offended that I blame his classmates at Yale far more than some random Jew like Ron Unz or Nicholas Stix?

    Regarding the subject of this essay, I’m not sure I see the point. Is Taylor trying to rehabilitate the negro? Rehabilitate himself by praising the negro? I don’t know anyone really who hates negroes (certainly not like negroes hate whites). Instead, all the whites I know just want to be away from negroes and it’s entirely due to the well known problems of crime, moral turpitude, state dependency, and hostility. That some negroes are wonderful people isn’t in dispute – it’s the totality that matters. And invariably, I find that it is the people who have the most experience among negroes who most want to avoid them. Those who see only the side Taylor represents here, the side the media portrays, are the most ardent negro worshippers and integrationists. So I’m as confused by this essay as I am by AmRen’s censorship of anyone who argues against the Jew-blamers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Remnant
    The AmRen comments section is much less "anti-Semitic" than TakiMag: AmRen is much more assiduous about moderating out "anti-Semitic" comments than pro-Semitic ones.

    I would suspect that comments like yours were moderated out not because your comments were philo-Semitic but because AmRen was anticipating and taking steps to prevent a comment flame war between pro- and anti-Semites.

    As for why Taylor wrote this article, I would think that after 20+ years of being called a "hater", he certainly has some desire to state what is obvious to anyone paying attention, which is that he bears no animous towards individuals of any race. Most people simply are unable to separate racialist views ("I prefer to live among people like myself") from hateful views ("I would like to exterminate all [whatever type of people]."
    , @SFG
    One of the things I've unfortunately realized (as a Mischling, first class) is that there is a heavy Jewish representation to the most vociferous elements of anti-white sentiment. I simply saw it growing up as a form of liberalism that derived from historical reasons, but I do wonder if MacDonald might not have a point with his 'evolutionary group strategy' theory. Basically, a homogeneous society is less open to outsiders, so it's in your interests to make it heterogeneous so you stick out less.

    There's also a feedback loop going on, of course, with quite vicious antisemitism from white nationalists, which leads Jews to get scared and donate to the SPLC and get involved with liberal causes, which enrages WNs even more...

    I don't see a way out.
    , @Jared Taylor
    I am very surprised by this comment. I would be curious to see an example of a comment you left at Amren.com that argued against the view that Jews were "the problem" but was deleted.

    As another commenter has pointed out below, we have little patience with posts that reflexively blame Jews for everything that has gone wrong for whites.
    , @Adam
    I must agree with you here. AmRen is rampant with low key anti-semitism. Taylor pays lip service to the Jews because he wants their donations but those who know him personally will tell you he's no true friend of the Jewish people. The moderating policies of his site reflect that. And let's not forget his friendships with Kevin MacDonald and David Duke.
    , @Mark Green
    Stan- Are you a Zionist activist?

    You sure lie like one.

    This is why I think you're probably Jewish, Stan. Jews generally hate it when whites stake out their own racial/cultural territory. In America, that privilege is reserved for Jews. Jews seek to de-legitimize 'white identity' while they celebrate 'Jewish identity'. And you fit this pattern.

    But there's plenty to blame Jews for, Stan. Plenty. Just ask the Palestinians. Or the Iraqis. Or the Iranians. Or the Lebanese. Or, for that matter, the Americans. (The alert ones, anyway). Jewish Americans (and even Israeli-Americans) have transformed our civilization. Are you kidding?

    Though Jews in Israel advance strict segregation there, Jews here and in Europe promote racial and cultural integration aggressively. And these double standards have served them well. Whites in Europe and America have seen themselves marginalized from their own cultures. Jews on the other hand have risen both economically and culturally in the West.

    At the same time, Israel lives off entrenched double-standards: from nuclear weapons, to it's arrogant license to warmonger, to its policy of systematic ethnic-cleansing, to its US-enabled ability to initiate lethal violence at will and without fear of reprisal since America protects Israel both militarily, economically and diplomatically.

    But Israel is something of a rogue state. To this day, the Jewish State refuses to declare its borders or to allow outside inspection of its nuclear arsenal. These are real double standards, Stan. You deny this?

    As for the 'Muslim question', organized Jewry has played a very definite role in flooding Europe as well as the US with Third World peoples. Some are Muslim, some Christian, and some have an assortment of beliefs and ethnic/racial backgrounds. But few of these new immigrants have much white European ancestry or an organic connection to Europe or white America. That's the key. White culture is in decline and this transformation is no accident. Western civilization is headed.... where? Not where average (white) Europeans and Americans want for it to go. But Jewish cultural influence and Jewish power and Jewish visibility is rising in everywhere. You haven't noticed?

    At the same time, Israel is slowly but inexorably getting rid of its gentiles. Does this interest you, Stan? Jewish DNA matters a lot in Israel. Should whites care about their DNA, too? May they even think about it?

    The racial transformation now underway in Europe and America has made the world safer for Israel as well as international Jewry--despite the wild headlines that emerge when one Jews get shot somewhere00as Jews do very well in mixed societies. They form ethnic-based teams.

    I've got good news for you, Stan: Jews are on a tear. They have achieved extraordinary wealth and power in the West. Today, the case can be made that Jews pretty much manage Washington, Hollywood and have quite a bit to say on Wall Street, too. This translates into vast cultural and political influence. Do you deny this? And what about all these wars? Might there be a Zionist angel here? Better check with AIPAC.

    Jews have been successfully de-Christianizing America and the West the West for decades. You haven't noticed? Better check with your pals at the ACLU.

    Blame Jews? Sure. Blame those responsible. But the responsibility is there. It's undeniable, even world class liars like you cannot deny the obvious, Stan. The Iraq war. The economic war on Iran. The conquest of Libya. The destablization of Syria. Of Palestine. Does this makes me an 'anti-Semite' for saying this?

    Oh my! I feel so ashamed!

    But you, Stan, are the liar.

    As America and Europe become less Christian and less white, nimble minorities like Jews can still form alliances and rise to the top. That's what's happened in the US over the past 50 years. You haven't noticed?

    Israel, meanwhile, is killing Muslims at will (and getting rid of its native Christian population, too) while is pursues its dream of a 'more pure' Jewish state. You deny this? And US taxpayers have been subsidizing this Zionist operation for decades. Why? And the US money to Israel never stops. American aid to Israel is unconditional, Stan. Interesting situation, don't you think?

    What's particularly maddening about Zionist operatives like you, Stan, is how you invariably depict yourself (Jews) as blameless victims in all the conflicts in which you and the world's most important tribe is involved. And that's a lot of conflicts! But activist Jews (and this probably includes you) are not innocent. So quit lying.

    Jews operatives even circulate the defamatory and dishonest term 'anti-Semitism' to describe their foes, claiming that the relatively voiceless people who have genuine disputes with Jews are somehow deranged or even mad. And then the kosher mafia has the audacity to complain about 'censorship'!

    You'd better tread lightly there, Stan. Am Ren barely touches the Jews. I wish they would criticize and excoriate the Jews far more often than they do. But it is Organized Jewry that is the foremost purveyor of (political) censorship in the Western World. Censorship? Jews absolutely rule American mass media. You haven't noticed? Since you're obviously not stupid, Stan, you must simply be dishonest.

    Sorry, but Jews HAVE PLAYED a very heavy role in numerous affairs where lives have been lost and liberty erased. But they often try cover their tacks. And yes, they do successfully impose censorship ('speech codes') and even draft 'hate crime' legislation, 'group libel' laws, as well as criminalize 'denial' of certain unproven political 'facts' involving WWII. This is world class censorship. And woe to the errant politician or artist or intellectual who steps out of line, as their careers are often affected adversely. Muslims don't get any of these protections. Why? The Jewish lobby is far more powerful.

    Does saying this make me 'anti-Semitic'? I hope so! But you'd better stop playing the dying 'anti-Semite' card, Stan. It's becoming worthless.

    OK, we can agree: Jews are not responsible for all the world's ills. But who has made such a ridiculous claim? No one. But organized Jewry has done real damage. And they're still at work. And if they get their way, the US will be involved in another military disaster involving another foe of you-know-who. This is criminal.

    Zionists must accept responsibility when it fits. In the meantime: quit lying.

    , @Anonymous
    You may be over-thinking Mr. Taylor's essay. I don't believe he has a hidden agenda. The man I've met at an AmRen conference is what he says he is, a race realist. He doesn't harbor a secret hatred of blacks; I base that on his articles, videos, essays, speeches. I think you can read the essay and believe exactly what he says, no more no less. He's an exceptionally elegant, intelligent, articulate man who isn't afraid to speak the truth. Some would say brave. Everything he's said in this essay is true. It's as simple as that.
    , @Batterytrain
    I've also had my posts challenged when I had criticized or insulted Asiatics/gooks on Amren and spoke certain unspeakable truths about them. Jared Taylor is an Asia-phile, a culture that is diametrically opposite to that of Western culture and values and which is something I have a big problem with.
  5. @conatus
    Hey Man don’t you know you are not supposed to talk about this s**t?

    While the rest of us have undergone incremental orchiectomies over the years (see Theodore Dalrymple on Political Correctness), Mr. Taylor has not.
    His AmRen organization is unabashedly pro-wh**te. And why not? After all we do live in the land of the fr** and the home of the br**e.
    Right?
    Our media masters usually describe AmRen as ‘supremacist’ but I would say it is ‘equalicist’. Mr. Taylor simply wants whites…err wh**es to be treated with equality, just like other groups. Mr. Taylor just cannot subscribe to the new tacit amendment to our Constitution, the New Double Standard Amendment that holds that whites should be held to a different standard than all others.

    As far as the Big Lebowski attitude to life discussed in the article I would say it originates when you are young and realize you are bad. A psyche thing, like if you can’t be a great accountant, at least you can be the baddest bad guy on the block. Our media plays into this (Morgan Freeman might be God but hey…’He still bad.’).
    I think it comes from this poem I wrote:

    Where’s my Dad?
    I must be bad!
    So…why try?
    Let’s get high.

    It also pays bennies on the block. Better to be a graduate of four years at Lorton(the old DC prison) than four years at Yale(like Mr. Taylor). You will get far more respect at the Mom and Pop store with Lorton behind you than a four year degree in Philosophy (again like Mr. Taylor).
    Many inner city Blacks live in a different world. It is not as light hearted as the Big Lebowskis’ world (or Mr. Taylor’s portrayal) and sometimes that impulsiveness he discusses can have deadly consequences.

    http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-885209.html

    tombarnes If your assertion is correct, it’s a self imposed hardship.

    Read More
  6. “Cheerful spontaneity” is easy when you have a low IQ, an undeveloped frontal lobe and poor future time orientation, and you live in a climate, either natural (tropical Africa) or artificial (welfare state America) where fulfilling your basic needs comes with little difficulty.

    People who live in harsh climates with harsh winters and limited growing seasons can’t afford cheerful spontaneity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hail
    "People who live in harsh climates with harsh winters and limited growing seasons can’t afford cheerful spontaneity."

    Well, it's not an on-off switch, is it. Asians need more, perhaps. Blacks need less, perhaps. Who's in the Goldilocks Zone?
  7. @Stan D Mute
    It's an interesting decision for Ron Unz to add Jared Taylor to his stable of columnists. Great exposure for Taylor to get outside his echo chamber at AmRen. It will be interesting to see how the subject of anti-Semitism is handled since there tends to be about the same level here as there is at Taki's. It will also be interesting to see how comments are moderated since I've had at least a dozen of my comments at AmRen disappeared when I challenged anti-Semites and their typical "blame the Jew" victimology by pointing out the blame for our (ie the West collectively and white America specifically) plight is far more the result of white Christian activism than that of Jews. At AmRen, pointing out that Jews have as much to lose as whites from subsuming western culture into muslim, negro, or mestizo "culture" has been enough to get censored. Likewise, pointing out that America's (and Europe's) adoration of the negro predates any major Jewish cultural influence (eg hard to blame the Jews for Reconstruction) has gotten other comments flagged and vanished down the memory hole.

    I used to visit and comment at Taylor's site pretty often, but gave up due to the crazy amount of censorship. For a guy who publicly claims he's not anti-Semitic, his comment moderation sure sends a very different message. Of course it's also possible I offended another sacred cow since I'd usually accompany my argument against the anti-Semites with a rejoinder showing that the blame lies primarily with white Christian (primarily although increasingly with secular) elites. Maybe Taylor is offended that I blame his classmates at Yale far more than some random Jew like Ron Unz or Nicholas Stix?

    Regarding the subject of this essay, I'm not sure I see the point. Is Taylor trying to rehabilitate the negro? Rehabilitate himself by praising the negro? I don't know anyone really who hates negroes (certainly not like negroes hate whites). Instead, all the whites I know just want to be away from negroes and it's entirely due to the well known problems of crime, moral turpitude, state dependency, and hostility. That some negroes are wonderful people isn't in dispute - it's the totality that matters. And invariably, I find that it is the people who have the most experience among negroes who most want to avoid them. Those who see only the side Taylor represents here, the side the media portrays, are the most ardent negro worshippers and integrationists. So I'm as confused by this essay as I am by AmRen's censorship of anyone who argues against the Jew-blamers.

    The AmRen comments section is much less “anti-Semitic” than TakiMag: AmRen is much more assiduous about moderating out “anti-Semitic” comments than pro-Semitic ones.

    I would suspect that comments like yours were moderated out not because your comments were philo-Semitic but because AmRen was anticipating and taking steps to prevent a comment flame war between pro- and anti-Semites.

    As for why Taylor wrote this article, I would think that after 20+ years of being called a “hater”, he certainly has some desire to state what is obvious to anyone paying attention, which is that he bears no animous towards individuals of any race. Most people simply are unable to separate racialist views (“I prefer to live among people like myself”) from hateful views (“I would like to exterminate all [whatever type of people].”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stan D Mute

    I would suspect that comments like yours were moderated out not because your comments were philo-Semitic but because AmRen was anticipating and taking steps to prevent a comment flame war between pro- and anti-Semites.
     
    That was my first thought as well, but I quickly noticed that virtually every comment thread would have at least one and often many anti-Jew posts. Typically, they'd be pretend coded like "Joos," "chosen," "you know who," etc, but always blatantly anti-Jew. These rarely, if ever, disappear. It gradually became clear to me that a simple, "you can't blame the Jews for this mess" wouldn't get scrubbed, but a more detailed reply chronicling the abolition movement, universal suffrage movement, and overwhelming Christian responsibility for bringing negroes to the New World (and Europe) would immediately go down the memory hole. Likewise, rebuttals to the Jew-haters citing unanimous support for "diversity" in all Christian churches will almost instantly go missing.

    I hung out at AmRen for several years (I may not be the quickest learner..) so this wasn't a one-off. Any serious attempt to rebut the Jew-blamers by demonstrating that our crisis was made by Christians would vanish. Over the years, I had dozens of comments zapped and it was just last year when I saw half a dozen vanish within a week that I called it quits. I've seen the same thing with the CofCC by the way. There is apparently a large contingent of race realists who just wants to blame Jews for everything and refuses to face the elephant in the room. We would be in exactly the same place we are today even if Jews never existed (ie if all believed the "messiah" story). That's a Truth which cannot be stated in a number of places and that pretty well ensures our demise as a people.
  8. @Stan D Mute
    It's an interesting decision for Ron Unz to add Jared Taylor to his stable of columnists. Great exposure for Taylor to get outside his echo chamber at AmRen. It will be interesting to see how the subject of anti-Semitism is handled since there tends to be about the same level here as there is at Taki's. It will also be interesting to see how comments are moderated since I've had at least a dozen of my comments at AmRen disappeared when I challenged anti-Semites and their typical "blame the Jew" victimology by pointing out the blame for our (ie the West collectively and white America specifically) plight is far more the result of white Christian activism than that of Jews. At AmRen, pointing out that Jews have as much to lose as whites from subsuming western culture into muslim, negro, or mestizo "culture" has been enough to get censored. Likewise, pointing out that America's (and Europe's) adoration of the negro predates any major Jewish cultural influence (eg hard to blame the Jews for Reconstruction) has gotten other comments flagged and vanished down the memory hole.

    I used to visit and comment at Taylor's site pretty often, but gave up due to the crazy amount of censorship. For a guy who publicly claims he's not anti-Semitic, his comment moderation sure sends a very different message. Of course it's also possible I offended another sacred cow since I'd usually accompany my argument against the anti-Semites with a rejoinder showing that the blame lies primarily with white Christian (primarily although increasingly with secular) elites. Maybe Taylor is offended that I blame his classmates at Yale far more than some random Jew like Ron Unz or Nicholas Stix?

    Regarding the subject of this essay, I'm not sure I see the point. Is Taylor trying to rehabilitate the negro? Rehabilitate himself by praising the negro? I don't know anyone really who hates negroes (certainly not like negroes hate whites). Instead, all the whites I know just want to be away from negroes and it's entirely due to the well known problems of crime, moral turpitude, state dependency, and hostility. That some negroes are wonderful people isn't in dispute - it's the totality that matters. And invariably, I find that it is the people who have the most experience among negroes who most want to avoid them. Those who see only the side Taylor represents here, the side the media portrays, are the most ardent negro worshippers and integrationists. So I'm as confused by this essay as I am by AmRen's censorship of anyone who argues against the Jew-blamers.

    One of the things I’ve unfortunately realized (as a Mischling, first class) is that there is a heavy Jewish representation to the most vociferous elements of anti-white sentiment. I simply saw it growing up as a form of liberalism that derived from historical reasons, but I do wonder if MacDonald might not have a point with his ‘evolutionary group strategy’ theory. Basically, a homogeneous society is less open to outsiders, so it’s in your interests to make it heterogeneous so you stick out less.

    There’s also a feedback loop going on, of course, with quite vicious antisemitism from white nationalists, which leads Jews to get scared and donate to the SPLC and get involved with liberal causes, which enrages WNs even more…

    I don’t see a way out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stan D Mute

    One of the things I’ve unfortunately realized (as a Mischling, first class) is that there is a heavy Jewish representation to the most vociferous elements of anti-white sentiment
     
    Of course there is! There is a heavy Jewish representation among ALL elite occupations (eg lawyers, doctors, professors, scientists, etc) as well as the chattering class (eg actors, writers, filmmakers, journalists, etc). But how does this fact make them any more (or less) responsible for the anti-white zeitgeist? Do you seriously suggest that white elites weren't gung-ho for bringing negroes to America, emancipation of the negroes, suffrage, and integration of the negroes long before Jews had a significant cultural presence here? Were Jews behind the horror show that was Reconstruction? And Reconstruction was just a sneak peek of what white elites have in mind for us today.

    If anything, WE have infected Jews with the liberal/egalitarian universalist disease. Reform and secular Jews, accounting for the majority of Jews in the West, oppose Israeli nationalist leader Netanyahu. They oppose sterilization of the negroes in Israel, they favor the designed to fail "two state solution", and are responsible for the more than 50% outmarriage rate of Jews in America. There are far more Zionist Christians than there are Zionist Jews. The Jews just happen to be highly visible precisely because of all the qualities we want in our quarter (eg intelligence).

    So OUR problem isn't Jews, it is our own elites. America was 90% white when the 1965 Immigration Act was passed. To suggest that was the "fault" of a minute population group determined to kill off the only people who have EVER defended them is a bit crazy isn't it?
  9. It’s hard to imagine a bunch of whites in quite the same predicament

    ‘Cracker’ comes to mind, as well as trailer trash, White trash … some would hold the term honky is well deserved and of course there are the numerous Blacks who aspire to be Whites and how they’re seen in the Black community:

    “There’s an old saying,”In the days of slavery, there were those slaves who lived on the plantation and there were those slaves that lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master … exactly the way the master intended to have you serve him.

    “It is my personal feeling that plantations exist all over America. If you walk into South Central Los Angeles, into Watts, or you walk into Over-the-Rhine in Cincinnati, you’ll find people who live lives that are as degrading as anything that slavery had ever produced. They live in economic oppression, they live in a disenfranchised way. In the hearts and minds of those people, and millions of others, you’re always looking for hope, and whenever somebody within our tribe, within our group, emerges that has the position of authority and power to make a difference in the way business is done, our expectations run high. Many times, those expectations are not fulfilled. But when such an individual is in the service of those who not only perpetuate the oppression, but sometimes design the way in which it is applied, it then becomes very, very, very, very critical that we raise our voices and be heard” -Harry Belafonte

    And of course the preceding might or might not apply to Obama, depending on one’s racial perspective:

    http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2013/05/03/a-conversation-with-jon-stewart/

    It never were a really ‘Black & White’ world ;)

    Read More
  10. @Remnant
    The AmRen comments section is much less "anti-Semitic" than TakiMag: AmRen is much more assiduous about moderating out "anti-Semitic" comments than pro-Semitic ones.

    I would suspect that comments like yours were moderated out not because your comments were philo-Semitic but because AmRen was anticipating and taking steps to prevent a comment flame war between pro- and anti-Semites.

    As for why Taylor wrote this article, I would think that after 20+ years of being called a "hater", he certainly has some desire to state what is obvious to anyone paying attention, which is that he bears no animous towards individuals of any race. Most people simply are unable to separate racialist views ("I prefer to live among people like myself") from hateful views ("I would like to exterminate all [whatever type of people]."

    I would suspect that comments like yours were moderated out not because your comments were philo-Semitic but because AmRen was anticipating and taking steps to prevent a comment flame war between pro- and anti-Semites.

    That was my first thought as well, but I quickly noticed that virtually every comment thread would have at least one and often many anti-Jew posts. Typically, they’d be pretend coded like “Joos,” “chosen,” “you know who,” etc, but always blatantly anti-Jew. These rarely, if ever, disappear. It gradually became clear to me that a simple, “you can’t blame the Jews for this mess” wouldn’t get scrubbed, but a more detailed reply chronicling the abolition movement, universal suffrage movement, and overwhelming Christian responsibility for bringing negroes to the New World (and Europe) would immediately go down the memory hole. Likewise, rebuttals to the Jew-haters citing unanimous support for “diversity” in all Christian churches will almost instantly go missing.

    I hung out at AmRen for several years (I may not be the quickest learner..) so this wasn’t a one-off. Any serious attempt to rebut the Jew-blamers by demonstrating that our crisis was made by Christians would vanish. Over the years, I had dozens of comments zapped and it was just last year when I saw half a dozen vanish within a week that I called it quits. I’ve seen the same thing with the CofCC by the way. There is apparently a large contingent of race realists who just wants to blame Jews for everything and refuses to face the elephant in the room. We would be in exactly the same place we are today even if Jews never existed (ie if all believed the “messiah” story). That’s a Truth which cannot be stated in a number of places and that pretty well ensures our demise as a people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @razor
    Stan Mute, are you Jared Taylor?

    My experience at Amren is quite the opposite of yours. Mods were quick to delete posters comments who responded to other jewish or heathen comments attacking Christianity and admonishing them to stop "proselytizing" which is a jewish smear term to denigrate those of the Christian Faith.

    An older Jared Taylor interview by Joe Adams has Jared saying this,almost verbatim what you have stated... "People who are constantly talking about and complaining about Jewish influence remind me of blacks who think everything that’s ever gone wrong for blacks in the past or ever will go wrong for blacks in the future is because of white racism. I think that blacks need to be responsible for their successes and their own failure, and I think that the whites have to as well. "

    http://www.tribaltheocrat.com/2011/11/jared-taylor-on-the-jewish-question

    As far as bringing blacks to the New World no one is more responsible for that than jewish slave-traders. It was Sam Francis who was fired from the Washington Times for quoting a verse from the jewish Torah/Old Testament related to jewish slavery.
  11. @SFG
    One of the things I've unfortunately realized (as a Mischling, first class) is that there is a heavy Jewish representation to the most vociferous elements of anti-white sentiment. I simply saw it growing up as a form of liberalism that derived from historical reasons, but I do wonder if MacDonald might not have a point with his 'evolutionary group strategy' theory. Basically, a homogeneous society is less open to outsiders, so it's in your interests to make it heterogeneous so you stick out less.

    There's also a feedback loop going on, of course, with quite vicious antisemitism from white nationalists, which leads Jews to get scared and donate to the SPLC and get involved with liberal causes, which enrages WNs even more...

    I don't see a way out.

    One of the things I’ve unfortunately realized (as a Mischling, first class) is that there is a heavy Jewish representation to the most vociferous elements of anti-white sentiment

    Of course there is! There is a heavy Jewish representation among ALL elite occupations (eg lawyers, doctors, professors, scientists, etc) as well as the chattering class (eg actors, writers, filmmakers, journalists, etc). But how does this fact make them any more (or less) responsible for the anti-white zeitgeist? Do you seriously suggest that white elites weren’t gung-ho for bringing negroes to America, emancipation of the negroes, suffrage, and integration of the negroes long before Jews had a significant cultural presence here? Were Jews behind the horror show that was Reconstruction? And Reconstruction was just a sneak peek of what white elites have in mind for us today.

    If anything, WE have infected Jews with the liberal/egalitarian universalist disease. Reform and secular Jews, accounting for the majority of Jews in the West, oppose Israeli nationalist leader Netanyahu. They oppose sterilization of the negroes in Israel, they favor the designed to fail “two state solution”, and are responsible for the more than 50% outmarriage rate of Jews in America. There are far more Zionist Christians than there are Zionist Jews. The Jews just happen to be highly visible precisely because of all the qualities we want in our quarter (eg intelligence).

    So OUR problem isn’t Jews, it is our own elites. America was 90% white when the 1965 Immigration Act was passed. To suggest that was the “fault” of a minute population group determined to kill off the only people who have EVER defended them is a bit crazy isn’t it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Remnant
    Reposting as a "reply" to Stan Mute:

    While I have not done a systematic study of the AmRen comments section, I have to disagree with you. In fact, my sense is just the opposite: when a comment thread shows a comment as “deleted by moderator” but leaves the responses to that deleted comment, I find that it is apparent that the deleted comment was “anti-Semitic”.

    Taylor’s views on commenting are pretty reasonable and middle-of-the-road: He stands for freedom of expression but he would also like things to be civil and not hateful. A quote from an interview with him in American Spectator: “I wish our commenters were better behaved. I agree that they are sometimes mean-spirited, and I wish nothing ever appeared on the site that was mean-spirited. On the other hand, I don’t like censorship, and deleting comments is a kind of censorship. This is a dilemma faced by all sites that permit commenting.” (http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/04/every_man_his_own_commissar_jared_taylor_and_the_politics_of_race.html#ixzz3Rhr2UlV4)

    As for Taylor’s take on Jews, his views are a matter of both public record and evident from his actions. Again in his own words from two interviews:

    “AR‘s position on Jews is well-known: Jews have always been full participants in the work of race realism and have taken prominent roles in almost all of our events.” (http://takimag.com/article/noble_lies_are_for_children_a_qa_with_jared_taylor/print#ixzz3RhrcTM1I)

    “Racially conscious whites tend to be suspicious of Jews for two reasons. First, Jews have been prominent in the effort to demonize any sense of white identity. Second, Zionist Jews support an ethnostate for Jews — Israel — while they generally promote diversity for America and Europe. This is annoying, but understandable for historical reasons.” (From the same American Spectator interview quoted above.)

    I would not facilely accuse AmRen (i.e. Taylor) of anti-Semitism, as few people in the movement have been more thoughtful and circumspect on the issue than Taylor. Why would he continue to publish Jews and feature them at AmRen conferences only to play games on the issue in the comments? Taylor most likely is simply following the policy articulated above: trying to allow freedom of expression but moderating in order to avoid tangential, unhelpful and inflammatory commenting. Sometimes this may result in deleting “anti-Semitic” and sometimes philo-Semitic comments.
  12. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    saying “half-asian” should require a qualification, i.e “half-white half-Asian”. white shouldn’t be the default.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Juggernaut3000
    White should also be capitalized in reference to the White race.

    Notice in this line in the article, "Asian, " "Muslim" and "Hispanic" are capitalized but not "White."

    "I have written rude things about whites, Hispanics, Asians, and Muslims"

    Not capitalizing "White" in reference to White people, when other races are capitalized is insulting and degrading.
    , @Anonymous
    In Asia they are called "half-White." It makes perfect sense that if the majority of people within a given area are X then when referring to a person, X will be implied. In the United States Asian is the distinguishing characteristic and Caucasian is the ordinary characteristic. In China, Caucasian is the distinguishing characteristic.

    So in most of the United States and amongst culturally Western people, white IS the default, by default. That isn't racist, it's simply correct.

    We could play the game and dance around everyone's fragile sensibilities, but once that gets started where does it stop? Some people are already talking about scores of different genders, most of which by your logic will be offended by referring to someone as either male or female by default. Worrying yourself about the majority being the majority is a futile activity.

  13. @Stan D Mute
    It's an interesting decision for Ron Unz to add Jared Taylor to his stable of columnists. Great exposure for Taylor to get outside his echo chamber at AmRen. It will be interesting to see how the subject of anti-Semitism is handled since there tends to be about the same level here as there is at Taki's. It will also be interesting to see how comments are moderated since I've had at least a dozen of my comments at AmRen disappeared when I challenged anti-Semites and their typical "blame the Jew" victimology by pointing out the blame for our (ie the West collectively and white America specifically) plight is far more the result of white Christian activism than that of Jews. At AmRen, pointing out that Jews have as much to lose as whites from subsuming western culture into muslim, negro, or mestizo "culture" has been enough to get censored. Likewise, pointing out that America's (and Europe's) adoration of the negro predates any major Jewish cultural influence (eg hard to blame the Jews for Reconstruction) has gotten other comments flagged and vanished down the memory hole.

    I used to visit and comment at Taylor's site pretty often, but gave up due to the crazy amount of censorship. For a guy who publicly claims he's not anti-Semitic, his comment moderation sure sends a very different message. Of course it's also possible I offended another sacred cow since I'd usually accompany my argument against the anti-Semites with a rejoinder showing that the blame lies primarily with white Christian (primarily although increasingly with secular) elites. Maybe Taylor is offended that I blame his classmates at Yale far more than some random Jew like Ron Unz or Nicholas Stix?

    Regarding the subject of this essay, I'm not sure I see the point. Is Taylor trying to rehabilitate the negro? Rehabilitate himself by praising the negro? I don't know anyone really who hates negroes (certainly not like negroes hate whites). Instead, all the whites I know just want to be away from negroes and it's entirely due to the well known problems of crime, moral turpitude, state dependency, and hostility. That some negroes are wonderful people isn't in dispute - it's the totality that matters. And invariably, I find that it is the people who have the most experience among negroes who most want to avoid them. Those who see only the side Taylor represents here, the side the media portrays, are the most ardent negro worshippers and integrationists. So I'm as confused by this essay as I am by AmRen's censorship of anyone who argues against the Jew-blamers.

    I am very surprised by this comment. I would be curious to see an example of a comment you left at Amren.com that argued against the view that Jews were “the problem” but was deleted.

    As another commenter has pointed out below, we have little patience with posts that reflexively blame Jews for everything that has gone wrong for whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @silviosilver

    I am very surprised by this comment. I would be curious to see an example of a comment you left at Amren.com that argued against the view that Jews were “the problem” but was deleted.

    As another commenter has pointed out below, we have little patience with posts that reflexively blame Jews for everything that has gone wrong for whites.
     

    Notice the language Taylor uses here.

    "the problem"

    "blame Jews for everything"

    Presumably unless Jews really are "the" problem or to blame for "everything" they cannot be criticized at all, which is like living in a society that only has one crime: murder. Then no matter how horrendously one person mistreats another short of causing death, one can always say, "What are you complaining about? It's not as if he murdered somebody."

    In reality, the claim is that Jewish influence is a problem, that it is to blame for some things, and that therefore Jews can be criticized for those things.

    Unless one is willing to admit that Jewish influence is a problem then Jews can happily continue to kick white gentiles in the head every day, just as they have been doing for at least the past fifty years, safe in the knowledge that white gentiles will do no more than smile meekly and invite more kicks in the head.

    , @Stan D Mute
    I could show you a dozen if Disqus hasn't archived them. I don't know how long Disqus retains comments that have been deleted on the site where originally posted.

    There has been a short but parallel discussion on @countenance's blog that I think really goes to the heart of this issue. The link is here: https://countenance.wordpress.com/2015/02/11/edgy-and-on-edge/#comments

    Note particularly DJF's comments. Note too other comments in this thread at Unz - it's no great secret that your site hosts a virulent strain of anti-semitism occasionally veiled by terms like "you know who" or "those we aren't allowed to name here."

    If, as you claim, you want to erase the division between Jews and white Western interests generally, a good start would be to notice what elite Jews are doing in Israel is the same as what elite whites are doing in America and Europe. DJF cites, at length, elite Jews pushing the multi-culti agenda on Israel. It's clear then the problem isn't one of Jew vs Christian (although the tens of millions of Zionist Christians should have made that abundantly clear already), but one of elite betrayal of their heritage generally. Your policy has been to make a general statement, "I like Jews," and then ignore the subject while your comment threads are rife with Jew-blaming. Show us your sincerity by addressing this head-on.
    , @Stan D Mute

    After a lifetime of studying the Jew haters, I think it's really all down to childish jealousy. It's no different from the negroes' hate for whites. One hates what he cannot ever attain. Especially so if he who has attained it is "the other."
     
    Apparently Disqus retains comments deleted by moderators for quite some time. Above is one such comment deleted by AmRen in reply to the Jew-haters.

    Great point! Just look at the $PLC. Those lousy scum are the absolute worst of the worst. There isn't a more evil organization in America. That Morris Dees is head of the Evil Empire.
    Oops. Dee$ is Unitarian. Dang it. A Southern Christian man from a farming family is the most evil man in America! Dadgummit.
    Sorry chief, but we need to do a whole lot more pruning of the tree than just "the Jews". Just a ballpark guess, I'd say about 40% of whites overall are infected and probably 10-15% are incurable. And the rest will have to be watched closely forever.

     

    And another. Actually there are quite a lot of them. How many would you like me to post here? Here's just one more for now. Maybe you were opposed to commenting negatively about the SPLC rather than my arguing against the Jew-haters who've set up shop on your site?

    That's just silly. Name one country that's come to a good end when Romans have run it. Or when Spartans have run it. Or Carthaginians have run it.
    Or, better yet, name one country that's come to a good end when it has engaged in silly feuds over mythology. "My Zeus is tougher than your Odin!" "Oh yeah? Well my Thor can kick your Mars' butt any day!" "You're Prussian? I hate Prussians!" "Die French scum!"
    Good grief. We are on the verge of being subsumed by a tidal wave of Mesoamerican Indians, we are daily savaged by Africans, and you want to pick fights with white neurosurgeons and podiatrists because of a two thousand year old book.
    Yes! There are jewish leftists. Of course there are. Leftism at its upper echelons is a disease afflicting intellectuals. There are many very smart Jews. But there are many many more very smart whites who believe the same marxist evil nonsense. Should we perhaps just purge everyone with a high IQ who has this disease? You'd have us excise maybe 10% of the Marxists and then what? Have Morris Dees for President
     
    ?
    , @Anonymous
    I have to agree with Stan D Mute. I used to think that AR was actually very fair about the question of Jews (as I know Jared is, individually); however, even very recently on your article about drug arrests, some of my comments (fairly benign, in my opinion) that were critical of the "blame the Jews" mentality were deleted, while some positively ignorant replies to said comments were left visible. I'm not sure what kind of oversight or moderation process there is for comments at AR, but I suspect the person(s) with administrative powers over the comments is/are not in full agreement with Jared on the question of the relationship between Jews and gentile whites.

    Meanwhile, I think this article here was excellent and I can agree with just about everything in it. I've often characterized myself to friends as being something of a racist (based on how the term is commonly understood nowadays), but by no means a malicious racist. Some people seem to have a difficult time disentangling the two concepts, but to me there is absolutely no inconsistency whatsoever.

  14. Good article. I’ve been a fan of Mr. Taylor’s since the late 1990s, though I don’t agree with him on everything.

    I do think the article gets a little shaky when it moves from personal anecdote to science (time-value experiments, speculative sociobiology); the findings, or at least their interpretations, are disputed. But the most unfortunate thing about the article is that it doesn’t include a photo of Mr. Taylor in his Panama hat.

    Read More
  15. Sir, as an African-American who is on this site daily and frequented Amren, and even “trolled” for a few years, before the Commie policies started, I want to thank you for your attempt at civillity here.

    I am sure that it is difficult to be the smart, well-respected-within-his-own-circle, family-minded, “high-IQ”, successful white man, who feels that he has done nothing wrong, yet still has to deal with the constant “racist ” criticism. He probably wears upon one who feels that he is telling the truth…and perplexes one greatly, as to why others in his cohort do not feel the same way.

    With that being said, My Good Man, there is some validity to the “old dogs, new tricks” axiom; so for your own reputation, that of the site, and internaitonal caucasoid-afro relations, PLEASE do not write another “complimentary” article. Just stick to who, and what you are, and everything will be fine. You will still get to heaven, my friend.

    I can tell you that I literally (not metaphorically) was four paragraphs into this article before I was convinced that it was not sarcasm. A staffwriter from The Onion, given the assignment of writing a “complimentary” article from a white “racist” would have come up with something similar. The entire thing reads like that old joke; “Bob, I don’t care what everyone else in you life says about you. I think you’re a good guy!”

    And as an aside, as you can tell from the comments, the white guys on the site now have the fact that you’re become an “N-lover” (in addition to being a Kike lover/hater/ Sinophile-ass kisser, depending upon which certified Mensa genius is holding the microphone).

    So, in summary, Mr. Taylor; you’ve made it 63 good and fruitful years with the basic world view that Africans are “disposable dogs, fortunate to be allowed in our presence.” An article that clarifies your opinion that “well, you know guys, some are rather sweet, and well behaved toy poodles” as well-intended as may have been, can only be taken as a backward step.

    Good luck to you, Sir.

    -Truth

    (KKM)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bernie
    I wonder if Cornel West, Barack Obama, Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton would ever write an article about what they like about white people.

    My guess is no.

    This is a big difference between white racialists and black racialists.
    , @FireForEffect
    I was not pro-white when I was growing up, in spite of numerous violent assaults and threats of murder by black adults. Only after the noise grew to gale force, did I begin to search for others who had similar experiences. I bought into the $plc line; hook, line and sinker until the EVIDENCE of daily life overwhelmed the propaganda. I have always been a nerd and have spent a lot of time thinking, collecting facts and pertinent historical events. Jared Taylor is a calm voice in a storm of lies, deceit and perfidy. Your comments are fairly coherent for an admitted $plc troll, but still devoid of truthful or useful content. Good luck hanging out with the Onion and probably Salon and Tim Wise types. They will betray you and do you more damage than I could ever conceive, if I had any wish to do you harm, and I don't.
    , @Leon Haller
    Funny, now I can see your point. But I had a different experience. I read the piece with pleasure and thought Mr. Taylor was being perfectly honest. "Old-school" whites do think like this. My grandparents were fine Christians who did not hate blacks, or anyone else (and they were even inordinately popular with the small number of Jews in their hometown). But they recognized that blacks and whites were not alike, no matter how often embarrassingly self-brainwashed whites (and, yes, often Jews) might try to convince otherwise. Taylor writes and thinks exactly like a well-educated and normal white man from about 3/4 of a century ago. I find this very refreshing.

    My only quibble with Taylor is that he never quite spells out what we ought to do about the unstable racial situation in the US. My personal belief is that the survival of the white race is more important than just exposing liberal egalitarianism for the buffoonish ideology it is. We will not make it as free men and a free race (ie, one which can determine its own collective destiny) through this century unless we take a much tougher, much harsher course of action. We don't need to become Nazis, but Ivy League political incorrectness circa the 1920s is not going to preserve us, either.
    , @BlueSonicStreak
    Gee, "Truth," it took you four entire paragraphs to realize Mr. Taylor was serious? Funny, I went into this article expecting sarcasm too, but it only took me to the top of the second paragraph to realize he was sincere.

    What should we take from this? That you have a low IQ? Or that you're just unable to cop to the "truth," handle notwithstanding? Are you so unable to recognize how accurate a description this is? If you took out all mentions of race and replaced blacks in this article with "People X," I'm sure most of us would still immediately know it was about black people.

    I'm sure that if white people of my generation (Millennials) wrote up a description of black people, it would not sound nearly so eloquent as this. And there is something about his attitude which reads as quaint. But the general thrust would be the same.
  16. @Stan D Mute
    It's an interesting decision for Ron Unz to add Jared Taylor to his stable of columnists. Great exposure for Taylor to get outside his echo chamber at AmRen. It will be interesting to see how the subject of anti-Semitism is handled since there tends to be about the same level here as there is at Taki's. It will also be interesting to see how comments are moderated since I've had at least a dozen of my comments at AmRen disappeared when I challenged anti-Semites and their typical "blame the Jew" victimology by pointing out the blame for our (ie the West collectively and white America specifically) plight is far more the result of white Christian activism than that of Jews. At AmRen, pointing out that Jews have as much to lose as whites from subsuming western culture into muslim, negro, or mestizo "culture" has been enough to get censored. Likewise, pointing out that America's (and Europe's) adoration of the negro predates any major Jewish cultural influence (eg hard to blame the Jews for Reconstruction) has gotten other comments flagged and vanished down the memory hole.

    I used to visit and comment at Taylor's site pretty often, but gave up due to the crazy amount of censorship. For a guy who publicly claims he's not anti-Semitic, his comment moderation sure sends a very different message. Of course it's also possible I offended another sacred cow since I'd usually accompany my argument against the anti-Semites with a rejoinder showing that the blame lies primarily with white Christian (primarily although increasingly with secular) elites. Maybe Taylor is offended that I blame his classmates at Yale far more than some random Jew like Ron Unz or Nicholas Stix?

    Regarding the subject of this essay, I'm not sure I see the point. Is Taylor trying to rehabilitate the negro? Rehabilitate himself by praising the negro? I don't know anyone really who hates negroes (certainly not like negroes hate whites). Instead, all the whites I know just want to be away from negroes and it's entirely due to the well known problems of crime, moral turpitude, state dependency, and hostility. That some negroes are wonderful people isn't in dispute - it's the totality that matters. And invariably, I find that it is the people who have the most experience among negroes who most want to avoid them. Those who see only the side Taylor represents here, the side the media portrays, are the most ardent negro worshippers and integrationists. So I'm as confused by this essay as I am by AmRen's censorship of anyone who argues against the Jew-blamers.

    I must agree with you here. AmRen is rampant with low key anti-semitism. Taylor pays lip service to the Jews because he wants their donations but those who know him personally will tell you he’s no true friend of the Jewish people. The moderating policies of his site reflect that. And let’s not forget his friendships with Kevin MacDonald and David Duke.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Remnant
    Again, I have to dissent strongly from this comment.

    Why should you impute to Taylor the views expressed by any given commentator, or any set of commentators? Taylor is trying to take a light hand to comment moderation, favoring freedom of expression wherever possible. Why do you assume Taylor agrees with every commentator?

    And on the question of his associations, again the reasoning here is quite faulty: You are assuming that everyone follow a "no friends to the right" policy. Why was it acceptable, for example, for William F. Buckley to be friends with Norman Mailer, Gore Vidal and other leftists? Does that not "impugn" Buckley's bona fides? What a barren and unsympathetic attitude. Why must Taylor abjure friendships with people who have views that society deems unacceptable? Taylor is also friends with numerous Jews, as even a cursory perusal through his publishing and associative history would show.

    I suspect that Taylor has seen enough people thrown under the bus for having the wrong views: Sobran, Buchanan, Derbyshire, Richwine, etc., and even obviously he himself. So, as a matter of principle, I imagine he refuses to reject friends and associations simply because the friend or associate (not Taylor himself) holds views that society deems unacceptable. If they are not violent or proponents of violence (neither MacDonald nor Duke is), why should he refuse to associate with them? Do you only have friendships with those with whom you agree?
    , @Anonymous
    So every white activist must put the interests of Jews above those of white people? You apparently think Taylor cannot be friends with anyone who is critical of Jews, even though they may agree on every other issue. What are you some kind of Jewish supremacist?
    , @B.A
    I don't think he is friendly with Duke or MacDonald. As far as the antisemitism and censorship at amren go, the antisemitic comments are probably very rarely deleted considering the amount of them in the comment section, and there are plenty of pro Jewish commenters. JT is a personal hero of mine, so whatever he writes regardless of the subject, I will read it. Who knew that underneath those smooth suits Mr. Taylor was hiding the body of a Greek God or that he wore a fedora.
  17. While I have not done a systematic study of the AmRen comments section, I have to disagree with you. In fact, my sense is just the opposite: when a comment thread shows a comment as “deleted by moderator” but leaves the responses to that deleted comment, I find that it is apparent that the deleted comment was “anti-Semitic”.

    Taylor’s views on commenting are pretty reasonable and middle-of-the-road: He stands for freedom of expression but he would also like things to be civil and not hateful. A quote from an interview with him in American Spectator: “I wish our commenters were better behaved. I agree that they are sometimes mean-spirited, and I wish nothing ever appeared on the site that was mean-spirited. On the other hand, I don’t like censorship, and deleting comments is a kind of censorship. This is a dilemma faced by all sites that permit commenting.” (http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/04/every_man_his_own_commissar_jared_taylor_and_the_politics_of_race.html#ixzz3Rhr2UlV4)

    As for Taylor’s take on Jews, his views are a matter of both public record and evident from his actions. Again in his own words from two interviews:

    “AR‘s position on Jews is well-known: Jews have always been full participants in the work of race realism and have taken prominent roles in almost all of our events.” (http://takimag.com/article/noble_lies_are_for_children_a_qa_with_jared_taylor/print#ixzz3RhrcTM1I)

    “Racially conscious whites tend to be suspicious of Jews for two reasons. First, Jews have been prominent in the effort to demonize any sense of white identity. Second, Zionist Jews support an ethnostate for Jews — Israel — while they generally promote diversity for America and Europe. This is annoying, but understandable for historical reasons.” (From the same American Spectator interview quoted above.)

    I would not facilely accuse AmRen (i.e. Taylor) of anti-Semitism, as few people in the movement have been more thoughtful and circumspect on the issue than Taylor. Why would he continue to publish Jews and feature them at AmRen conferences only to play games on the issue in the comments? Taylor most likely is simply following the policy articulated above: trying to allow freedom of expression but moderating in order to avoid tangential, unhelpful and inflammatory commenting. Sometimes this may result in deleting “anti-Semitic” and sometimes philo-Semitic comments.

    Read More
  18. @Stan D Mute

    One of the things I’ve unfortunately realized (as a Mischling, first class) is that there is a heavy Jewish representation to the most vociferous elements of anti-white sentiment
     
    Of course there is! There is a heavy Jewish representation among ALL elite occupations (eg lawyers, doctors, professors, scientists, etc) as well as the chattering class (eg actors, writers, filmmakers, journalists, etc). But how does this fact make them any more (or less) responsible for the anti-white zeitgeist? Do you seriously suggest that white elites weren't gung-ho for bringing negroes to America, emancipation of the negroes, suffrage, and integration of the negroes long before Jews had a significant cultural presence here? Were Jews behind the horror show that was Reconstruction? And Reconstruction was just a sneak peek of what white elites have in mind for us today.

    If anything, WE have infected Jews with the liberal/egalitarian universalist disease. Reform and secular Jews, accounting for the majority of Jews in the West, oppose Israeli nationalist leader Netanyahu. They oppose sterilization of the negroes in Israel, they favor the designed to fail "two state solution", and are responsible for the more than 50% outmarriage rate of Jews in America. There are far more Zionist Christians than there are Zionist Jews. The Jews just happen to be highly visible precisely because of all the qualities we want in our quarter (eg intelligence).

    So OUR problem isn't Jews, it is our own elites. America was 90% white when the 1965 Immigration Act was passed. To suggest that was the "fault" of a minute population group determined to kill off the only people who have EVER defended them is a bit crazy isn't it?

    Reposting as a “reply” to Stan Mute:

    While I have not done a systematic study of the AmRen comments section, I have to disagree with you. In fact, my sense is just the opposite: when a comment thread shows a comment as “deleted by moderator” but leaves the responses to that deleted comment, I find that it is apparent that the deleted comment was “anti-Semitic”.

    Taylor’s views on commenting are pretty reasonable and middle-of-the-road: He stands for freedom of expression but he would also like things to be civil and not hateful. A quote from an interview with him in American Spectator: “I wish our commenters were better behaved. I agree that they are sometimes mean-spirited, and I wish nothing ever appeared on the site that was mean-spirited. On the other hand, I don’t like censorship, and deleting comments is a kind of censorship. This is a dilemma faced by all sites that permit commenting.” (http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/04/every_man_his_own_commissar_jared_taylor_and_the_politics_of_race.html#ixzz3Rhr2UlV4)

    As for Taylor’s take on Jews, his views are a matter of both public record and evident from his actions. Again in his own words from two interviews:

    “AR‘s position on Jews is well-known: Jews have always been full participants in the work of race realism and have taken prominent roles in almost all of our events.” (http://takimag.com/article/noble_lies_are_for_children_a_qa_with_jared_taylor/print#ixzz3RhrcTM1I)

    “Racially conscious whites tend to be suspicious of Jews for two reasons. First, Jews have been prominent in the effort to demonize any sense of white identity. Second, Zionist Jews support an ethnostate for Jews — Israel — while they generally promote diversity for America and Europe. This is annoying, but understandable for historical reasons.” (From the same American Spectator interview quoted above.)

    I would not facilely accuse AmRen (i.e. Taylor) of anti-Semitism, as few people in the movement have been more thoughtful and circumspect on the issue than Taylor. Why would he continue to publish Jews and feature them at AmRen conferences only to play games on the issue in the comments? Taylor most likely is simply following the policy articulated above: trying to allow freedom of expression but moderating in order to avoid tangential, unhelpful and inflammatory commenting. Sometimes this may result in deleting “anti-Semitic” and sometimes philo-Semitic comments.

    Read More
  19. @Adam
    I must agree with you here. AmRen is rampant with low key anti-semitism. Taylor pays lip service to the Jews because he wants their donations but those who know him personally will tell you he's no true friend of the Jewish people. The moderating policies of his site reflect that. And let's not forget his friendships with Kevin MacDonald and David Duke.

    Again, I have to dissent strongly from this comment.

    Why should you impute to Taylor the views expressed by any given commentator, or any set of commentators? Taylor is trying to take a light hand to comment moderation, favoring freedom of expression wherever possible. Why do you assume Taylor agrees with every commentator?

    And on the question of his associations, again the reasoning here is quite faulty: You are assuming that everyone follow a “no friends to the right” policy. Why was it acceptable, for example, for William F. Buckley to be friends with Norman Mailer, Gore Vidal and other leftists? Does that not “impugn” Buckley’s bona fides? What a barren and unsympathetic attitude. Why must Taylor abjure friendships with people who have views that society deems unacceptable? Taylor is also friends with numerous Jews, as even a cursory perusal through his publishing and associative history would show.

    I suspect that Taylor has seen enough people thrown under the bus for having the wrong views: Sobran, Buchanan, Derbyshire, Richwine, etc., and even obviously he himself. So, as a matter of principle, I imagine he refuses to reject friends and associations simply because the friend or associate (not Taylor himself) holds views that society deems unacceptable. If they are not violent or proponents of violence (neither MacDonald nor Duke is), why should he refuse to associate with them? Do you only have friendships with those with whom you agree?

    Read More
  20. @Truth
    Sir, as an African-American who is on this site daily and frequented Amren, and even "trolled" for a few years, before the Commie policies started, I want to thank you for your attempt at civillity here.

    I am sure that it is difficult to be the smart, well-respected-within-his-own-circle, family-minded, "high-IQ", successful white man, who feels that he has done nothing wrong, yet still has to deal with the constant "racist " criticism. He probably wears upon one who feels that he is telling the truth...and perplexes one greatly, as to why others in his cohort do not feel the same way.

    With that being said, My Good Man, there is some validity to the "old dogs, new tricks" axiom; so for your own reputation, that of the site, and internaitonal caucasoid-afro relations, PLEASE do not write another "complimentary" article. Just stick to who, and what you are, and everything will be fine. You will still get to heaven, my friend.

    I can tell you that I literally (not metaphorically) was four paragraphs into this article before I was convinced that it was not sarcasm. A staffwriter from The Onion, given the assignment of writing a "complimentary" article from a white "racist" would have come up with something similar. The entire thing reads like that old joke; "Bob, I don't care what everyone else in you life says about you. I think you're a good guy!"

    And as an aside, as you can tell from the comments, the white guys on the site now have the fact that you're become an "N-lover" (in addition to being a Kike lover/hater/ Sinophile-ass kisser, depending upon which certified Mensa genius is holding the microphone).

    So, in summary, Mr. Taylor; you've made it 63 good and fruitful years with the basic world view that Africans are "disposable dogs, fortunate to be allowed in our presence." An article that clarifies your opinion that "well, you know guys, some are rather sweet, and well behaved toy poodles" as well-intended as may have been, can only be taken as a backward step.

    Good luck to you, Sir.

    -Truth

    (KKM)

    I wonder if Cornel West, Barack Obama, Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton would ever write an article about what they like about white people.

    My guess is no.

    This is a big difference between white racialists and black racialists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    An Ivy league professor, a quasi-preacher media personality, and the President of the US; yes, lots of commonality there.

    You see, that's just what you don't get; what black person would put Jimmy Swaggart, George H.W. Bush and Richard Feynman in the same sentence and wonder why they aren't doing the same thing?

    Do yourself a favor and think about that, and why you did it.

    , @Reg Cæsar


    I wonder if Cornel West, Barack Obama, Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton would ever write an article about what they like about white people.

     

    Why would Barack Obama? Has he had any meaningful relationship with a sane white person his entire life?
  21. @countenance
    "Cheerful spontaneity" is easy when you have a low IQ, an undeveloped frontal lobe and poor future time orientation, and you live in a climate, either natural (tropical Africa) or artificial (welfare state America) where fulfilling your basic needs comes with little difficulty.

    People who live in harsh climates with harsh winters and limited growing seasons can't afford cheerful spontaneity.

    People who live in harsh climates with harsh winters and limited growing seasons can’t afford cheerful spontaneity.

    Well, it’s not an on-off switch, is it. Asians need more, perhaps. Blacks need less, perhaps. Who’s in the Goldilocks Zone?

    Read More
  22. Along the lines of racial differences and things thereof to appreciate, I would add music. There’s so much more more at work than IQ among racial groups. Blacks are very accomplished musically, both creating and performing, and in particular singing. I recently argued to some friends that, at this point, Asians, IQ notwithstanding, are so far behind blacks musically at this point that blacks could stop creating music now, we could wait a million years, and Asians still wouldn’t be anywhere close. Asians excel at understanding, appreciating, and performing European music, but they have no creative bone. Not even the Japanese are musically creative, although, unlike Asians generally, they are creative in many other ways.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dipwill
    "I recently argued to some friends that, at this point, Asians, IQ notwithstanding, are so far behind blacks musically at this point that blacks could stop creating music now, we could wait a million years, and Asians still wouldn’t be anywhere close. Asians excel at understanding, appreciating, and performing European music, but they have no creative bone. Not even the Japanese are musically creative, although, unlike Asians generally, they are creative in many other ways."

    You have absolutely no clue about japanese music. It is vast, remarkably diverse, and has many talented, influential artists in just about every genre imaginable. If you want to talk about creativity, look no further than their work in the experiment and avant-garde genres, which showcases some of the most eclectic, unique music out there. I'm not as familiar with korean or chinese music, but you could barely be more off the mark with japan.
  23. @Bernie
    I wonder if Cornel West, Barack Obama, Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton would ever write an article about what they like about white people.

    My guess is no.

    This is a big difference between white racialists and black racialists.

    An Ivy league professor, a quasi-preacher media personality, and the President of the US; yes, lots of commonality there.

    You see, that’s just what you don’t get; what black person would put Jimmy Swaggart, George H.W. Bush and Richard Feynman in the same sentence and wonder why they aren’t doing the same thing?

    Do yourself a favor and think about that, and why you did it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    There is indeed commonality among all the blacks listed. All are racialists to a man.
    , @P
    Cornel West, Barack Obama, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton are all "professional blacks". They owe their careers to their adept exploiting of America's racial anxieties. If they were white, no one would have heard of them. Taylor is a "race man", just like them, but in today's America being a "professional white" is a much less attractive career choice than the black equivalent.
    , @jgeard
    "An Ivy league professor, a quasi-preacher media personality, and the President of the US; yes, lots of commonality there."

    The names he mentioned are all in politics, assuming to support black interests.

    "Do yourself a favor and think about that, and why you did it."

    That is entirely on you.
  24. @Truth
    Sir, as an African-American who is on this site daily and frequented Amren, and even "trolled" for a few years, before the Commie policies started, I want to thank you for your attempt at civillity here.

    I am sure that it is difficult to be the smart, well-respected-within-his-own-circle, family-minded, "high-IQ", successful white man, who feels that he has done nothing wrong, yet still has to deal with the constant "racist " criticism. He probably wears upon one who feels that he is telling the truth...and perplexes one greatly, as to why others in his cohort do not feel the same way.

    With that being said, My Good Man, there is some validity to the "old dogs, new tricks" axiom; so for your own reputation, that of the site, and internaitonal caucasoid-afro relations, PLEASE do not write another "complimentary" article. Just stick to who, and what you are, and everything will be fine. You will still get to heaven, my friend.

    I can tell you that I literally (not metaphorically) was four paragraphs into this article before I was convinced that it was not sarcasm. A staffwriter from The Onion, given the assignment of writing a "complimentary" article from a white "racist" would have come up with something similar. The entire thing reads like that old joke; "Bob, I don't care what everyone else in you life says about you. I think you're a good guy!"

    And as an aside, as you can tell from the comments, the white guys on the site now have the fact that you're become an "N-lover" (in addition to being a Kike lover/hater/ Sinophile-ass kisser, depending upon which certified Mensa genius is holding the microphone).

    So, in summary, Mr. Taylor; you've made it 63 good and fruitful years with the basic world view that Africans are "disposable dogs, fortunate to be allowed in our presence." An article that clarifies your opinion that "well, you know guys, some are rather sweet, and well behaved toy poodles" as well-intended as may have been, can only be taken as a backward step.

    Good luck to you, Sir.

    -Truth

    (KKM)

    I was not pro-white when I was growing up, in spite of numerous violent assaults and threats of murder by black adults. Only after the noise grew to gale force, did I begin to search for others who had similar experiences. I bought into the $plc line; hook, line and sinker until the EVIDENCE of daily life overwhelmed the propaganda. I have always been a nerd and have spent a lot of time thinking, collecting facts and pertinent historical events. Jared Taylor is a calm voice in a storm of lies, deceit and perfidy. Your comments are fairly coherent for an admitted $plc troll, but still devoid of truthful or useful content. Good luck hanging out with the Onion and probably Salon and Tim Wise types. They will betray you and do you more damage than I could ever conceive, if I had any wish to do you harm, and I don’t.

    Read More
  25. @Anonymous
    saying "half-asian" should require a qualification, i.e "half-white half-Asian". white shouldn't be the default.

    White should also be capitalized in reference to the White race.

    Notice in this line in the article, “Asian, ” “Muslim” and “Hispanic” are capitalized but not “White.”

    “I have written rude things about whites, Hispanics, Asians, and Muslims”

    Not capitalizing “White” in reference to White people, when other races are capitalized is insulting and degrading.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Not capitalizing “White” in reference to White people, when other races are capitalized is insulting and degrading.
     
    So Lothrop Stoddard, Madison Grant, Rudyard Kipling, Thomas Carlyle, Theodore Bilbo, Theodore Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, Carleton Coon, Carleton Putnam, etc, were "insulting and degrading" us!

    More insulting and degrading, however, is your suggestion that we follow the stylebook of Jet magazine.
  26. I am disturbed that this article gives a positive view of blacks and the impression that they are not to be feared when all crime statistics prove that it’s extremely wise for Whites to either avoid blacks or be wary around them.

    This piece is akin to what the msm think we should believe about blacks, they are harmless and have murder rates no higher than that of Whites.

    No White should ever be comfortable around blacks. Whites need to be warned about violent black behavior, not comforted. The msm already keep Whites in the dark about rampant black-on-White assaults,murders, rapes, robberies and knock-out “game.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Aaron Gross
    You wrote (with a few words changed):

    I am disturbed that this article gives a positive view of [men] and the impression that they are not to be feared when all crime statistics prove that it’s extremely wise for [women] to either avoid [men] or be wary around them.
    ...
    No [woman] should ever be comfortable around [men]. [Women] need to be warned about violent [male] behavior, not comforted.
     
    This is based on federal crime statistics, which show that men are more criminally violent than women by approximately an order of magnitude.
    , @razor
    In light of the fact that Amren had no less than six articles related to John Derbyshires firing from National Review enumerating why White parents should "have that talk" to their White children about blacks propensity for violence and their natural and "learned" hatred of Whites,I also find it troubling why Taylor would give such a positive view of blacks.

    Even more troubling is Taylors consistent inference to minimizing jewish power and influence even as he puts forth the proposition that black self-esteem for all ages is higher than that of White self-esteem for all ages and using a link Adolescent Self-Esteem:Differences by Race,Ethnicity,Gender and Age to support this claim. I took the time to read this report by "social scientists" and nowhere did i find it give consideration to how jewish power & influence in institutions of higher learning from elementary to college as well as in printed and electronic MSM had any effect in these "findings" that blacks scored higher on self-esteem of all ages more than Whites.Just reading a list of "social scientists" names,even those who authored the article,will show you that such a profession is dominated by jews. It is common knowledge that Whites are discouraged and smeared as being racist if they verbally exclaim they are White and Proud while blacks,hispanics,asians,muslims,talmudists and every other non-White race is encouraged to promote the same for themselves and their collective race. This extends to religion as well. White Christians are not a federally protected class under ADL "hate speech"and "hate crime" laws. Burning the koran or merely hurting the feelings of other non-Christian religious minorities will get you fined and imprisoned in Europe, in America they will just use jewish power to smear your good name and get you fired from your job.Burning a Bible will not result in any such similiar ramifications.....It is also not a "hate crime" when jews beat up a black gay.http://www.truthtellers.org/alerts/No-Hate-Crime-When-Jews-Beat-Up-Black-Gay.html One of my favorite articles by Dr.William Pierce helps to explain more than Taylor or all the "social scientists" why black self-esteem is higher than that for Whites: Choosing a Barbie Doll...
    http://www.anticain.blogspot.com/2013/01/choosing-barbie-doll.html

    Mark Green...excellent reply to Stan Mute

    Biden Acknowleges Immense Jewish Role in American Cultural Life and Mass Media--by Mark Weber

    http://ihr.org/other/biden_jewish_role
  27. Anonymous says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Truth
    An Ivy league professor, a quasi-preacher media personality, and the President of the US; yes, lots of commonality there.

    You see, that's just what you don't get; what black person would put Jimmy Swaggart, George H.W. Bush and Richard Feynman in the same sentence and wonder why they aren't doing the same thing?

    Do yourself a favor and think about that, and why you did it.

    There is indeed commonality among all the blacks listed. All are racialists to a man.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    Barry is a "racialist?"

    Well yes he is; but then of course;

    George Washington was a "human trafficker"
    Thomas Jefferson was a "pedophile"
    Theodore Roosevelt was a "murderer"
    And John F. Kennedy, well, he was a "football player"


    Sir, the issue is not that the President of the US is a "racialist"

    The issue is that you are; and when all you have is a hammer...
    , @jack shindo
    The definition of racism comes from the white Euro -US American, where the laws were passed to pick winners and losers, and to grant priviledge to the aforementioned Euro origin US white fellow.

    No Asian, "Hispanic: or Afro-descended origin individuals have passed laws to abrogate the rights of any such Euro origin white American in principle or concept. That just never happened but we see alot of this cognitive dissonance form the 'white designated man" pretending the opposite is true. As long as truth is known, all people will have the situational awareness to see the true criminals and their ilk. G*d bless USA
  28. @Juggernaut3000
    I am disturbed that this article gives a positive view of blacks and the impression that they are not to be feared when all crime statistics prove that it's extremely wise for Whites to either avoid blacks or be wary around them.

    This piece is akin to what the msm think we should believe about blacks, they are harmless and have murder rates no higher than that of Whites.

    No White should ever be comfortable around blacks. Whites need to be warned about violent black behavior, not comforted. The msm already keep Whites in the dark about rampant black-on-White assaults,murders, rapes, robberies and knock-out "game."

    You wrote (with a few words changed):

    I am disturbed that this article gives a positive view of [men] and the impression that they are not to be feared when all crime statistics prove that it’s extremely wise for [women] to either avoid [men] or be wary around them.

    No [woman] should ever be comfortable around [men]. [Women] need to be warned about violent [male] behavior, not comforted.

    This is based on federal crime statistics, which show that men are more criminally violent than women by approximately an order of magnitude.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome


    You wrote (with a few words changed):


    I am disturbed that this article gives a positive view of [men] and the impression that they are not to be feared when all crime statistics prove that it’s extremely wise for [women] to either avoid [men] or be wary around them.

    No [woman] should ever be comfortable around [men]. [Women] need to be warned about violent [male] behavior, not comforted.

     

    This is based on federal crime statistics, which show that men are more criminally violent than women by approximately an order of magnitude.

     

    If a person were to recommend that a woman not "walk down an alley alone at night" they would no be condemned for making out all men to be rapists.

    Sex differences are ingrained into our customs and laws.

    We have separate-but-equal sex-segregated restrooms. We have sex-segregated athletics at all levels. Men are not allowed to be girl-scout leaders. Doctors need female chaperones. Japan has women-only train cars to stop groping. etc.
  29. Here, here. Being around sexless, neurotic white and Asian guys in academia has given me new appreciation for the poor blacks I grew up around. What’s the point of high IQ and decent civilization if you’re not going to be happy?

    Read More
  30. @Robert Weissberg
    Jared speaks the truth. I, too, wear nice hats (including a real Panama during the summer) and blacks regularly give me complements. Moreover, in my many years of teaching I always got along splendidly with individual blacks despite my well-known "controversial" views on race. We shared lots of jokes and laughs much to the chagrin of my up tight liberal colleagues. I was also a regular at a local black owned rib joint where much of the black clientele looked like the people whose pictures decorate the post office. My liberal colleagues where terrified to go there despite my assurances that it was totally safe. These were the same "experts" who would insist that black crime resulted from white racism.

    “Compliment”. Complement is a different word.

    Read More
  31. I can’t say I find much disagreeable or off the mark with this article, but there was this comment:
    “Groups that evolved in climates where they didn’t have to worry about storing food for the winter could afford to eat one candy bar right away. If they didn’t need to cooperate to bring down big game, maybe they could all afford to think they were big shots.”

    The fact you’d actually say this despite having read things Nicholas Wade’s book and found it very commendable is remarkable- you seriously still, after all this time, subscribe to the “race differences were forged in the ice age and have remained virtually unchanged for all of human history” model. It should be abundantly clear, not just from reading that book, but any cursory glance at the state of research in this field how dead wrong that whole framework is (but to be honest, it should have come off as pretty absurd from a racialist perspective even 20 years ago.) Whites and east asians were likely behaviorally very different several centuries ago, and it’s really doubtful the paleolithic climates played as clear of a role as something like Rushton’s models might imply. In the case of blacks, Peter Frost has noted how the most primitive, isolated african ethnic groups- the hadza, pygmies, khoisan and sandawe, predominantly stone age hunter-gatherers (in contrast to virtually all other africans who had agriculture, animal husbandry and iron smelting before colonialism) exhibit very “k” behaviors in contrast to the “r” ones of most other africans. The aka pygmies have the highest rates of parental investment from fathers in the world- what does that tell you? It’s likely the case that the female-centered agriculture and heavy polygamy that typifies bantsu and such, which originated only several thousand years ago has been a major factor in the pathologies and other characteristics of typical blacks. Plus, it’s not like far northern mongoloid peoples like the huns and mongols were some of the most barbaric, destructive people in human history, or that native americans, despite their infants being more stoic and less responsive than east asian ones, nonetheless have been known to be astonishingly violent and barbaric, like the plains indians and the aztecs.

    This all really dovetails with what you say at the end, “One of the great, historic frustrations of liberalism is the failure of blacks to behave like whites, no matter how many role models we set up, laws we pass, racial preferences we hand out, or welfare programs we pay for. Blacks are not going to change, so we have to treat with them as they are. And just as the blacks of the Tenderloin saw me as a source of fun—as a potentially amusing fellow human being—we should make the most of their good qualities.” In essence, I agree, but human evolution can work far faster than what people like Rushton and Lynn imply, and while modern liberalism isn’t the answer, it goes without saying that they can change, and maybe if you eschewed their work (who are, on the whole, charlatans, with cartoon understandings of human history who have done great damage to this field*), maybe you can be truly an impetus for this as well.

    *Somehow, even someone like Frost has openly proclaimed he respects Rushton- despite how his work is largely anathema to him. Why, I don’t really know, but I have to say not of all his ideas really make much sense either.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SDN
    I pretty much agree with your end point that biological determinism has been a bit exaggerated to explain black pathologies.

    I dug around many datas I've been posting on internet forums to get some feedback (lately I posted them to Steve Sailer's blog co's comment section)and I would like to know yours as well.

    It is common knowledge that Blacks disproportionately commit crimes compared their share in the general population but it seems to be less known that black crime rate has had a sharper drop than the white rate.

    There's a website called "Easy access to Juvenile populations". http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ezapop/
    Despite the misleading title you can obtain data from the entire population regarding their sex, age, race and ethnicity and even make state-by-state or county-by-county comparison. Using the population tables with the Uniform Crime Report (plus the Easy Access Supplementary Homicide Reports website) from the FBI you can establish crime rates (for 100'000 people) for different populations.

    It turns out that for Blacks:
    Between 1991 and 2012
    Murder rate went from 34.3 to 16.1 which is a 56 percent drop
    Between 1992 and 2013
    Rape from 46.4 to 10.4 about 78 percent
    Robbery from 304 to 108.5 about 64 percent
    Aggravated Assault from 549.3 to 242 about 56 percent
    Violent Crime from 934.6 to 371.6 about 60 percent
    Burglary from 355.4 to 151.2 about 58 percent
    Larceny-Theft from 1317.4 to 608.7 about 54 percent
    Motor Vehicle Theft from 219.7 to 40.4 about 82 percent
    Arson from 11.6 to 2.5 about 60 percent

    Note: The timespan for the homicide rate is different because it started to drop a year earlier than other crimes and because data for 2013 are not yet available.

    For Whites (& Hispanics too since 90% of them are classified as "White") within the same period and same crimes:
    Murder from 4.7 to 2.2 about 51 percent
    Rape from 7.7 to 3.6 about 58 percent
    Robbery from 27 to 13.2 about 48 percent
    Aggravated Assault from 120.1 to 73.3 about 39 percent
    Violent Crime from 160.5 to 91.8 about 43 percent
    Burglary from 113.9 to 55 about 58 percent
    Larceny-Theft from 399 to 271.6 about 32 percent
    Motor Vehicle Theft from 46.7 to 14.2 about 70 percent
    Arson from 5.8 to 2.5 about 57 percent

    Interestingly interracial crime also seems to be on the decline. The 1994 edition of "Criminal Victimization in the United States Statistical Tables" records 1'140'670 white victims of criminal violence at the hands of blacks compared to only 135'360 blacks victims of whites. In 2010 these numbers dropped respectively to 320'082 and 62'593. Using the non-hispanic white and black population to establish the rates we find that the black rate dropped 77 percent compared to the white rate which dropped 55 percent.

    The recent decrease of crime also has its effects on the correlation between race and crime. Comparing the state population by race in EZAPOP and state violent crime rate in disastercenter.com we find a correlation of r = 0.76 between the percentage of black population and violent crime rate among the 50 states in 1991 (the correlation increases to r = 0.86 if we include the hispanic population). In 2012 this correlation dropped to r = 0.61 (with the hispanic population it dropped to r = 0.65). The drop is sharper if we take only the homicide rate with the black population percentage, we find, during the same period, a drop from r = 0.72 to r = 0.46.
    Exploring the net I stumbled upon this article about crime and demographics from the Claremont Institute which explores the interactions between these two factors
    http://www.claremont.org/article/the-great-black-hope/#.VNlfn977-Xo

    In parallel we also witnessed the decline of sexual activities among black teens. Recently the CDC published a survey report showing that black students are less sexually active "About 60 percent of black high school students surveyed in 2011 reported having had sex, down from 82 percent in 1991...In addition to the increasing share of black teens who have never had sex, those that are active cite fewer partners than previous generations. The number with four or more sex partners declined to 25 percent from 43 percent" http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-07-24/black-teens-having-less-sex-narrow-gap-with-whites

    In another press release one official says "the numbers coincide with drops in teen pregnancy and births." http://consumer.healthday.com/senior-citizen-information-31/age-health-news-7/survey-finds-big-drop-in-sexual-activity-among-black-teens-666975.html

    The datas are pretty verifiable. The justice department office of juvenile justice and delinquency prevention (OJJDP) has its graph about teenage mothers by race. We find that between 1991 and 2012, birth rates among 15-17-year-old declined 74% for black teens while for white teens the drop was of 57%.
    http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/population/qa01302.asp?qaDate=2012

    The Guttmacher Institute published similar results concerning 15-19-year-old women. Table 1.1 of this report shows similar drops of pregnancies among Black and White women
    https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/USTPtrends10.pdf
  32. @Penguinchip
    Along the lines of racial differences and things thereof to appreciate, I would add music. There's so much more more at work than IQ among racial groups. Blacks are very accomplished musically, both creating and performing, and in particular singing. I recently argued to some friends that, at this point, Asians, IQ notwithstanding, are so far behind blacks musically at this point that blacks could stop creating music now, we could wait a million years, and Asians still wouldn't be anywhere close. Asians excel at understanding, appreciating, and performing European music, but they have no creative bone. Not even the Japanese are musically creative, although, unlike Asians generally, they are creative in many other ways.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtNZm9KXm8w

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe6JTHAWDT4

    “I recently argued to some friends that, at this point, Asians, IQ notwithstanding, are so far behind blacks musically at this point that blacks could stop creating music now, we could wait a million years, and Asians still wouldn’t be anywhere close. Asians excel at understanding, appreciating, and performing European music, but they have no creative bone. Not even the Japanese are musically creative, although, unlike Asians generally, they are creative in many other ways.”

    You have absolutely no clue about japanese music. It is vast, remarkably diverse, and has many talented, influential artists in just about every genre imaginable. If you want to talk about creativity, look no further than their work in the experiment and avant-garde genres, which showcases some of the most eclectic, unique music out there. I’m not as familiar with korean or chinese music, but you could barely be more off the mark with japan.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Penguinchip
    Thank you for the suggestion. I will look into it.
  33. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Adam
    I must agree with you here. AmRen is rampant with low key anti-semitism. Taylor pays lip service to the Jews because he wants their donations but those who know him personally will tell you he's no true friend of the Jewish people. The moderating policies of his site reflect that. And let's not forget his friendships with Kevin MacDonald and David Duke.

    So every white activist must put the interests of Jews above those of white people? You apparently think Taylor cannot be friends with anyone who is critical of Jews, even though they may agree on every other issue. What are you some kind of Jewish supremacist?

    Read More
  34. @Anonymous
    There is indeed commonality among all the blacks listed. All are racialists to a man.

    Barry is a “racialist?”

    Well yes he is; but then of course;

    George Washington was a “human trafficker”
    Thomas Jefferson was a “pedophile”
    Theodore Roosevelt was a “murderer”
    And John F. Kennedy, well, he was a “football player”

    Sir, the issue is not that the President of the US is a “racialist”

    The issue is that you are; and when all you have is a hammer…

    Read More
  35. @Truth
    Sir, as an African-American who is on this site daily and frequented Amren, and even "trolled" for a few years, before the Commie policies started, I want to thank you for your attempt at civillity here.

    I am sure that it is difficult to be the smart, well-respected-within-his-own-circle, family-minded, "high-IQ", successful white man, who feels that he has done nothing wrong, yet still has to deal with the constant "racist " criticism. He probably wears upon one who feels that he is telling the truth...and perplexes one greatly, as to why others in his cohort do not feel the same way.

    With that being said, My Good Man, there is some validity to the "old dogs, new tricks" axiom; so for your own reputation, that of the site, and internaitonal caucasoid-afro relations, PLEASE do not write another "complimentary" article. Just stick to who, and what you are, and everything will be fine. You will still get to heaven, my friend.

    I can tell you that I literally (not metaphorically) was four paragraphs into this article before I was convinced that it was not sarcasm. A staffwriter from The Onion, given the assignment of writing a "complimentary" article from a white "racist" would have come up with something similar. The entire thing reads like that old joke; "Bob, I don't care what everyone else in you life says about you. I think you're a good guy!"

    And as an aside, as you can tell from the comments, the white guys on the site now have the fact that you're become an "N-lover" (in addition to being a Kike lover/hater/ Sinophile-ass kisser, depending upon which certified Mensa genius is holding the microphone).

    So, in summary, Mr. Taylor; you've made it 63 good and fruitful years with the basic world view that Africans are "disposable dogs, fortunate to be allowed in our presence." An article that clarifies your opinion that "well, you know guys, some are rather sweet, and well behaved toy poodles" as well-intended as may have been, can only be taken as a backward step.

    Good luck to you, Sir.

    -Truth

    (KKM)

    Funny, now I can see your point. But I had a different experience. I read the piece with pleasure and thought Mr. Taylor was being perfectly honest. “Old-school” whites do think like this. My grandparents were fine Christians who did not hate blacks, or anyone else (and they were even inordinately popular with the small number of Jews in their hometown). But they recognized that blacks and whites were not alike, no matter how often embarrassingly self-brainwashed whites (and, yes, often Jews) might try to convince otherwise. Taylor writes and thinks exactly like a well-educated and normal white man from about 3/4 of a century ago. I find this very refreshing.

    My only quibble with Taylor is that he never quite spells out what we ought to do about the unstable racial situation in the US. My personal belief is that the survival of the white race is more important than just exposing liberal egalitarianism for the buffoonish ideology it is. We will not make it as free men and a free race (ie, one which can determine its own collective destiny) through this century unless we take a much tougher, much harsher course of action. We don’t need to become Nazis, but Ivy League political incorrectness circa the 1920s is not going to preserve us, either.

    Read More
  36. @Juggernaut3000
    White should also be capitalized in reference to the White race.

    Notice in this line in the article, "Asian, " "Muslim" and "Hispanic" are capitalized but not "White."

    "I have written rude things about whites, Hispanics, Asians, and Muslims"

    Not capitalizing "White" in reference to White people, when other races are capitalized is insulting and degrading.

    Not capitalizing “White” in reference to White people, when other races are capitalized is insulting and degrading.

    So Lothrop Stoddard, Madison Grant, Rudyard Kipling, Thomas Carlyle, Theodore Bilbo, Theodore Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, Carleton Coon, Carleton Putnam, etc, were “insulting and degrading” us!

    More insulting and degrading, however, is your suggestion that we follow the stylebook of Jet magazine.

    Read More
  37. @Bernie
    I wonder if Cornel West, Barack Obama, Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton would ever write an article about what they like about white people.

    My guess is no.

    This is a big difference between white racialists and black racialists.

    I wonder if Cornel West, Barack Obama, Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton would ever write an article about what they like about white people.

    Why would Barack Obama? Has he had any meaningful relationship with a sane white person his entire life?

    Read More
  38. Japanese and Korean music are great when the state doesn’t get their grubby fingers into it (K-pop being a particularly abhorrent case).


    You need to be at least 100000000 years old and have an IQ of 1593852999995 to understand this article.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth

    You need to...have an IQ of 1593852999995 to understand this article.
     
    SHIT!

    Missed it by 9 points.
  39. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anonymous
    saying "half-asian" should require a qualification, i.e "half-white half-Asian". white shouldn't be the default.

    In Asia they are called “half-White.” It makes perfect sense that if the majority of people within a given area are X then when referring to a person, X will be implied. In the United States Asian is the distinguishing characteristic and Caucasian is the ordinary characteristic. In China, Caucasian is the distinguishing characteristic.

    So in most of the United States and amongst culturally Western people, white IS the default, by default. That isn’t racist, it’s simply correct.

    We could play the game and dance around everyone’s fragile sensibilities, but once that gets started where does it stop? Some people are already talking about scores of different genders, most of which by your logic will be offended by referring to someone as either male or female by default. Worrying yourself about the majority being the majority is a futile activity.

    Read More
  40. 3 Points I like to Make:

    1. I don’t think Blacks have lower IQ than Whites. Most especially, I don’t think Blacks have lesser mathematical ability than Whites. I’ve played at the chess tournaments in Newark, NJ and all of the winners are Black. It is true that Blacks commit more crimes but some of the scams I see on TV really impress me. I once saw a special about some Black guy counterfeiting twenty dollar bills and made them look like the real thing.

    2. I think the problem is that Blacks have no discipline at all. Keith Richburg has made the same observation. That is why Blacks are so arrogant and proud despite the fact that they have accomplished so little. I also think that no amount of schooling is going to change this. I’m not a race realist. I’m a cultural realist.

    3. I think there are 2 reasons why so many whites are not on the race realism bandwagon. First, as John Derbyshire and Fred Reed has pointed out, most whites come in contact with only intelligent, middle class blacks. Second and conversely, most whites go to public schools with only other whites. There are many cases of white on white bullying and violence. It may be far less than what you would get at a black public school but it is enough to make a lot of non-blacks believe that “whites are no better than blacks.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @SDN
    Interesting point 1. There's this NYT article about three black kids who are among the 13 youngest master chess in the US named James Black Jr., Joshua Coles and Justus Williams.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/13/crosswords/chess/chess-three-young-african-americans-earn-recognition-as-masters.html?_r=0

    Two of them were part of a team which won the national high school chess championship and the last one competed against Magnus Carlssen (the actual number 1). Were they among the winners of the tournament you're talking about ?

  41. @Jared Taylor
    I am very surprised by this comment. I would be curious to see an example of a comment you left at Amren.com that argued against the view that Jews were "the problem" but was deleted.

    As another commenter has pointed out below, we have little patience with posts that reflexively blame Jews for everything that has gone wrong for whites.

    I am very surprised by this comment. I would be curious to see an example of a comment you left at Amren.com that argued against the view that Jews were “the problem” but was deleted.

    As another commenter has pointed out below, we have little patience with posts that reflexively blame Jews for everything that has gone wrong for whites.

    Notice the language Taylor uses here.

    the problem”

    “blame Jews for everything

    Presumably unless Jews really are “the” problem or to blame for “everything” they cannot be criticized at all, which is like living in a society that only has one crime: murder. Then no matter how horrendously one person mistreats another short of causing death, one can always say, “What are you complaining about? It’s not as if he murdered somebody.”

    In reality, the claim is that Jewish influence is a problem, that it is to blame for some things, and that therefore Jews can be criticized for those things.

    Unless one is willing to admit that Jewish influence is a problem then Jews can happily continue to kick white gentiles in the head every day, just as they have been doing for at least the past fifty years, safe in the knowledge that white gentiles will do no more than smile meekly and invite more kicks in the head.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stan D Mute

    In reality, the claim is that Jewish influence is a problem, that it is to blame for some things, and that therefore Jews can be criticized for those things.

    Unless one is willing to admit that Jewish influence is a problem then Jews can happily continue to kick white gentiles in the head every day, just as they have been doing for at least the past fifty years, safe in the knowledge that white gentiles will do no more than smile meekly and invite more kicks in the head.
     
    Is this any different from ordinary Christian white elite behavior? The Jews we hear from are elites and are behaving exactly like the Christian elites. Of what value then is identifying them as Jews? Do we preface complaints about GW Bush and his ilk with "Christian"? Do we remark that "Christian Jeb Bush wants to see white Americans subsumed beneath a tsunami of mesoamerican illiterates"?

    The fact is that Jews are plagued by the same insanity as non-Jew whites. Jews are lobbying to see Israel open her borders, allow african immigrants, and create a Palastinian state. And yes, these Jews are a problem ... just like the Christians who hold those same cultural marxist beliefs.
  42. This is really refreshing. I’d have never thought that J.T. (in his sixties) would be such a consummate slummer and be so prone to engage in “risky behavior”. I wonder if he packs heat.

    Read More
  43. @q
    Japanese and Korean music are great when the state doesn't get their grubby fingers into it (K-pop being a particularly abhorrent case).

    @Truth
    You need to be at least 100000000 years old and have an IQ of 1593852999995 to understand this article.

    You need to…have an IQ of 1593852999995 to understand this article.

    SHIT!

    Missed it by 9 points.

    Read More
  44. @silviosilver

    I am very surprised by this comment. I would be curious to see an example of a comment you left at Amren.com that argued against the view that Jews were “the problem” but was deleted.

    As another commenter has pointed out below, we have little patience with posts that reflexively blame Jews for everything that has gone wrong for whites.
     

    Notice the language Taylor uses here.

    "the problem"

    "blame Jews for everything"

    Presumably unless Jews really are "the" problem or to blame for "everything" they cannot be criticized at all, which is like living in a society that only has one crime: murder. Then no matter how horrendously one person mistreats another short of causing death, one can always say, "What are you complaining about? It's not as if he murdered somebody."

    In reality, the claim is that Jewish influence is a problem, that it is to blame for some things, and that therefore Jews can be criticized for those things.

    Unless one is willing to admit that Jewish influence is a problem then Jews can happily continue to kick white gentiles in the head every day, just as they have been doing for at least the past fifty years, safe in the knowledge that white gentiles will do no more than smile meekly and invite more kicks in the head.

    In reality, the claim is that Jewish influence is a problem, that it is to blame for some things, and that therefore Jews can be criticized for those things.

    Unless one is willing to admit that Jewish influence is a problem then Jews can happily continue to kick white gentiles in the head every day, just as they have been doing for at least the past fifty years, safe in the knowledge that white gentiles will do no more than smile meekly and invite more kicks in the head.

    Is this any different from ordinary Christian white elite behavior? The Jews we hear from are elites and are behaving exactly like the Christian elites. Of what value then is identifying them as Jews? Do we preface complaints about GW Bush and his ilk with “Christian”? Do we remark that “Christian Jeb Bush wants to see white Americans subsumed beneath a tsunami of mesoamerican illiterates”?

    The fact is that Jews are plagued by the same insanity as non-Jew whites. Jews are lobbying to see Israel open her borders, allow african immigrants, and create a Palastinian state. And yes, these Jews are a problem … just like the Christians who hold those same cultural marxist beliefs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @silviosilver

    Is this any different from ordinary Christian white elite behavior?
     
    Of course it's different. Jews are recommending those policies to and enforcing them on ethnic rivals. White Christians are doing it to ethnic kin.

    The fact is that Jews are plagued by the same insanity as non-Jew whites. Jews are lobbying to see Israel open her borders, allow african immigrants, and create a Palastinian state.
     
    That is not a fact at all. Jewish behavior is characterized by the organized Jewish mainstream, not by the eccentric recommendations of isolated oddballs. The Jewish mainstream remains firmly in favor of the ethnic integrity of Israel and the ethnic dissolution of western countries. These are far from the only double standards in play in the relationship between Jews and gentiles.
  45. @Jared Taylor
    I am very surprised by this comment. I would be curious to see an example of a comment you left at Amren.com that argued against the view that Jews were "the problem" but was deleted.

    As another commenter has pointed out below, we have little patience with posts that reflexively blame Jews for everything that has gone wrong for whites.

    I could show you a dozen if Disqus hasn’t archived them. I don’t know how long Disqus retains comments that have been deleted on the site where originally posted.

    There has been a short but parallel discussion on ’s blog that I think really goes to the heart of this issue. The link is here: https://countenance.wordpress.com/2015/02/11/edgy-and-on-edge/#comments

    Note particularly DJF’s comments. Note too other comments in this thread at Unz – it’s no great secret that your site hosts a virulent strain of anti-semitism occasionally veiled by terms like “you know who” or “those we aren’t allowed to name here.”

    If, as you claim, you want to erase the division between Jews and white Western interests generally, a good start would be to notice what elite Jews are doing in Israel is the same as what elite whites are doing in America and Europe. DJF cites, at length, elite Jews pushing the multi-culti agenda on Israel. It’s clear then the problem isn’t one of Jew vs Christian (although the tens of millions of Zionist Christians should have made that abundantly clear already), but one of elite betrayal of their heritage generally. Your policy has been to make a general statement, “I like Jews,” and then ignore the subject while your comment threads are rife with Jew-blaming. Show us your sincerity by addressing this head-on.

    Read More
  46. @Jared Taylor
    I am very surprised by this comment. I would be curious to see an example of a comment you left at Amren.com that argued against the view that Jews were "the problem" but was deleted.

    As another commenter has pointed out below, we have little patience with posts that reflexively blame Jews for everything that has gone wrong for whites.

    After a lifetime of studying the Jew haters, I think it’s really all down to childish jealousy. It’s no different from the negroes’ hate for whites. One hates what he cannot ever attain. Especially so if he who has attained it is “the other.”

    Apparently Disqus retains comments deleted by moderators for quite some time. Above is one such comment deleted by AmRen in reply to the Jew-haters.

    Great point! Just look at the $PLC. Those lousy scum are the absolute worst of the worst. There isn’t a more evil organization in America. That Morris Dees is head of the Evil Empire.
    Oops. Dee$ is Unitarian. Dang it. A Southern Christian man from a farming family is the most evil man in America! Dadgummit.
    Sorry chief, but we need to do a whole lot more pruning of the tree than just “the Jews”. Just a ballpark guess, I’d say about 40% of whites overall are infected and probably 10-15% are incurable. And the rest will have to be watched closely forever.

    And another. Actually there are quite a lot of them. How many would you like me to post here? Here’s just one more for now. Maybe you were opposed to commenting negatively about the SPLC rather than my arguing against the Jew-haters who’ve set up shop on your site?

    That’s just silly. Name one country that’s come to a good end when Romans have run it. Or when Spartans have run it. Or Carthaginians have run it.
    Or, better yet, name one country that’s come to a good end when it has engaged in silly feuds over mythology. “My Zeus is tougher than your Odin!” “Oh yeah? Well my Thor can kick your Mars’ butt any day!” “You’re Prussian? I hate Prussians!” “Die French scum!”
    Good grief. We are on the verge of being subsumed by a tidal wave of Mesoamerican Indians, we are daily savaged by Africans, and you want to pick fights with white neurosurgeons and podiatrists because of a two thousand year old book.
    Yes! There are jewish leftists. Of course there are. Leftism at its upper echelons is a disease afflicting intellectuals. There are many very smart Jews. But there are many many more very smart whites who believe the same marxist evil nonsense. Should we perhaps just purge everyone with a high IQ who has this disease? You’d have us excise maybe 10% of the Marxists and then what? Have Morris Dees for President

    ?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Remnant
    To cherry pick a few philo-Semitic comments that were deleted does not really prove anything. Taylor also has deleted anti-Semitic comments.

    Again, see Taylor's own words from the American Spectator interview I quoted above: he does not take a fully hands-off approach.

    His record on Jews is clear: he welcomes them but he also refuses to disassociate himself from those with less welcoming positions on the Jewish question. That is, in my view, an entirely admirable position: he stands for civil debate, and that extends to associating with those with whose positions he does not entirely agree.

    For Christsake, the Anti-defamation League and Mark Potok of the SPLC are on record as saying Taylor is not an antisemite. Indeed, Taylor is probably among the most hated figures among the more hardcore nationalists for his "philosemitism".
  47. @Stan D Mute

    In reality, the claim is that Jewish influence is a problem, that it is to blame for some things, and that therefore Jews can be criticized for those things.

    Unless one is willing to admit that Jewish influence is a problem then Jews can happily continue to kick white gentiles in the head every day, just as they have been doing for at least the past fifty years, safe in the knowledge that white gentiles will do no more than smile meekly and invite more kicks in the head.
     
    Is this any different from ordinary Christian white elite behavior? The Jews we hear from are elites and are behaving exactly like the Christian elites. Of what value then is identifying them as Jews? Do we preface complaints about GW Bush and his ilk with "Christian"? Do we remark that "Christian Jeb Bush wants to see white Americans subsumed beneath a tsunami of mesoamerican illiterates"?

    The fact is that Jews are plagued by the same insanity as non-Jew whites. Jews are lobbying to see Israel open her borders, allow african immigrants, and create a Palastinian state. And yes, these Jews are a problem ... just like the Christians who hold those same cultural marxist beliefs.

    Is this any different from ordinary Christian white elite behavior?

    Of course it’s different. Jews are recommending those policies to and enforcing them on ethnic rivals. White Christians are doing it to ethnic kin.

    The fact is that Jews are plagued by the same insanity as non-Jew whites. Jews are lobbying to see Israel open her borders, allow african immigrants, and create a Palastinian state.

    That is not a fact at all. Jewish behavior is characterized by the organized Jewish mainstream, not by the eccentric recommendations of isolated oddballs. The Jewish mainstream remains firmly in favor of the ethnic integrity of Israel and the ethnic dissolution of western countries. These are far from the only double standards in play in the relationship between Jews and gentiles.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stan D Mute

    Of course it’s different. Jews are recommending those policies to and enforcing them on ethnic rivals. White Christians are doing it to ethnic kin.
     
    That's all you have? Where, exactly, are these omnipotent Jews enforcing policies against their rivals? Who, exactly, are their rivals (other than Muslims of course)? Are you suggesting that Jews are deliberately and openly trying to destroy the only people standing between them and complete annihilation?

    Jewish behavior is characterized by the organized Jewish mainstream
     
    Hmm. Would that be the mainstream Reform Jews? They're the largest organized group of Jews. Or perhaps the secular Jews who identify more strongly with the Democrat Party than with Judaism? All of them Jews whose political positions include support for a Palastinian state and african immigration?

    In America there is a small but very vocal and activist group of Jews supporting Netanyahu and Israel's far right (settlements, sterilize africans, etc). Many are the same on the american political right where leading presidential contenders like Jeb Bush are open borders advocates. Also, perhaps you've not noticed, Israel's "ethnic integrity" is around 21% Arab Muslim. These, of course, claim discrimination just like american negroes and mestizos.

    I find it odd when America is being invaded by Mesoamericans who've never seen indoor plumbing and undergoing a slow but constant one-sided race war from hyperviolent illiterate africans, you choose to attack orthodontists, podiatrists, and neurosurgeons for the sin of agreeing with the rest of elite Americans. But the dentists, gynecologists, and judges who cheer for a different mythological being escape your wrath?
  48. @Dipwill
    "I recently argued to some friends that, at this point, Asians, IQ notwithstanding, are so far behind blacks musically at this point that blacks could stop creating music now, we could wait a million years, and Asians still wouldn’t be anywhere close. Asians excel at understanding, appreciating, and performing European music, but they have no creative bone. Not even the Japanese are musically creative, although, unlike Asians generally, they are creative in many other ways."

    You have absolutely no clue about japanese music. It is vast, remarkably diverse, and has many talented, influential artists in just about every genre imaginable. If you want to talk about creativity, look no further than their work in the experiment and avant-garde genres, which showcases some of the most eclectic, unique music out there. I'm not as familiar with korean or chinese music, but you could barely be more off the mark with japan.

    Thank you for the suggestion. I will look into it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dipwill
    Some examples that come to mind are Tatsuya Yoshida (and the many projects/bands he's been apart of), Acid Mothers Temple and their many offshoots, Les Rallizes Dénudés, Boredoms and their associated acts, and Merzbow. The last of which is what many people might not consider actual music, and the others overly eclectic/experimental, but are all prime counter-examples to the idea the Japanese have no creativity when it comes to music.
  49. @silviosilver

    Is this any different from ordinary Christian white elite behavior?
     
    Of course it's different. Jews are recommending those policies to and enforcing them on ethnic rivals. White Christians are doing it to ethnic kin.

    The fact is that Jews are plagued by the same insanity as non-Jew whites. Jews are lobbying to see Israel open her borders, allow african immigrants, and create a Palastinian state.
     
    That is not a fact at all. Jewish behavior is characterized by the organized Jewish mainstream, not by the eccentric recommendations of isolated oddballs. The Jewish mainstream remains firmly in favor of the ethnic integrity of Israel and the ethnic dissolution of western countries. These are far from the only double standards in play in the relationship between Jews and gentiles.

    Of course it’s different. Jews are recommending those policies to and enforcing them on ethnic rivals. White Christians are doing it to ethnic kin.

    That’s all you have? Where, exactly, are these omnipotent Jews enforcing policies against their rivals? Who, exactly, are their rivals (other than Muslims of course)? Are you suggesting that Jews are deliberately and openly trying to destroy the only people standing between them and complete annihilation?

    Jewish behavior is characterized by the organized Jewish mainstream

    Hmm. Would that be the mainstream Reform Jews? They’re the largest organized group of Jews. Or perhaps the secular Jews who identify more strongly with the Democrat Party than with Judaism? All of them Jews whose political positions include support for a Palastinian state and african immigration?

    In America there is a small but very vocal and activist group of Jews supporting Netanyahu and Israel’s far right (settlements, sterilize africans, etc). Many are the same on the american political right where leading presidential contenders like Jeb Bush are open borders advocates. Also, perhaps you’ve not noticed, Israel’s “ethnic integrity” is around 21% Arab Muslim. These, of course, claim discrimination just like american negroes and mestizos.

    I find it odd when America is being invaded by Mesoamericans who’ve never seen indoor plumbing and undergoing a slow but constant one-sided race war from hyperviolent illiterate africans, you choose to attack orthodontists, podiatrists, and neurosurgeons for the sin of agreeing with the rest of elite Americans. But the dentists, gynecologists, and judges who cheer for a different mythological being escape your wrath?

    Read More
  50. @Stan D Mute

    After a lifetime of studying the Jew haters, I think it's really all down to childish jealousy. It's no different from the negroes' hate for whites. One hates what he cannot ever attain. Especially so if he who has attained it is "the other."
     
    Apparently Disqus retains comments deleted by moderators for quite some time. Above is one such comment deleted by AmRen in reply to the Jew-haters.

    Great point! Just look at the $PLC. Those lousy scum are the absolute worst of the worst. There isn't a more evil organization in America. That Morris Dees is head of the Evil Empire.
    Oops. Dee$ is Unitarian. Dang it. A Southern Christian man from a farming family is the most evil man in America! Dadgummit.
    Sorry chief, but we need to do a whole lot more pruning of the tree than just "the Jews". Just a ballpark guess, I'd say about 40% of whites overall are infected and probably 10-15% are incurable. And the rest will have to be watched closely forever.

     

    And another. Actually there are quite a lot of them. How many would you like me to post here? Here's just one more for now. Maybe you were opposed to commenting negatively about the SPLC rather than my arguing against the Jew-haters who've set up shop on your site?

    That's just silly. Name one country that's come to a good end when Romans have run it. Or when Spartans have run it. Or Carthaginians have run it.
    Or, better yet, name one country that's come to a good end when it has engaged in silly feuds over mythology. "My Zeus is tougher than your Odin!" "Oh yeah? Well my Thor can kick your Mars' butt any day!" "You're Prussian? I hate Prussians!" "Die French scum!"
    Good grief. We are on the verge of being subsumed by a tidal wave of Mesoamerican Indians, we are daily savaged by Africans, and you want to pick fights with white neurosurgeons and podiatrists because of a two thousand year old book.
    Yes! There are jewish leftists. Of course there are. Leftism at its upper echelons is a disease afflicting intellectuals. There are many very smart Jews. But there are many many more very smart whites who believe the same marxist evil nonsense. Should we perhaps just purge everyone with a high IQ who has this disease? You'd have us excise maybe 10% of the Marxists and then what? Have Morris Dees for President
     
    ?

    To cherry pick a few philo-Semitic comments that were deleted does not really prove anything. Taylor also has deleted anti-Semitic comments.

    Again, see Taylor’s own words from the American Spectator interview I quoted above: he does not take a fully hands-off approach.

    His record on Jews is clear: he welcomes them but he also refuses to disassociate himself from those with less welcoming positions on the Jewish question. That is, in my view, an entirely admirable position: he stands for civil debate, and that extends to associating with those with whose positions he does not entirely agree.

    For Christsake, the Anti-defamation League and Mark Potok of the SPLC are on record as saying Taylor is not an antisemite. Indeed, Taylor is probably among the most hated figures among the more hardcore nationalists for his “philosemitism”.

    Read More
  51. @Stan D Mute
    It's an interesting decision for Ron Unz to add Jared Taylor to his stable of columnists. Great exposure for Taylor to get outside his echo chamber at AmRen. It will be interesting to see how the subject of anti-Semitism is handled since there tends to be about the same level here as there is at Taki's. It will also be interesting to see how comments are moderated since I've had at least a dozen of my comments at AmRen disappeared when I challenged anti-Semites and their typical "blame the Jew" victimology by pointing out the blame for our (ie the West collectively and white America specifically) plight is far more the result of white Christian activism than that of Jews. At AmRen, pointing out that Jews have as much to lose as whites from subsuming western culture into muslim, negro, or mestizo "culture" has been enough to get censored. Likewise, pointing out that America's (and Europe's) adoration of the negro predates any major Jewish cultural influence (eg hard to blame the Jews for Reconstruction) has gotten other comments flagged and vanished down the memory hole.

    I used to visit and comment at Taylor's site pretty often, but gave up due to the crazy amount of censorship. For a guy who publicly claims he's not anti-Semitic, his comment moderation sure sends a very different message. Of course it's also possible I offended another sacred cow since I'd usually accompany my argument against the anti-Semites with a rejoinder showing that the blame lies primarily with white Christian (primarily although increasingly with secular) elites. Maybe Taylor is offended that I blame his classmates at Yale far more than some random Jew like Ron Unz or Nicholas Stix?

    Regarding the subject of this essay, I'm not sure I see the point. Is Taylor trying to rehabilitate the negro? Rehabilitate himself by praising the negro? I don't know anyone really who hates negroes (certainly not like negroes hate whites). Instead, all the whites I know just want to be away from negroes and it's entirely due to the well known problems of crime, moral turpitude, state dependency, and hostility. That some negroes are wonderful people isn't in dispute - it's the totality that matters. And invariably, I find that it is the people who have the most experience among negroes who most want to avoid them. Those who see only the side Taylor represents here, the side the media portrays, are the most ardent negro worshippers and integrationists. So I'm as confused by this essay as I am by AmRen's censorship of anyone who argues against the Jew-blamers.

    Stan- Are you a Zionist activist?

    You sure lie like one.

    This is why I think you’re probably Jewish, Stan. Jews generally hate it when whites stake out their own racial/cultural territory. In America, that privilege is reserved for Jews. Jews seek to de-legitimize ‘white identity’ while they celebrate ‘Jewish identity’. And you fit this pattern.

    But there’s plenty to blame Jews for, Stan. Plenty. Just ask the Palestinians. Or the Iraqis. Or the Iranians. Or the Lebanese. Or, for that matter, the Americans. (The alert ones, anyway). Jewish Americans (and even Israeli-Americans) have transformed our civilization. Are you kidding?

    Though Jews in Israel advance strict segregation there, Jews here and in Europe promote racial and cultural integration aggressively. And these double standards have served them well. Whites in Europe and America have seen themselves marginalized from their own cultures. Jews on the other hand have risen both economically and culturally in the West.

    At the same time, Israel lives off entrenched double-standards: from nuclear weapons, to it’s arrogant license to warmonger, to its policy of systematic ethnic-cleansing, to its US-enabled ability to initiate lethal violence at will and without fear of reprisal since America protects Israel both militarily, economically and diplomatically.

    But Israel is something of a rogue state. To this day, the Jewish State refuses to declare its borders or to allow outside inspection of its nuclear arsenal. These are real double standards, Stan. You deny this?

    As for the ‘Muslim question’, organized Jewry has played a very definite role in flooding Europe as well as the US with Third World peoples. Some are Muslim, some Christian, and some have an assortment of beliefs and ethnic/racial backgrounds. But few of these new immigrants have much white European ancestry or an organic connection to Europe or white America. That’s the key. White culture is in decline and this transformation is no accident. Western civilization is headed…. where? Not where average (white) Europeans and Americans want for it to go. But Jewish cultural influence and Jewish power and Jewish visibility is rising in everywhere. You haven’t noticed?

    At the same time, Israel is slowly but inexorably getting rid of its gentiles. Does this interest you, Stan? Jewish DNA matters a lot in Israel. Should whites care about their DNA, too? May they even think about it?

    The racial transformation now underway in Europe and America has made the world safer for Israel as well as international Jewry–despite the wild headlines that emerge when one Jews get shot somewhere00as Jews do very well in mixed societies. They form ethnic-based teams.

    I’ve got good news for you, Stan: Jews are on a tear. They have achieved extraordinary wealth and power in the West. Today, the case can be made that Jews pretty much manage Washington, Hollywood and have quite a bit to say on Wall Street, too. This translates into vast cultural and political influence. Do you deny this? And what about all these wars? Might there be a Zionist angel here? Better check with AIPAC.

    Jews have been successfully de-Christianizing America and the West the West for decades. You haven’t noticed? Better check with your pals at the ACLU.

    Blame Jews? Sure. Blame those responsible. But the responsibility is there. It’s undeniable, even world class liars like you cannot deny the obvious, Stan. The Iraq war. The economic war on Iran. The conquest of Libya. The destablization of Syria. Of Palestine. Does this makes me an ‘anti-Semite’ for saying this?

    Oh my! I feel so ashamed!

    But you, Stan, are the liar.

    As America and Europe become less Christian and less white, nimble minorities like Jews can still form alliances and rise to the top. That’s what’s happened in the US over the past 50 years. You haven’t noticed?

    Israel, meanwhile, is killing Muslims at will (and getting rid of its native Christian population, too) while is pursues its dream of a ‘more pure’ Jewish state. You deny this? And US taxpayers have been subsidizing this Zionist operation for decades. Why? And the US money to Israel never stops. American aid to Israel is unconditional, Stan. Interesting situation, don’t you think?

    What’s particularly maddening about Zionist operatives like you, Stan, is how you invariably depict yourself (Jews) as blameless victims in all the conflicts in which you and the world’s most important tribe is involved. And that’s a lot of conflicts! But activist Jews (and this probably includes you) are not innocent. So quit lying.

    Jews operatives even circulate the defamatory and dishonest term ‘anti-Semitism’ to describe their foes, claiming that the relatively voiceless people who have genuine disputes with Jews are somehow deranged or even mad. And then the kosher mafia has the audacity to complain about ‘censorship’!

    You’d better tread lightly there, Stan. Am Ren barely touches the Jews. I wish they would criticize and excoriate the Jews far more often than they do. But it is Organized Jewry that is the foremost purveyor of (political) censorship in the Western World. Censorship? Jews absolutely rule American mass media. You haven’t noticed? Since you’re obviously not stupid, Stan, you must simply be dishonest.

    Sorry, but Jews HAVE PLAYED a very heavy role in numerous affairs where lives have been lost and liberty erased. But they often try cover their tacks. And yes, they do successfully impose censorship (‘speech codes’) and even draft ‘hate crime’ legislation, ‘group libel’ laws, as well as criminalize ‘denial’ of certain unproven political ‘facts’ involving WWII. This is world class censorship. And woe to the errant politician or artist or intellectual who steps out of line, as their careers are often affected adversely. Muslims don’t get any of these protections. Why? The Jewish lobby is far more powerful.

    Does saying this make me ‘anti-Semitic’? I hope so! But you’d better stop playing the dying ‘anti-Semite’ card, Stan. It’s becoming worthless.

    OK, we can agree: Jews are not responsible for all the world’s ills. But who has made such a ridiculous claim? No one. But organized Jewry has done real damage. And they’re still at work. And if they get their way, the US will be involved in another military disaster involving another foe of you-know-who. This is criminal.

    Zionists must accept responsibility when it fits. In the meantime: quit lying.

    Read More
    • Replies: @razor
    Great post/reply Mark Green.

    Just one correction...

    http://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2011/11/muslim-refugees-yes-christian-refugees.html#

    Some are Muslim, some Christian,---should read Overwhelmingly muslim

    Whatever one may think of Pamela Geller her article Muslim Refugees Yes, Christian Refugees No is factual.

    To understand jewish power and influence one needs only to see what Christian religious symbol now is not allowed on public lands(The Cross) while hundreds of jewish symbols(The Menorah) is allowed--a thirty foot tall Menorah is set up every Christmas on the lawn of the White house. Place the Koran or the Talmud into a toilet and face hate crime charges in Europe. Place the Christian Bible into a toilet and it is deemed free expression or a work of art in Europe as well as here in America. Piss Christ is another example.

    The kosher/halal racket speaks volumes about jewish power and influence as well...

    , @kikz
    Mark Green, thank you..

    I only have to listen/see Barbara Spectre to understand even on an entirely visceral level why I don't favor Jews having any control over my country. this short video leaves now room for misinterpretation, no matter what Stan (I wish) Mute says. http://youtu.be/MFE0qAiofMQ 1min17.
  52. @Adam
    I must agree with you here. AmRen is rampant with low key anti-semitism. Taylor pays lip service to the Jews because he wants their donations but those who know him personally will tell you he's no true friend of the Jewish people. The moderating policies of his site reflect that. And let's not forget his friendships with Kevin MacDonald and David Duke.

    I don’t think he is friendly with Duke or MacDonald. As far as the antisemitism and censorship at amren go, the antisemitic comments are probably very rarely deleted considering the amount of them in the comment section, and there are plenty of pro Jewish commenters. JT is a personal hero of mine, so whatever he writes regardless of the subject, I will read it. Who knew that underneath those smooth suits Mr. Taylor was hiding the body of a Greek God or that he wore a fedora.

    Read More
  53. Stan, you are badly out of your league. Out of deference to Taylor and Unz I won’t pursue it here. Bring this game to radix or altright and watch yourself be demolished.

    Read More
  54. @Penguinchip
    Thank you for the suggestion. I will look into it.

    Some examples that come to mind are Tatsuya Yoshida (and the many projects/bands he’s been apart of), Acid Mothers Temple and their many offshoots, Les Rallizes Dénudés, Boredoms and their associated acts, and Merzbow. The last of which is what many people might not consider actual music, and the others overly eclectic/experimental, but are all prime counter-examples to the idea the Japanese have no creativity when it comes to music.

    Read More
  55. @Juggernaut3000
    I am disturbed that this article gives a positive view of blacks and the impression that they are not to be feared when all crime statistics prove that it's extremely wise for Whites to either avoid blacks or be wary around them.

    This piece is akin to what the msm think we should believe about blacks, they are harmless and have murder rates no higher than that of Whites.

    No White should ever be comfortable around blacks. Whites need to be warned about violent black behavior, not comforted. The msm already keep Whites in the dark about rampant black-on-White assaults,murders, rapes, robberies and knock-out "game."

    In light of the fact that Amren had no less than six articles related to John Derbyshires firing from National Review enumerating why White parents should “have that talk” to their White children about blacks propensity for violence and their natural and “learned” hatred of Whites,I also find it troubling why Taylor would give such a positive view of blacks.

    Even more troubling is Taylors consistent inference to minimizing jewish power and influence even as he puts forth the proposition that black self-esteem for all ages is higher than that of White self-esteem for all ages and using a link Adolescent Self-Esteem:Differences by Race,Ethnicity,Gender and Age to support this claim. I took the time to read this report by “social scientists” and nowhere did i find it give consideration to how jewish power & influence in institutions of higher learning from elementary to college as well as in printed and electronic MSM had any effect in these “findings” that blacks scored higher on self-esteem of all ages more than Whites.Just reading a list of “social scientists” names,even those who authored the article,will show you that such a profession is dominated by jews. It is common knowledge that Whites are discouraged and smeared as being racist if they verbally exclaim they are White and Proud while blacks,hispanics,asians,muslims,talmudists and every other non-White race is encouraged to promote the same for themselves and their collective race. This extends to religion as well. White Christians are not a federally protected class under ADL “hate speech”and “hate crime” laws. Burning the koran or merely hurting the feelings of other non-Christian religious minorities will get you fined and imprisoned in Europe, in America they will just use jewish power to smear your good name and get you fired from your job.Burning a Bible will not result in any such similiar ramifications…..It is also not a “hate crime” when jews beat up a black gay.http://www.truthtellers.org/alerts/No-Hate-Crime-When-Jews-Beat-Up-Black-Gay.html One of my favorite articles by Dr.William Pierce helps to explain more than Taylor or all the “social scientists” why black self-esteem is higher than that for Whites: Choosing a Barbie Doll…

    http://www.anticain.blogspot.com/2013/01/choosing-barbie-doll.html

    Mark Green…excellent reply to Stan Mute

    Biden Acknowleges Immense Jewish Role in American Cultural Life and Mass Media–by Mark Weber

    http://ihr.org/other/biden_jewish_role

    Read More
  56. @Aaron Gross
    Good article. I've been a fan of Mr. Taylor's since the late 1990s, though I don't agree with him on everything.

    I do think the article gets a little shaky when it moves from personal anecdote to science (time-value experiments, speculative sociobiology); the findings, or at least their interpretations, are disputed. But the most unfortunate thing about the article is that it doesn't include a photo of Mr. Taylor in his Panama hat.

    Or a photo with his shirt off.

    Read More
  57. Upon reflection, I have to wonder whose interests are served by causing discord among intelligent whites. Obviously the leftists want to keep Jews in their camp so painting race realist conservatives as Jew Haters serves their interest very well. On the other hand, nationalist whites generally support Israel’s right to defend itself but oppose American involvement. So a 1,000 word rant to say “I hate Jews and so you must be a Jew” could well be a hasbara troll knowing such idiotic bile would serve to deter interest among reasoning people. Thread spamming is a known hasbara tactic.

    Clearly the notion of Jews aligning themselves with race realist whites is terrifying to the leftists. So how much of this “I hate those Jews and their Zionist conspiracy” from alleged conservative race realists is really leftist trolls trying desperately to keep Jews from realizing that they are in fact white and thus in the same existential danger from leftist policies designed to exterminate us. Using Jewish history and paranoia to trick so many of them into aligning themselves with white elites and their Stone Age hordes is clever as long as they continue to get away with it.

    Read More
  58. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Stan D Mute
    It's an interesting decision for Ron Unz to add Jared Taylor to his stable of columnists. Great exposure for Taylor to get outside his echo chamber at AmRen. It will be interesting to see how the subject of anti-Semitism is handled since there tends to be about the same level here as there is at Taki's. It will also be interesting to see how comments are moderated since I've had at least a dozen of my comments at AmRen disappeared when I challenged anti-Semites and their typical "blame the Jew" victimology by pointing out the blame for our (ie the West collectively and white America specifically) plight is far more the result of white Christian activism than that of Jews. At AmRen, pointing out that Jews have as much to lose as whites from subsuming western culture into muslim, negro, or mestizo "culture" has been enough to get censored. Likewise, pointing out that America's (and Europe's) adoration of the negro predates any major Jewish cultural influence (eg hard to blame the Jews for Reconstruction) has gotten other comments flagged and vanished down the memory hole.

    I used to visit and comment at Taylor's site pretty often, but gave up due to the crazy amount of censorship. For a guy who publicly claims he's not anti-Semitic, his comment moderation sure sends a very different message. Of course it's also possible I offended another sacred cow since I'd usually accompany my argument against the anti-Semites with a rejoinder showing that the blame lies primarily with white Christian (primarily although increasingly with secular) elites. Maybe Taylor is offended that I blame his classmates at Yale far more than some random Jew like Ron Unz or Nicholas Stix?

    Regarding the subject of this essay, I'm not sure I see the point. Is Taylor trying to rehabilitate the negro? Rehabilitate himself by praising the negro? I don't know anyone really who hates negroes (certainly not like negroes hate whites). Instead, all the whites I know just want to be away from negroes and it's entirely due to the well known problems of crime, moral turpitude, state dependency, and hostility. That some negroes are wonderful people isn't in dispute - it's the totality that matters. And invariably, I find that it is the people who have the most experience among negroes who most want to avoid them. Those who see only the side Taylor represents here, the side the media portrays, are the most ardent negro worshippers and integrationists. So I'm as confused by this essay as I am by AmRen's censorship of anyone who argues against the Jew-blamers.

    You may be over-thinking Mr. Taylor’s essay. I don’t believe he has a hidden agenda. The man I’ve met at an AmRen conference is what he says he is, a race realist. He doesn’t harbor a secret hatred of blacks; I base that on his articles, videos, essays, speeches. I think you can read the essay and believe exactly what he says, no more no less. He’s an exceptionally elegant, intelligent, articulate man who isn’t afraid to speak the truth. Some would say brave. Everything he’s said in this essay is true. It’s as simple as that.

    Read More
  59. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Wait until I show this article to my middle class brothers and sisters; they’re going to be ‘tickled to death’. “Fo’ shizzle”!

    Read More
  60. @Stan D Mute
    It's an interesting decision for Ron Unz to add Jared Taylor to his stable of columnists. Great exposure for Taylor to get outside his echo chamber at AmRen. It will be interesting to see how the subject of anti-Semitism is handled since there tends to be about the same level here as there is at Taki's. It will also be interesting to see how comments are moderated since I've had at least a dozen of my comments at AmRen disappeared when I challenged anti-Semites and their typical "blame the Jew" victimology by pointing out the blame for our (ie the West collectively and white America specifically) plight is far more the result of white Christian activism than that of Jews. At AmRen, pointing out that Jews have as much to lose as whites from subsuming western culture into muslim, negro, or mestizo "culture" has been enough to get censored. Likewise, pointing out that America's (and Europe's) adoration of the negro predates any major Jewish cultural influence (eg hard to blame the Jews for Reconstruction) has gotten other comments flagged and vanished down the memory hole.

    I used to visit and comment at Taylor's site pretty often, but gave up due to the crazy amount of censorship. For a guy who publicly claims he's not anti-Semitic, his comment moderation sure sends a very different message. Of course it's also possible I offended another sacred cow since I'd usually accompany my argument against the anti-Semites with a rejoinder showing that the blame lies primarily with white Christian (primarily although increasingly with secular) elites. Maybe Taylor is offended that I blame his classmates at Yale far more than some random Jew like Ron Unz or Nicholas Stix?

    Regarding the subject of this essay, I'm not sure I see the point. Is Taylor trying to rehabilitate the negro? Rehabilitate himself by praising the negro? I don't know anyone really who hates negroes (certainly not like negroes hate whites). Instead, all the whites I know just want to be away from negroes and it's entirely due to the well known problems of crime, moral turpitude, state dependency, and hostility. That some negroes are wonderful people isn't in dispute - it's the totality that matters. And invariably, I find that it is the people who have the most experience among negroes who most want to avoid them. Those who see only the side Taylor represents here, the side the media portrays, are the most ardent negro worshippers and integrationists. So I'm as confused by this essay as I am by AmRen's censorship of anyone who argues against the Jew-blamers.

    I’ve also had my posts challenged when I had criticized or insulted Asiatics/gooks on Amren and spoke certain unspeakable truths about them. Jared Taylor is an Asia-phile, a culture that is diametrically opposite to that of Western culture and values and which is something I have a big problem with.

    Read More
  61. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Robert Weissberg
    Jared speaks the truth. I, too, wear nice hats (including a real Panama during the summer) and blacks regularly give me complements. Moreover, in my many years of teaching I always got along splendidly with individual blacks despite my well-known "controversial" views on race. We shared lots of jokes and laughs much to the chagrin of my up tight liberal colleagues. I was also a regular at a local black owned rib joint where much of the black clientele looked like the people whose pictures decorate the post office. My liberal colleagues where terrified to go there despite my assurances that it was totally safe. These were the same "experts" who would insist that black crime resulted from white racism.

    Excellent piece and excellent response from Bob. This is all true. My experience exactly.

    ps You will never find such unvarnished truth on a liberal website. They are not about truth, they are about comfortable fairytales. The definition of an intelligent person in my opinion is someone who notices things that other people cannot or will not notice. Liberals whole program is that you cannot notice certain things. On liberal organs like NPR, they make a big show about noticing some things (usually silly things), but it is just a camouflage for an over-arching anti-intellectualism.

    Non-Liberal: “that person is insane”. Liberal: “You cannot say that! There is at least a .001% chance that he is not insane. Therefore you are to say nothing”.

    Read More
  62. @Stan D Mute

    I would suspect that comments like yours were moderated out not because your comments were philo-Semitic but because AmRen was anticipating and taking steps to prevent a comment flame war between pro- and anti-Semites.
     
    That was my first thought as well, but I quickly noticed that virtually every comment thread would have at least one and often many anti-Jew posts. Typically, they'd be pretend coded like "Joos," "chosen," "you know who," etc, but always blatantly anti-Jew. These rarely, if ever, disappear. It gradually became clear to me that a simple, "you can't blame the Jews for this mess" wouldn't get scrubbed, but a more detailed reply chronicling the abolition movement, universal suffrage movement, and overwhelming Christian responsibility for bringing negroes to the New World (and Europe) would immediately go down the memory hole. Likewise, rebuttals to the Jew-haters citing unanimous support for "diversity" in all Christian churches will almost instantly go missing.

    I hung out at AmRen for several years (I may not be the quickest learner..) so this wasn't a one-off. Any serious attempt to rebut the Jew-blamers by demonstrating that our crisis was made by Christians would vanish. Over the years, I had dozens of comments zapped and it was just last year when I saw half a dozen vanish within a week that I called it quits. I've seen the same thing with the CofCC by the way. There is apparently a large contingent of race realists who just wants to blame Jews for everything and refuses to face the elephant in the room. We would be in exactly the same place we are today even if Jews never existed (ie if all believed the "messiah" story). That's a Truth which cannot be stated in a number of places and that pretty well ensures our demise as a people.

    Stan Mute, are you Jared Taylor?

    My experience at Amren is quite the opposite of yours. Mods were quick to delete posters comments who responded to other jewish or heathen comments attacking Christianity and admonishing them to stop “proselytizing” which is a jewish smear term to denigrate those of the Christian Faith.

    An older Jared Taylor interview by Joe Adams has Jared saying this,almost verbatim what you have stated… “People who are constantly talking about and complaining about Jewish influence remind me of blacks who think everything that’s ever gone wrong for blacks in the past or ever will go wrong for blacks in the future is because of white racism. I think that blacks need to be responsible for their successes and their own failure, and I think that the whites have to as well. ”

    http://www.tribaltheocrat.com/2011/11/jared-taylor-on-the-jewish-question

    As far as bringing blacks to the New World no one is more responsible for that than jewish slave-traders. It was Sam Francis who was fired from the Washington Times for quoting a verse from the jewish Torah/Old Testament related to jewish slavery.

    Read More
  63. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Jared- About those black maids who complimented you at the hotel… many Black women are single and not married. They may have been looking to earn a little extra income, if you know what I mean… and you are one good looking white man… unusually good looking.

    And no, Black women are not the only women that do that. Yes, some white women flirt with men too, even ask them out…

    Are Black women, given their circumstances, more likely to do that…yes…

    I’m sure many white women have given you the nod too…

    Read More
  64. @Mark Green
    Stan- Are you a Zionist activist?

    You sure lie like one.

    This is why I think you're probably Jewish, Stan. Jews generally hate it when whites stake out their own racial/cultural territory. In America, that privilege is reserved for Jews. Jews seek to de-legitimize 'white identity' while they celebrate 'Jewish identity'. And you fit this pattern.

    But there's plenty to blame Jews for, Stan. Plenty. Just ask the Palestinians. Or the Iraqis. Or the Iranians. Or the Lebanese. Or, for that matter, the Americans. (The alert ones, anyway). Jewish Americans (and even Israeli-Americans) have transformed our civilization. Are you kidding?

    Though Jews in Israel advance strict segregation there, Jews here and in Europe promote racial and cultural integration aggressively. And these double standards have served them well. Whites in Europe and America have seen themselves marginalized from their own cultures. Jews on the other hand have risen both economically and culturally in the West.

    At the same time, Israel lives off entrenched double-standards: from nuclear weapons, to it's arrogant license to warmonger, to its policy of systematic ethnic-cleansing, to its US-enabled ability to initiate lethal violence at will and without fear of reprisal since America protects Israel both militarily, economically and diplomatically.

    But Israel is something of a rogue state. To this day, the Jewish State refuses to declare its borders or to allow outside inspection of its nuclear arsenal. These are real double standards, Stan. You deny this?

    As for the 'Muslim question', organized Jewry has played a very definite role in flooding Europe as well as the US with Third World peoples. Some are Muslim, some Christian, and some have an assortment of beliefs and ethnic/racial backgrounds. But few of these new immigrants have much white European ancestry or an organic connection to Europe or white America. That's the key. White culture is in decline and this transformation is no accident. Western civilization is headed.... where? Not where average (white) Europeans and Americans want for it to go. But Jewish cultural influence and Jewish power and Jewish visibility is rising in everywhere. You haven't noticed?

    At the same time, Israel is slowly but inexorably getting rid of its gentiles. Does this interest you, Stan? Jewish DNA matters a lot in Israel. Should whites care about their DNA, too? May they even think about it?

    The racial transformation now underway in Europe and America has made the world safer for Israel as well as international Jewry--despite the wild headlines that emerge when one Jews get shot somewhere00as Jews do very well in mixed societies. They form ethnic-based teams.

    I've got good news for you, Stan: Jews are on a tear. They have achieved extraordinary wealth and power in the West. Today, the case can be made that Jews pretty much manage Washington, Hollywood and have quite a bit to say on Wall Street, too. This translates into vast cultural and political influence. Do you deny this? And what about all these wars? Might there be a Zionist angel here? Better check with AIPAC.

    Jews have been successfully de-Christianizing America and the West the West for decades. You haven't noticed? Better check with your pals at the ACLU.

    Blame Jews? Sure. Blame those responsible. But the responsibility is there. It's undeniable, even world class liars like you cannot deny the obvious, Stan. The Iraq war. The economic war on Iran. The conquest of Libya. The destablization of Syria. Of Palestine. Does this makes me an 'anti-Semite' for saying this?

    Oh my! I feel so ashamed!

    But you, Stan, are the liar.

    As America and Europe become less Christian and less white, nimble minorities like Jews can still form alliances and rise to the top. That's what's happened in the US over the past 50 years. You haven't noticed?

    Israel, meanwhile, is killing Muslims at will (and getting rid of its native Christian population, too) while is pursues its dream of a 'more pure' Jewish state. You deny this? And US taxpayers have been subsidizing this Zionist operation for decades. Why? And the US money to Israel never stops. American aid to Israel is unconditional, Stan. Interesting situation, don't you think?

    What's particularly maddening about Zionist operatives like you, Stan, is how you invariably depict yourself (Jews) as blameless victims in all the conflicts in which you and the world's most important tribe is involved. And that's a lot of conflicts! But activist Jews (and this probably includes you) are not innocent. So quit lying.

    Jews operatives even circulate the defamatory and dishonest term 'anti-Semitism' to describe their foes, claiming that the relatively voiceless people who have genuine disputes with Jews are somehow deranged or even mad. And then the kosher mafia has the audacity to complain about 'censorship'!

    You'd better tread lightly there, Stan. Am Ren barely touches the Jews. I wish they would criticize and excoriate the Jews far more often than they do. But it is Organized Jewry that is the foremost purveyor of (political) censorship in the Western World. Censorship? Jews absolutely rule American mass media. You haven't noticed? Since you're obviously not stupid, Stan, you must simply be dishonest.

    Sorry, but Jews HAVE PLAYED a very heavy role in numerous affairs where lives have been lost and liberty erased. But they often try cover their tacks. And yes, they do successfully impose censorship ('speech codes') and even draft 'hate crime' legislation, 'group libel' laws, as well as criminalize 'denial' of certain unproven political 'facts' involving WWII. This is world class censorship. And woe to the errant politician or artist or intellectual who steps out of line, as their careers are often affected adversely. Muslims don't get any of these protections. Why? The Jewish lobby is far more powerful.

    Does saying this make me 'anti-Semitic'? I hope so! But you'd better stop playing the dying 'anti-Semite' card, Stan. It's becoming worthless.

    OK, we can agree: Jews are not responsible for all the world's ills. But who has made such a ridiculous claim? No one. But organized Jewry has done real damage. And they're still at work. And if they get their way, the US will be involved in another military disaster involving another foe of you-know-who. This is criminal.

    Zionists must accept responsibility when it fits. In the meantime: quit lying.

    Great post/reply Mark Green.

    Just one correction…

    http://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2011/11/muslim-refugees-yes-christian-refugees.html#

    Some are Muslim, some Christian,—should read Overwhelmingly muslim

    Whatever one may think of Pamela Geller her article Muslim Refugees Yes, Christian Refugees No is factual.

    To understand jewish power and influence one needs only to see what Christian religious symbol now is not allowed on public lands(The Cross) while hundreds of jewish symbols(The Menorah) is allowed–a thirty foot tall Menorah is set up every Christmas on the lawn of the White house. Place the Koran or the Talmud into a toilet and face hate crime charges in Europe. Place the Christian Bible into a toilet and it is deemed free expression or a work of art in Europe as well as here in America. Piss Christ is another example.

    The kosher/halal racket speaks volumes about jewish power and influence as well…

    Read More
  65. I do not think those who have not grown up with and spent a good deal of life around large groups of Blacks can possibly understand how those of us who have can be so critical of the dysfunction that is Black culture in America – including much of their group behavior and instinctive sense of grievance at every turn – and yet still retain a realistic yet genuine affection for them.

    Besides clueless Whites of all kinds, this includes many Blacks themselves, who have been told repeatedly by their Phony White Guilt Minders that even the slightest criticism of their irrefutably dysfunctional communities across the width & breadth of the United States by White Boys (or Girls; or any non-Black) of any kind is simply the work of malevolent racists bent on doing them ill will.

    Pulling up to a Wendy’s drive-through window late at night just last weekend, and a Black girl tots up and delivers our order; “you said ‘Honey Mustard’ with that, right?” she said, “and Happy Valentines day to you, too, as long as we’re talking honey.”

    It was a genuine, slightly flirty, completely sincere and utterly unscripted moment, but touching in its way, and one to which I responded with what I hope was equal sincerity, and graciousness. The notion that I’d – or the vast majority of critics of the reality that is the ongoing dysfunction in the Black community would – wish or hope for ill on that saucy-talking Black girl hard at work on a Friday night because of some lurking, irrational animus always makes me snicker in contempt: it’s beyond false.

    On the other hand, those of us who recognize that “Noticing Patterns” is simply holding fast to factual, data-backed, irrefutable truth can both hold fast to those principles, and continue to deal with Black people as people in our day-to-day encounters, to the same extent they treat us individually as people, and without the utter cognitive dissonance and conflict and, frankly, cringing fear on offer in the vast majority of the rest of American society; that vast majority who have been guilted or bullied into accepting the comforting yet false equalitarian lies of the Left.

    One of the ironies our age that historians of the far future will have to suss out is how a people so fawned over by the ruling (Leftist) cultural elites of Post-WWII America to the present (and still counting) were so thoroughly misunderstood by same. And yet so well understood – and often intimately on a day-to-day basis – by their supposed “enemies” on the Reactionary Right. We were the ones that never flinched, for the most part, from simply telling that community hard truths that couldn’t be denied, and got labeled “racists” and all the rest of it from either self-interested members of same or phony white guilt-soaked liberals.

    Excellent article.

    Read More
  66. Discussing how two Black women admired his body as he walked around a hotel half naked and how he smiled at them? The guy is a perv. Seems like a race mixer to.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth

    Discussing how two Black women admired his body as he walked around a hotel half naked and how he smiled at them? The guy is a perv. Seems like a race mixer to.

     

    LOL! Comment of the year! OK, you guys can close the thread now.

    I LOVE this game!
  67. “a certain level of delusion—and this is something you often see in blacks.”

    Not that any of the largely white military-industrial-financial elites in this country don’t exhibit even more colossal symptoms of delusion…

    Read More
  68. Thank you Mr.Taylor for your modern day version of the Amos ‘n’ Andy show. Gave me quite a few laughs but if you think this will endear you in anyway to Mainstream America think again…

    An excerpt from Dr.William Pierce article CHOOSING a BARBIE DOLL…

    The most popular radio show ever broadcast in America, which started in 1929, eventually became a TV series, and ran until 1960 – 31 years altogether – was Amos ‘n’ Andy. It was a show with White scriptwriters and White actors playing the roles of Blacks and using Black dialect. It was not in any sense an anti-Black show; in fact, it treated its Black characters with affection; but it was a comedy show, and it did not portray Blacks as dignified statesmen or brain surgeons or rocket scientists, so by the 1960s it had been condemned as “racist” and taken off the air. If the Amos ‘n’ Andy show were revived today, any company which signed on as a sponsor would be hit immediately with boycotts and demonstrations. Politicians and church leaders would be giving outraged speeches on television about how “hateful” and “racist” it was. And all over America tens of thousands of Katherine Corcorans – remember, she’s the silly woman who wrote in the San Jose Mercury News last week about her seven-year-old daughter’s traumatic experience with Barbie dolls – tens of thousands of Katherine Corcorans and their fully “sensitized” husbands would be wringing their hands and agonizing over how to explain to their kids why they couldn’t watch Amos ‘n’ Andy on TV, why it would be “prejudiced” of them to laugh at the characters.

    It’s interesting to note that although Amos ‘n’ Andy spent its last days as a TV show, it was primarily TV which brought about the great sea change in America in the 1960s which made it impossible for Amos ‘n’ Andy or any other Politically Incorrect programming to remain on the air. Television as a brainwashing medium first became significant around 1950 – or perhaps a year or two earlier. In 1950 there already were ten million black-and-white television receivers in the United States. Even in the early 1950s every self-respecting lemming family which wanted to keep up with the Joneses believed that it had to have a television receiver in the house, so that every evening the little lemmings and their parents could gather around the tiny, flickering, monochrome screen to have their attitudes and opinions adjusted. But it was the advent of color television at the beginning of the 1960s which made television the powerful and universal medium of mind control that it quickly became.

    Without television Katherine Corcoran’s little girl could have reached for the White Barbie doll without a trace of angst. Without television Field Marshall Montgomery’s admirers wouldn’t have to be apologizing for him. Without television Bill Clinton would be simply another crooked lawyer in Little Rock, defending small-time drug dealers.

    Of course, it’s really misleading to blame television as a medium for Political Correctness. That’s like blaming Smith and Wesson or Colt for drive-by shootings. The ones to be blamed are the members of that Hollywood tribe who got their dirty hands on television right from the beginning, elbowed everyone else aside, and with an unfailing tribal instinct began using the new medium to inject their spiritual poison into our people. But, you know, that’s a subject we’ve talked about often enough already on American Dissident Voices.

    We ought to conclude our talk today by resolving that we will not continue sitting on our hands while that filthy tribe poisons the souls of seven-year-old girls: that we will do whatever we must do to end their control of the minds and souls of our people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @razor
    T.V. = MIND CONTROL

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Nq9Gg7A-YEE
  69. @razor
    Thank you Mr.Taylor for your modern day version of the Amos 'n' Andy show. Gave me quite a few laughs but if you think this will endear you in anyway to Mainstream America think again...

    An excerpt from Dr.William Pierce article CHOOSING a BARBIE DOLL...

    The most popular radio show ever broadcast in America, which started in 1929, eventually became a TV series, and ran until 1960 - 31 years altogether - was Amos 'n' Andy. It was a show with White scriptwriters and White actors playing the roles of Blacks and using Black dialect. It was not in any sense an anti-Black show; in fact, it treated its Black characters with affection; but it was a comedy show, and it did not portray Blacks as dignified statesmen or brain surgeons or rocket scientists, so by the 1960s it had been condemned as "racist" and taken off the air. If the Amos 'n' Andy show were revived today, any company which signed on as a sponsor would be hit immediately with boycotts and demonstrations. Politicians and church leaders would be giving outraged speeches on television about how "hateful" and "racist" it was. And all over America tens of thousands of Katherine Corcorans - remember, she's the silly woman who wrote in the San Jose Mercury News last week about her seven-year-old daughter's traumatic experience with Barbie dolls - tens of thousands of Katherine Corcorans and their fully "sensitized" husbands would be wringing their hands and agonizing over how to explain to their kids why they couldn't watch Amos 'n' Andy on TV, why it would be "prejudiced" of them to laugh at the characters.

    It's interesting to note that although Amos 'n' Andy spent its last days as a TV show, it was primarily TV which brought about the great sea change in America in the 1960s which made it impossible for Amos 'n' Andy or any other Politically Incorrect programming to remain on the air. Television as a brainwashing medium first became significant around 1950 - or perhaps a year or two earlier. In 1950 there already were ten million black-and-white television receivers in the United States. Even in the early 1950s every self-respecting lemming family which wanted to keep up with the Joneses believed that it had to have a television receiver in the house, so that every evening the little lemmings and their parents could gather around the tiny, flickering, monochrome screen to have their attitudes and opinions adjusted. But it was the advent of color television at the beginning of the 1960s which made television the powerful and universal medium of mind control that it quickly became.

    Without television Katherine Corcoran's little girl could have reached for the White Barbie doll without a trace of angst. Without television Field Marshall Montgomery's admirers wouldn't have to be apologizing for him. Without television Bill Clinton would be simply another crooked lawyer in Little Rock, defending small-time drug dealers.

    Of course, it's really misleading to blame television as a medium for Political Correctness. That's like blaming Smith and Wesson or Colt for drive-by shootings. The ones to be blamed are the members of that Hollywood tribe who got their dirty hands on television right from the beginning, elbowed everyone else aside, and with an unfailing tribal instinct began using the new medium to inject their spiritual poison into our people. But, you know, that's a subject we've talked about often enough already on American Dissident Voices.

    We ought to conclude our talk today by resolving that we will not continue sitting on our hands while that filthy tribe poisons the souls of seven-year-old girls: that we will do whatever we must do to end their control of the minds and souls of our people.

    T.V. = MIND CONTROL

    Read More
  70. @Reactionary
    Discussing how two Black women admired his body as he walked around a hotel half naked and how he smiled at them? The guy is a perv. Seems like a race mixer to.

    Discussing how two Black women admired his body as he walked around a hotel half naked and how he smiled at them? The guy is a perv. Seems like a race mixer to.

    LOL! Comment of the year! OK, you guys can close the thread now.

    I LOVE this game!

    Read More
  71. @Truth
    Sir, as an African-American who is on this site daily and frequented Amren, and even "trolled" for a few years, before the Commie policies started, I want to thank you for your attempt at civillity here.

    I am sure that it is difficult to be the smart, well-respected-within-his-own-circle, family-minded, "high-IQ", successful white man, who feels that he has done nothing wrong, yet still has to deal with the constant "racist " criticism. He probably wears upon one who feels that he is telling the truth...and perplexes one greatly, as to why others in his cohort do not feel the same way.

    With that being said, My Good Man, there is some validity to the "old dogs, new tricks" axiom; so for your own reputation, that of the site, and internaitonal caucasoid-afro relations, PLEASE do not write another "complimentary" article. Just stick to who, and what you are, and everything will be fine. You will still get to heaven, my friend.

    I can tell you that I literally (not metaphorically) was four paragraphs into this article before I was convinced that it was not sarcasm. A staffwriter from The Onion, given the assignment of writing a "complimentary" article from a white "racist" would have come up with something similar. The entire thing reads like that old joke; "Bob, I don't care what everyone else in you life says about you. I think you're a good guy!"

    And as an aside, as you can tell from the comments, the white guys on the site now have the fact that you're become an "N-lover" (in addition to being a Kike lover/hater/ Sinophile-ass kisser, depending upon which certified Mensa genius is holding the microphone).

    So, in summary, Mr. Taylor; you've made it 63 good and fruitful years with the basic world view that Africans are "disposable dogs, fortunate to be allowed in our presence." An article that clarifies your opinion that "well, you know guys, some are rather sweet, and well behaved toy poodles" as well-intended as may have been, can only be taken as a backward step.

    Good luck to you, Sir.

    -Truth

    (KKM)

    Gee, “Truth,” it took you four entire paragraphs to realize Mr. Taylor was serious? Funny, I went into this article expecting sarcasm too, but it only took me to the top of the second paragraph to realize he was sincere.

    What should we take from this? That you have a low IQ? Or that you’re just unable to cop to the “truth,” handle notwithstanding? Are you so unable to recognize how accurate a description this is? If you took out all mentions of race and replaced blacks in this article with “People X,” I’m sure most of us would still immediately know it was about black people.

    I’m sure that if white people of my generation (Millennials) wrote up a description of black people, it would not sound nearly so eloquent as this. And there is something about his attitude which reads as quaint. But the general thrust would be the same.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    I don't think you understand, Sport;

    Of course I have a low IQ, it's 85, but that's outside of the scope of this conversation. I get from this article that Mr. Taylor likes black people because they:

    1. Compliment his appearance
    2. Make him laugh
    3. Want to fuck him

    Guess what, in most cases, I appreciate these traits in all people. And what you, and the other Oceanians here don't get is that if I wrote an article entitled "Why I like whites," and and highlighted their abilities to get along (whimpiness, fear of sticking up for themselves), love for animals (kissing, sleeping with, eating out of the same dish with their dogs), intellectual pursuits (inability to play sports or dance), and disarming naivite (climbing into the cage at the zoo every other mont to make "friends" with the Grizzly bears), and replaced "white" with "x" black people would know whom I was talking about; and it would be valid because it's my "opinion". However, white people reading it would say "wait hold on, we may do some of these things, but there is so much more to us!" And their "opinion" would be valid as well, although they would think my article was satire.

    Get it now? Not too hard.
  72. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Most WNs are actually fine with Black Americans who they view as behaving admirably, and agreeing with them on issues like Trayvon Martin.

    What’s neglected in Mr. Taylor’s above article is that he and his readers welcome articles like Larry Murdock‘s A Black Man’s Path to Race Realism.

    Smart Black Americans could have instant career success if they become public commentators who vocally support traditional America (including Black Americans who want to assimilate into that).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    "Smart Black Americans could have instant career success if they become public commentators who vocally support traditional America (including Black Americans who want to assimilate into that)."

    You are not totally wrong, nor are you anywhere near totally right. If you don't believe me, answer me this question:

    Imagine a black men, tall, handsome, muscular and black as midnight. Kind to children and animals, police and well spoken: He graduated from Harvard with a STEM degree, and by some odd chance, it has be proven, conclusively, that he earned this degree via merit. He spends many hours doing charity work with white Appalachian children in his free time. Listens to classical music, C/W and heavy metal, serves in the Army reserve because "he loves America, and wants to see it succeed. He is under no illusion that black people have earned anything, and admits freely that he is "lucky" to have been "allowed" into America.

    I want you not just to think about this scenario, but to actually close your eyes and visualize "the perfect black man (by WN standards anyway).

    Next scenario; imagine the perfect white woman, well-raised, friendly to nerds, thin, beautiful, blonde, athletic and 19. Smart but not as smart as you, sexy and built, but not sleazy, and confident but still "a chick."

    Close your eyes and imagine now.

    Now "Jack" is not a friend, per-se, but you know him fairly well and like, and respect him.

    Now imagine he starts FUCKING Jill. How do you feel?

    All he is doing, remeber, is answering nature's call, and he is a "wonderful human being", so you are happy for him, right? (Aside from the normal male-to-male jealousy you would have if Jim his white classmate and best friend were to conquer "Jill."

    No difference in your mind, right?

    OK, well, I guess that explains just how much you believe in "assimilation."
    , @SDN
    Fair enough.

    But most White Nationalists act as if they consider racial hatred against Blacks to be part of the cornerstone of their ideology.

    You just have to read a comment section of any Amren article to see this hatred is pretty much mainstream. Most articles about Blacks considered friendly to their causes (like Elizabeth Wright or Larry Murdock) are met with many comments of contempt or hatred with large voting approval.

    That's what repelled me as a Black person. Jared Taylor might not personally detest Blacks but like a tree who hides the forest his website is a magnet for internauts who are exactly the type of people liberals like to point the finger at to say racism is pervasive in America.

    Discussions about Black crime are absolutely legitimate but there's a fine line between legitimate criticisms of mentalities and behaviors we believe are detrimental to the country's social fabric and vulgar and abusive generalizations like "Black men are sexual predators" or "Blacks are a criminal race".

    Regarding the article in itself he certainly brings an entertaining perspective about Black behavior in the hood. However I do not regard them as being stuck in their habits I remember a Walter Williams column talking about how Northern Blacks were saying to Black migrants from the South about to comply with the current standards: 'During the early 20th century, there were mass migrations of blacks from the South. Both the black-owned Chicago Defender and the Urban League offered published advice to their less tutored brethren, such as: "Don't use vile language in public places." "Don't throw garbage in the backyard or alley or keep dirty front yards." "Do not carry on loud conversations in street cars and public places."' ('Intellectuals and race' column)

    I'm not saying these people will be rich one day at all but speaking from a general point of view that goes far beyond the neighborhood Taylor is talking about. Mentalities can change but it takes a a long time. A recent Rasmussen poll shows that Blacks are aware they are more racists than other ethnic groups and other polls demonstrate that belief in OJ Simpson's "innocence" has waned overtime among Blacks.
  73. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    >>>What I Like About Blacks

    Blacks are a societal cancer. Might as well publish an article called “What I Like About Cancer.”

    Read More
  74. @BlueSonicStreak
    Gee, "Truth," it took you four entire paragraphs to realize Mr. Taylor was serious? Funny, I went into this article expecting sarcasm too, but it only took me to the top of the second paragraph to realize he was sincere.

    What should we take from this? That you have a low IQ? Or that you're just unable to cop to the "truth," handle notwithstanding? Are you so unable to recognize how accurate a description this is? If you took out all mentions of race and replaced blacks in this article with "People X," I'm sure most of us would still immediately know it was about black people.

    I'm sure that if white people of my generation (Millennials) wrote up a description of black people, it would not sound nearly so eloquent as this. And there is something about his attitude which reads as quaint. But the general thrust would be the same.

    I don’t think you understand, Sport;

    Of course I have a low IQ, it’s 85, but that’s outside of the scope of this conversation. I get from this article that Mr. Taylor likes black people because they:

    1. Compliment his appearance
    2. Make him laugh
    3. Want to fuck him

    Guess what, in most cases, I appreciate these traits in all people. And what you, and the other Oceanians here don’t get is that if I wrote an article entitled “Why I like whites,” and and highlighted their abilities to get along (whimpiness, fear of sticking up for themselves), love for animals (kissing, sleeping with, eating out of the same dish with their dogs), intellectual pursuits (inability to play sports or dance), and disarming naivite (climbing into the cage at the zoo every other mont to make “friends” with the Grizzly bears), and replaced “white” with “x” black people would know whom I was talking about; and it would be valid because it’s my “opinion”. However, white people reading it would say “wait hold on, we may do some of these things, but there is so much more to us!” And their “opinion” would be valid as well, although they would think my article was satire.

    Get it now? Not too hard.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BlueSonicStreak
    Well, you got a strange angle out of Mr. Taylor's article, Truth. He certainly related the qualities he was describing to his own interactions with people, yet I doubt he would agree with the perspective you're summarizing it from. The observation that your weird projected narcissism is pretty quintessentially black would be cheap, right? Or no? Since you seem to be copping to the qualities of your race after all, even if the observations being made apparently make you pout.

    You don't have to offer me a theoretical "what I like about whites" article. I used to be a radical leftist, and spent years hanging around enough of the black blogosphere to have seen EXACTLY what you're describing, over and over again in a thousand posts and comment sections. Your "theoretical" article is a daily reality in places not so far from here. As I'm sure you know perfectly well. (Hey, in talking about our love of animals, you left out, "smell like them, too." How could you forget that we smell like wet dogs?)

    But please, be more honest with your criticism here. Those were never "what I LIKE about whites," comments. They were, one and all, "what I HATE about whites" comments, because blacks essentially never write the former. And they have never, ever concerned themselves with whether or not their observations are good for "internaitonal [sic] caucasoid-afro relations."

    Makes your whining here particularly petty, see.
  75. @Anon
    @Truth

    Most WNs are actually fine with Black Americans who they view as behaving admirably, and agreeing with them on issues like Trayvon Martin.

    What's neglected in Mr. Taylor's above article is that he and his readers welcome articles like Larry Murdock's A Black Man’s Path to Race Realism.

    Smart Black Americans could have instant career success if they become public commentators who vocally support traditional America (including Black Americans who want to assimilate into that).

    “Smart Black Americans could have instant career success if they become public commentators who vocally support traditional America (including Black Americans who want to assimilate into that).”

    You are not totally wrong, nor are you anywhere near totally right. If you don’t believe me, answer me this question:

    Imagine a black men, tall, handsome, muscular and black as midnight. Kind to children and animals, police and well spoken: He graduated from Harvard with a STEM degree, and by some odd chance, it has be proven, conclusively, that he earned this degree via merit. He spends many hours doing charity work with white Appalachian children in his free time. Listens to classical music, C/W and heavy metal, serves in the Army reserve because “he loves America, and wants to see it succeed. He is under no illusion that black people have earned anything, and admits freely that he is “lucky” to have been “allowed” into America.

    I want you not just to think about this scenario, but to actually close your eyes and visualize “the perfect black man (by WN standards anyway).

    Next scenario; imagine the perfect white woman, well-raised, friendly to nerds, thin, beautiful, blonde, athletic and 19. Smart but not as smart as you, sexy and built, but not sleazy, and confident but still “a chick.”

    Close your eyes and imagine now.

    Now “Jack” is not a friend, per-se, but you know him fairly well and like, and respect him.

    Now imagine he starts FUCKING Jill. How do you feel?

    All he is doing, remeber, is answering nature’s call, and he is a “wonderful human being”, so you are happy for him, right? (Aside from the normal male-to-male jealousy you would have if Jim his white classmate and best friend were to conquer “Jill.”

    No difference in your mind, right?

    OK, well, I guess that explains just how much you believe in “assimilation.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @jewamongyou
    It's not just about an individual's merit, it's about group rights, a massive propaganda campaign (favoring black males) and "affirmative action."

    In a world where white men and black men were treated equally by the powers that be, it wouldn't bother me when black men, and white women, occasionally paired up. There will always be intermarriage, and there will always be cases where the best match is not of the same race.

    What bothers me is the societal context in which Jack and Jill got together. Here's a thought experiment for YOU:

    Imagine the perfect Southern white man in the Old South. We'll call him Phil. He's smart, handsome, open-minded and educated. He earned everything he's got, including the large farm he runs. One of his employees is a young black female, whose name is Edith. She's a good-hearted woman, and she's very beautiful. Through her contact with Phil, as his maid, she's become fond of him and they have an affair. How would most establishment elites, and leftists, view this relationship in an age where black poverty, subservience and sharecropping is the norm?

    Context Truth. It's all about context.

  76. @Truth
    I don't think you understand, Sport;

    Of course I have a low IQ, it's 85, but that's outside of the scope of this conversation. I get from this article that Mr. Taylor likes black people because they:

    1. Compliment his appearance
    2. Make him laugh
    3. Want to fuck him

    Guess what, in most cases, I appreciate these traits in all people. And what you, and the other Oceanians here don't get is that if I wrote an article entitled "Why I like whites," and and highlighted their abilities to get along (whimpiness, fear of sticking up for themselves), love for animals (kissing, sleeping with, eating out of the same dish with their dogs), intellectual pursuits (inability to play sports or dance), and disarming naivite (climbing into the cage at the zoo every other mont to make "friends" with the Grizzly bears), and replaced "white" with "x" black people would know whom I was talking about; and it would be valid because it's my "opinion". However, white people reading it would say "wait hold on, we may do some of these things, but there is so much more to us!" And their "opinion" would be valid as well, although they would think my article was satire.

    Get it now? Not too hard.

    Well, you got a strange angle out of Mr. Taylor’s article, Truth. He certainly related the qualities he was describing to his own interactions with people, yet I doubt he would agree with the perspective you’re summarizing it from. The observation that your weird projected narcissism is pretty quintessentially black would be cheap, right? Or no? Since you seem to be copping to the qualities of your race after all, even if the observations being made apparently make you pout.

    You don’t have to offer me a theoretical “what I like about whites” article. I used to be a radical leftist, and spent years hanging around enough of the black blogosphere to have seen EXACTLY what you’re describing, over and over again in a thousand posts and comment sections. Your “theoretical” article is a daily reality in places not so far from here. As I’m sure you know perfectly well. (Hey, in talking about our love of animals, you left out, “smell like them, too.” How could you forget that we smell like wet dogs?)

    But please, be more honest with your criticism here. Those were never “what I LIKE about whites,” comments. They were, one and all, “what I HATE about whites” comments, because blacks essentially never write the former. And they have never, ever concerned themselves with whether or not their observations are good for “internaitonal [sic] caucasoid-afro relations.”

    Makes your whining here particularly petty, see.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    "The observation that your weird projected narcissism is pretty quintessentially black would be cheap, right?"

    We're referencing an article in which a man walks from the hotel gym to his hotel room shirtless, yet I'm the narcissist?

    " Since you seem to be copping to the qualities of your race after all, even if the observations being made apparently make you pout."

    Incorrect again, Knave Thursday; I couldn't care less what Mr. Taylor thinks, the article, and his observations seems simple-minded and sophomoric; I just wanted to express this to HIM so he knows how it reads from the outside (you are not on the outside, you share a shoe box with him).

    "Your “theoretical” article is a daily reality in places not so far from here."

    OK, now you're starting to get it.

    "But please, be more honest with your criticism here..."

    Oh, wait scratch that. THAT'S JUST IT! But I could easily write them as "compliments" in a back-handed and self-serving way - and believe me there would be SOME degree of sincerity. THAT'S THE ENTIRE POINT HERE!

    It's cool, Bro, I'll take you on as a protogee, did great things with Mr. Anon, Svigor is a little too dense, but I tried.

  77. @BlueSonicStreak
    Well, you got a strange angle out of Mr. Taylor's article, Truth. He certainly related the qualities he was describing to his own interactions with people, yet I doubt he would agree with the perspective you're summarizing it from. The observation that your weird projected narcissism is pretty quintessentially black would be cheap, right? Or no? Since you seem to be copping to the qualities of your race after all, even if the observations being made apparently make you pout.

    You don't have to offer me a theoretical "what I like about whites" article. I used to be a radical leftist, and spent years hanging around enough of the black blogosphere to have seen EXACTLY what you're describing, over and over again in a thousand posts and comment sections. Your "theoretical" article is a daily reality in places not so far from here. As I'm sure you know perfectly well. (Hey, in talking about our love of animals, you left out, "smell like them, too." How could you forget that we smell like wet dogs?)

    But please, be more honest with your criticism here. Those were never "what I LIKE about whites," comments. They were, one and all, "what I HATE about whites" comments, because blacks essentially never write the former. And they have never, ever concerned themselves with whether or not their observations are good for "internaitonal [sic] caucasoid-afro relations."

    Makes your whining here particularly petty, see.

    “The observation that your weird projected narcissism is pretty quintessentially black would be cheap, right?”

    We’re referencing an article in which a man walks from the hotel gym to his hotel room shirtless, yet I’m the narcissist?

    ” Since you seem to be copping to the qualities of your race after all, even if the observations being made apparently make you pout.”

    Incorrect again, Knave Thursday; I couldn’t care less what Mr. Taylor thinks, the article, and his observations seems simple-minded and sophomoric; I just wanted to express this to HIM so he knows how it reads from the outside (you are not on the outside, you share a shoe box with him).

    “Your “theoretical” article is a daily reality in places not so far from here.”

    OK, now you’re starting to get it.

    “But please, be more honest with your criticism here…”

    Oh, wait scratch that. THAT’S JUST IT! But I could easily write them as “compliments” in a back-handed and self-serving way – and believe me there would be SOME degree of sincerity. THAT’S THE ENTIRE POINT HERE!

    It’s cool, Bro, I’ll take you on as a protogee, did great things with Mr. Anon, Svigor is a little too dense, but I tried.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BlueSonicStreak
    Truth, while I don't actually believe you to be stupid, you definitely aren't smart enough to consider me a "protogee [sic]." It's hilarious that you put me in the same "shoebox" as Mr. Taylor. I guess that makes you feel better.

    You don't seem to have remotely understood my point about your level of honesty - it was not about how sincerely you describe whites. If your description of whites was ACCURATE, regardless of your spin, yes, people would recognize it. Funny that you claim to have hung out at AmRen, yet seem to have forgotten how often some of the qualities you mentioned are brought up by whites themselves there (and bemoaned).

    Your pretense to some ideal of "fairness" is the lie. You don't give a fig if blacks are ever fair to whites. You're just butthurt that the best thing someone CAN say about blacks inevitably comes off as "back-handed."

    Your stunning individuality does not trump dozens or hundreds or thousands of experiences, and thinking so is what is "simple-minded and sophomoric." Mr. Taylor could have described these black qualities in ways that were less complimentary, or less "back-handed," or just not described them at all. They would still exist in reality.
  78. @Truth
    "The observation that your weird projected narcissism is pretty quintessentially black would be cheap, right?"

    We're referencing an article in which a man walks from the hotel gym to his hotel room shirtless, yet I'm the narcissist?

    " Since you seem to be copping to the qualities of your race after all, even if the observations being made apparently make you pout."

    Incorrect again, Knave Thursday; I couldn't care less what Mr. Taylor thinks, the article, and his observations seems simple-minded and sophomoric; I just wanted to express this to HIM so he knows how it reads from the outside (you are not on the outside, you share a shoe box with him).

    "Your “theoretical” article is a daily reality in places not so far from here."

    OK, now you're starting to get it.

    "But please, be more honest with your criticism here..."

    Oh, wait scratch that. THAT'S JUST IT! But I could easily write them as "compliments" in a back-handed and self-serving way - and believe me there would be SOME degree of sincerity. THAT'S THE ENTIRE POINT HERE!

    It's cool, Bro, I'll take you on as a protogee, did great things with Mr. Anon, Svigor is a little too dense, but I tried.

    Truth, while I don’t actually believe you to be stupid, you definitely aren’t smart enough to consider me a “protogee [sic].” It’s hilarious that you put me in the same “shoebox” as Mr. Taylor. I guess that makes you feel better.

    You don’t seem to have remotely understood my point about your level of honesty – it was not about how sincerely you describe whites. If your description of whites was ACCURATE, regardless of your spin, yes, people would recognize it. Funny that you claim to have hung out at AmRen, yet seem to have forgotten how often some of the qualities you mentioned are brought up by whites themselves there (and bemoaned).

    Your pretense to some ideal of “fairness” is the lie. You don’t give a fig if blacks are ever fair to whites. You’re just butthurt that the best thing someone CAN say about blacks inevitably comes off as “back-handed.”

    Your stunning individuality does not trump dozens or hundreds or thousands of experiences, and thinking so is what is “simple-minded and sophomoric.” Mr. Taylor could have described these black qualities in ways that were less complimentary, or less “back-handed,” or just not described them at all. They would still exist in reality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    To be perfectly honest, Sport, I have noticed the "wet dog" thing, I just never wanted to say it...

    Anyway, show up outside the temple, tomorrow at the crack of dawn with all of the other orphans. Stay there, rain or shine for at least thirty days...yadda..yadda...yadda...you know the drill I'm only taking one in.
  79. @BlueSonicStreak
    Truth, while I don't actually believe you to be stupid, you definitely aren't smart enough to consider me a "protogee [sic]." It's hilarious that you put me in the same "shoebox" as Mr. Taylor. I guess that makes you feel better.

    You don't seem to have remotely understood my point about your level of honesty - it was not about how sincerely you describe whites. If your description of whites was ACCURATE, regardless of your spin, yes, people would recognize it. Funny that you claim to have hung out at AmRen, yet seem to have forgotten how often some of the qualities you mentioned are brought up by whites themselves there (and bemoaned).

    Your pretense to some ideal of "fairness" is the lie. You don't give a fig if blacks are ever fair to whites. You're just butthurt that the best thing someone CAN say about blacks inevitably comes off as "back-handed."

    Your stunning individuality does not trump dozens or hundreds or thousands of experiences, and thinking so is what is "simple-minded and sophomoric." Mr. Taylor could have described these black qualities in ways that were less complimentary, or less "back-handed," or just not described them at all. They would still exist in reality.

    To be perfectly honest, Sport, I have noticed the “wet dog” thing, I just never wanted to say it…

    Anyway, show up outside the temple, tomorrow at the crack of dawn with all of the other orphans. Stay there, rain or shine for at least thirty days…yadda..yadda…yadda…you know the drill I’m only taking one in.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BlueSonicStreak
    ...And at the end of the day, that's all you've got. Fancy yourself a real smart-alek, don't you, but you cannot win an argument.

    We won't discuss your personal perfume. Unlike blacks, I've never in my life stooped low enough to invent a rude description for it. And that's a good enough summation right there of why I'm no longer a liberal.
  80. “The Foole doth thinke he is wise, but the wiseman knowes himselfe to be a Foole”

    - Shakespeare

    Read More
  81. @Truth
    To be perfectly honest, Sport, I have noticed the "wet dog" thing, I just never wanted to say it...

    Anyway, show up outside the temple, tomorrow at the crack of dawn with all of the other orphans. Stay there, rain or shine for at least thirty days...yadda..yadda...yadda...you know the drill I'm only taking one in.

    …And at the end of the day, that’s all you’ve got. Fancy yourself a real smart-alek, don’t you, but you cannot win an argument.

    We won’t discuss your personal perfume. Unlike blacks, I’ve never in my life stooped low enough to invent a rude description for it. And that’s a good enough summation right there of why I’m no longer a liberal.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    So I helped you make a major life decision?

    You see, the mentorship is working already.
  82. @BlueSonicStreak
    ...And at the end of the day, that's all you've got. Fancy yourself a real smart-alek, don't you, but you cannot win an argument.

    We won't discuss your personal perfume. Unlike blacks, I've never in my life stooped low enough to invent a rude description for it. And that's a good enough summation right there of why I'm no longer a liberal.

    So I helped you make a major life decision?

    You see, the mentorship is working already.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BlueSonicStreak
    Because turning whites to racial realism is your goal here, right?
  83. BTW; Bro, one does not “win” an argument. An argument is meant to be a mutual exchange of ideas; “statements and reasoning in support of a position.”

    If you go into it with the viewpoint of “winning”, you’ve already lost.

    Read More
  84. @Truth
    So I helped you make a major life decision?

    You see, the mentorship is working already.

    Because turning whites to racial realism is your goal here, right?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    No, My friend, certainly not:

    My goal is to make jokes.
  85. @BlueSonicStreak
    Because turning whites to racial realism is your goal here, right?

    No, My friend, certainly not:

    My goal is to make jokes.

    Read More
  86. @Mark Green
    Stan- Are you a Zionist activist?

    You sure lie like one.

    This is why I think you're probably Jewish, Stan. Jews generally hate it when whites stake out their own racial/cultural territory. In America, that privilege is reserved for Jews. Jews seek to de-legitimize 'white identity' while they celebrate 'Jewish identity'. And you fit this pattern.

    But there's plenty to blame Jews for, Stan. Plenty. Just ask the Palestinians. Or the Iraqis. Or the Iranians. Or the Lebanese. Or, for that matter, the Americans. (The alert ones, anyway). Jewish Americans (and even Israeli-Americans) have transformed our civilization. Are you kidding?

    Though Jews in Israel advance strict segregation there, Jews here and in Europe promote racial and cultural integration aggressively. And these double standards have served them well. Whites in Europe and America have seen themselves marginalized from their own cultures. Jews on the other hand have risen both economically and culturally in the West.

    At the same time, Israel lives off entrenched double-standards: from nuclear weapons, to it's arrogant license to warmonger, to its policy of systematic ethnic-cleansing, to its US-enabled ability to initiate lethal violence at will and without fear of reprisal since America protects Israel both militarily, economically and diplomatically.

    But Israel is something of a rogue state. To this day, the Jewish State refuses to declare its borders or to allow outside inspection of its nuclear arsenal. These are real double standards, Stan. You deny this?

    As for the 'Muslim question', organized Jewry has played a very definite role in flooding Europe as well as the US with Third World peoples. Some are Muslim, some Christian, and some have an assortment of beliefs and ethnic/racial backgrounds. But few of these new immigrants have much white European ancestry or an organic connection to Europe or white America. That's the key. White culture is in decline and this transformation is no accident. Western civilization is headed.... where? Not where average (white) Europeans and Americans want for it to go. But Jewish cultural influence and Jewish power and Jewish visibility is rising in everywhere. You haven't noticed?

    At the same time, Israel is slowly but inexorably getting rid of its gentiles. Does this interest you, Stan? Jewish DNA matters a lot in Israel. Should whites care about their DNA, too? May they even think about it?

    The racial transformation now underway in Europe and America has made the world safer for Israel as well as international Jewry--despite the wild headlines that emerge when one Jews get shot somewhere00as Jews do very well in mixed societies. They form ethnic-based teams.

    I've got good news for you, Stan: Jews are on a tear. They have achieved extraordinary wealth and power in the West. Today, the case can be made that Jews pretty much manage Washington, Hollywood and have quite a bit to say on Wall Street, too. This translates into vast cultural and political influence. Do you deny this? And what about all these wars? Might there be a Zionist angel here? Better check with AIPAC.

    Jews have been successfully de-Christianizing America and the West the West for decades. You haven't noticed? Better check with your pals at the ACLU.

    Blame Jews? Sure. Blame those responsible. But the responsibility is there. It's undeniable, even world class liars like you cannot deny the obvious, Stan. The Iraq war. The economic war on Iran. The conquest of Libya. The destablization of Syria. Of Palestine. Does this makes me an 'anti-Semite' for saying this?

    Oh my! I feel so ashamed!

    But you, Stan, are the liar.

    As America and Europe become less Christian and less white, nimble minorities like Jews can still form alliances and rise to the top. That's what's happened in the US over the past 50 years. You haven't noticed?

    Israel, meanwhile, is killing Muslims at will (and getting rid of its native Christian population, too) while is pursues its dream of a 'more pure' Jewish state. You deny this? And US taxpayers have been subsidizing this Zionist operation for decades. Why? And the US money to Israel never stops. American aid to Israel is unconditional, Stan. Interesting situation, don't you think?

    What's particularly maddening about Zionist operatives like you, Stan, is how you invariably depict yourself (Jews) as blameless victims in all the conflicts in which you and the world's most important tribe is involved. And that's a lot of conflicts! But activist Jews (and this probably includes you) are not innocent. So quit lying.

    Jews operatives even circulate the defamatory and dishonest term 'anti-Semitism' to describe their foes, claiming that the relatively voiceless people who have genuine disputes with Jews are somehow deranged or even mad. And then the kosher mafia has the audacity to complain about 'censorship'!

    You'd better tread lightly there, Stan. Am Ren barely touches the Jews. I wish they would criticize and excoriate the Jews far more often than they do. But it is Organized Jewry that is the foremost purveyor of (political) censorship in the Western World. Censorship? Jews absolutely rule American mass media. You haven't noticed? Since you're obviously not stupid, Stan, you must simply be dishonest.

    Sorry, but Jews HAVE PLAYED a very heavy role in numerous affairs where lives have been lost and liberty erased. But they often try cover their tacks. And yes, they do successfully impose censorship ('speech codes') and even draft 'hate crime' legislation, 'group libel' laws, as well as criminalize 'denial' of certain unproven political 'facts' involving WWII. This is world class censorship. And woe to the errant politician or artist or intellectual who steps out of line, as their careers are often affected adversely. Muslims don't get any of these protections. Why? The Jewish lobby is far more powerful.

    Does saying this make me 'anti-Semitic'? I hope so! But you'd better stop playing the dying 'anti-Semite' card, Stan. It's becoming worthless.

    OK, we can agree: Jews are not responsible for all the world's ills. But who has made such a ridiculous claim? No one. But organized Jewry has done real damage. And they're still at work. And if they get their way, the US will be involved in another military disaster involving another foe of you-know-who. This is criminal.

    Zionists must accept responsibility when it fits. In the meantime: quit lying.

    Mark Green, thank you..

    I only have to listen/see Barbara Spectre to understand even on an entirely visceral level why I don’t favor Jews having any control over my country. this short video leaves now room for misinterpretation, no matter what Stan (I wish) Mute says. http://youtu.be/MFE0qAiofMQ 1min17.

    Read More
  87. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Jared Taylor
    I am very surprised by this comment. I would be curious to see an example of a comment you left at Amren.com that argued against the view that Jews were "the problem" but was deleted.

    As another commenter has pointed out below, we have little patience with posts that reflexively blame Jews for everything that has gone wrong for whites.

    I have to agree with Stan D Mute. I used to think that AR was actually very fair about the question of Jews (as I know Jared is, individually); however, even very recently on your article about drug arrests, some of my comments (fairly benign, in my opinion) that were critical of the “blame the Jews” mentality were deleted, while some positively ignorant replies to said comments were left visible. I’m not sure what kind of oversight or moderation process there is for comments at AR, but I suspect the person(s) with administrative powers over the comments is/are not in full agreement with Jared on the question of the relationship between Jews and gentile whites.

    Meanwhile, I think this article here was excellent and I can agree with just about everything in it. I’ve often characterized myself to friends as being something of a racist (based on how the term is commonly understood nowadays), but by no means a malicious racist. Some people seem to have a difficult time disentangling the two concepts, but to me there is absolutely no inconsistency whatsoever.

    Read More
  88. @Anon
    @Truth

    Most WNs are actually fine with Black Americans who they view as behaving admirably, and agreeing with them on issues like Trayvon Martin.

    What's neglected in Mr. Taylor's above article is that he and his readers welcome articles like Larry Murdock's A Black Man’s Path to Race Realism.

    Smart Black Americans could have instant career success if they become public commentators who vocally support traditional America (including Black Americans who want to assimilate into that).

    Fair enough.

    But most White Nationalists act as if they consider racial hatred against Blacks to be part of the cornerstone of their ideology.

    You just have to read a comment section of any Amren article to see this hatred is pretty much mainstream. Most articles about Blacks considered friendly to their causes (like Elizabeth Wright or Larry Murdock) are met with many comments of contempt or hatred with large voting approval.

    That’s what repelled me as a Black person. Jared Taylor might not personally detest Blacks but like a tree who hides the forest his website is a magnet for internauts who are exactly the type of people liberals like to point the finger at to say racism is pervasive in America.

    Discussions about Black crime are absolutely legitimate but there’s a fine line between legitimate criticisms of mentalities and behaviors we believe are detrimental to the country’s social fabric and vulgar and abusive generalizations like “Black men are sexual predators” or “Blacks are a criminal race”.

    Regarding the article in itself he certainly brings an entertaining perspective about Black behavior in the hood. However I do not regard them as being stuck in their habits I remember a Walter Williams column talking about how Northern Blacks were saying to Black migrants from the South about to comply with the current standards: ‘During the early 20th century, there were mass migrations of blacks from the South. Both the black-owned Chicago Defender and the Urban League offered published advice to their less tutored brethren, such as: “Don’t use vile language in public places.” “Don’t throw garbage in the backyard or alley or keep dirty front yards.” “Do not carry on loud conversations in street cars and public places.”‘ (‘Intellectuals and race’ column)

    I’m not saying these people will be rich one day at all but speaking from a general point of view that goes far beyond the neighborhood Taylor is talking about. Mentalities can change but it takes a a long time. A recent Rasmussen poll shows that Blacks are aware they are more racists than other ethnic groups and other polls demonstrate that belief in OJ Simpson’s “innocence” has waned overtime among Blacks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna

    You just have to read a comment section of any Amren article to see this hatred is pretty much mainstream.
     
    How on earth you extrapolate from Amren's comment sections to the 'mainstream' is quite beyond me. Meanwhile you keep repeating the phrase 'the datas' and use apostrophes for commas as numerical delimiters. It's all very cool.
  89. @Gene Su
    3 Points I like to Make:

    1. I don't think Blacks have lower IQ than Whites. Most especially, I don't think Blacks have lesser mathematical ability than Whites. I've played at the chess tournaments in Newark, NJ and all of the winners are Black. It is true that Blacks commit more crimes but some of the scams I see on TV really impress me. I once saw a special about some Black guy counterfeiting twenty dollar bills and made them look like the real thing.

    2. I think the problem is that Blacks have no discipline at all. Keith Richburg has made the same observation. That is why Blacks are so arrogant and proud despite the fact that they have accomplished so little. I also think that no amount of schooling is going to change this. I'm not a race realist. I'm a cultural realist.

    3. I think there are 2 reasons why so many whites are not on the race realism bandwagon. First, as John Derbyshire and Fred Reed has pointed out, most whites come in contact with only intelligent, middle class blacks. Second and conversely, most whites go to public schools with only other whites. There are many cases of white on white bullying and violence. It may be far less than what you would get at a black public school but it is enough to make a lot of non-blacks believe that "whites are no better than blacks."

    Interesting point 1. There’s this NYT article about three black kids who are among the 13 youngest master chess in the US named James Black Jr., Joshua Coles and Justus Williams.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/13/crosswords/chess/chess-three-young-african-americans-earn-recognition-as-masters.html?_r=0

    Two of them were part of a team which won the national high school chess championship and the last one competed against Magnus Carlssen (the actual number 1). Were they among the winners of the tournament you’re talking about ?

    Read More
  90. @Dipwill
    I can't say I find much disagreeable or off the mark with this article, but there was this comment:
    "Groups that evolved in climates where they didn’t have to worry about storing food for the winter could afford to eat one candy bar right away. If they didn’t need to cooperate to bring down big game, maybe they could all afford to think they were big shots."

    The fact you'd actually say this despite having read things Nicholas Wade's book and found it very commendable is remarkable- you seriously still, after all this time, subscribe to the "race differences were forged in the ice age and have remained virtually unchanged for all of human history" model. It should be abundantly clear, not just from reading that book, but any cursory glance at the state of research in this field how dead wrong that whole framework is (but to be honest, it should have come off as pretty absurd from a racialist perspective even 20 years ago.) Whites and east asians were likely behaviorally very different several centuries ago, and it's really doubtful the paleolithic climates played as clear of a role as something like Rushton's models might imply. In the case of blacks, Peter Frost has noted how the most primitive, isolated african ethnic groups- the hadza, pygmies, khoisan and sandawe, predominantly stone age hunter-gatherers (in contrast to virtually all other africans who had agriculture, animal husbandry and iron smelting before colonialism) exhibit very "k" behaviors in contrast to the "r" ones of most other africans. The aka pygmies have the highest rates of parental investment from fathers in the world- what does that tell you? It's likely the case that the female-centered agriculture and heavy polygamy that typifies bantsu and such, which originated only several thousand years ago has been a major factor in the pathologies and other characteristics of typical blacks. Plus, it's not like far northern mongoloid peoples like the huns and mongols were some of the most barbaric, destructive people in human history, or that native americans, despite their infants being more stoic and less responsive than east asian ones, nonetheless have been known to be astonishingly violent and barbaric, like the plains indians and the aztecs.

    This all really dovetails with what you say at the end, "One of the great, historic frustrations of liberalism is the failure of blacks to behave like whites, no matter how many role models we set up, laws we pass, racial preferences we hand out, or welfare programs we pay for. Blacks are not going to change, so we have to treat with them as they are. And just as the blacks of the Tenderloin saw me as a source of fun—as a potentially amusing fellow human being—we should make the most of their good qualities." In essence, I agree, but human evolution can work far faster than what people like Rushton and Lynn imply, and while modern liberalism isn't the answer, it goes without saying that they can change, and maybe if you eschewed their work (who are, on the whole, charlatans, with cartoon understandings of human history who have done great damage to this field*), maybe you can be truly an impetus for this as well.

    *Somehow, even someone like Frost has openly proclaimed he respects Rushton- despite how his work is largely anathema to him. Why, I don't really know, but I have to say not of all his ideas really make much sense either.

    I pretty much agree with your end point that biological determinism has been a bit exaggerated to explain black pathologies.

    I dug around many datas I’ve been posting on internet forums to get some feedback (lately I posted them to Steve Sailer’s blog co’s comment section)and I would like to know yours as well.

    It is common knowledge that Blacks disproportionately commit crimes compared their share in the general population but it seems to be less known that black crime rate has had a sharper drop than the white rate.

    There’s a website called “Easy access to Juvenile populations”. http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ezapop/
    Despite the misleading title you can obtain data from the entire population regarding their sex, age, race and ethnicity and even make state-by-state or county-by-county comparison. Using the population tables with the Uniform Crime Report (plus the Easy Access Supplementary Homicide Reports website) from the FBI you can establish crime rates (for 100’000 people) for different populations.

    It turns out that for Blacks:
    Between 1991 and 2012
    Murder rate went from 34.3 to 16.1 which is a 56 percent drop
    Between 1992 and 2013
    Rape from 46.4 to 10.4 about 78 percent
    Robbery from 304 to 108.5 about 64 percent
    Aggravated Assault from 549.3 to 242 about 56 percent
    Violent Crime from 934.6 to 371.6 about 60 percent
    Burglary from 355.4 to 151.2 about 58 percent
    Larceny-Theft from 1317.4 to 608.7 about 54 percent
    Motor Vehicle Theft from 219.7 to 40.4 about 82 percent
    Arson from 11.6 to 2.5 about 60 percent

    Note: The timespan for the homicide rate is different because it started to drop a year earlier than other crimes and because data for 2013 are not yet available.

    For Whites (& Hispanics too since 90% of them are classified as “White”) within the same period and same crimes:
    Murder from 4.7 to 2.2 about 51 percent
    Rape from 7.7 to 3.6 about 58 percent
    Robbery from 27 to 13.2 about 48 percent
    Aggravated Assault from 120.1 to 73.3 about 39 percent
    Violent Crime from 160.5 to 91.8 about 43 percent
    Burglary from 113.9 to 55 about 58 percent
    Larceny-Theft from 399 to 271.6 about 32 percent
    Motor Vehicle Theft from 46.7 to 14.2 about 70 percent
    Arson from 5.8 to 2.5 about 57 percent

    Interestingly interracial crime also seems to be on the decline. The 1994 edition of “Criminal Victimization in the United States Statistical Tables” records 1’140’670 white victims of criminal violence at the hands of blacks compared to only 135’360 blacks victims of whites. In 2010 these numbers dropped respectively to 320’082 and 62’593. Using the non-hispanic white and black population to establish the rates we find that the black rate dropped 77 percent compared to the white rate which dropped 55 percent.

    The recent decrease of crime also has its effects on the correlation between race and crime. Comparing the state population by race in EZAPOP and state violent crime rate in disastercenter.com we find a correlation of r = 0.76 between the percentage of black population and violent crime rate among the 50 states in 1991 (the correlation increases to r = 0.86 if we include the hispanic population). In 2012 this correlation dropped to r = 0.61 (with the hispanic population it dropped to r = 0.65). The drop is sharper if we take only the homicide rate with the black population percentage, we find, during the same period, a drop from r = 0.72 to r = 0.46.
    Exploring the net I stumbled upon this article about crime and demographics from the Claremont Institute which explores the interactions between these two factors

    http://www.claremont.org/article/the-great-black-hope/#.VNlfn977-Xo

    In parallel we also witnessed the decline of sexual activities among black teens. Recently the CDC published a survey report showing that black students are less sexually active “About 60 percent of black high school students surveyed in 2011 reported having had sex, down from 82 percent in 1991…In addition to the increasing share of black teens who have never had sex, those that are active cite fewer partners than previous generations. The number with four or more sex partners declined to 25 percent from 43 percent” http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-07-24/black-teens-having-less-sex-narrow-gap-with-whites

    In another press release one official says “the numbers coincide with drops in teen pregnancy and births.” http://consumer.healthday.com/senior-citizen-information-31/age-health-news-7/survey-finds-big-drop-in-sexual-activity-among-black-teens-666975.html

    The datas are pretty verifiable. The justice department office of juvenile justice and delinquency prevention (OJJDP) has its graph about teenage mothers by race. We find that between 1991 and 2012, birth rates among 15-17-year-old declined 74% for black teens while for white teens the drop was of 57%.

    http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/population/qa01302.asp?qaDate=2012

    The Guttmacher Institute published similar results concerning 15-19-year-old women. Table 1.1 of this report shows similar drops of pregnancies among Black and White women

    https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/USTPtrends10.pdf

    Read More
  91. @SDN
    Fair enough.

    But most White Nationalists act as if they consider racial hatred against Blacks to be part of the cornerstone of their ideology.

    You just have to read a comment section of any Amren article to see this hatred is pretty much mainstream. Most articles about Blacks considered friendly to their causes (like Elizabeth Wright or Larry Murdock) are met with many comments of contempt or hatred with large voting approval.

    That's what repelled me as a Black person. Jared Taylor might not personally detest Blacks but like a tree who hides the forest his website is a magnet for internauts who are exactly the type of people liberals like to point the finger at to say racism is pervasive in America.

    Discussions about Black crime are absolutely legitimate but there's a fine line between legitimate criticisms of mentalities and behaviors we believe are detrimental to the country's social fabric and vulgar and abusive generalizations like "Black men are sexual predators" or "Blacks are a criminal race".

    Regarding the article in itself he certainly brings an entertaining perspective about Black behavior in the hood. However I do not regard them as being stuck in their habits I remember a Walter Williams column talking about how Northern Blacks were saying to Black migrants from the South about to comply with the current standards: 'During the early 20th century, there were mass migrations of blacks from the South. Both the black-owned Chicago Defender and the Urban League offered published advice to their less tutored brethren, such as: "Don't use vile language in public places." "Don't throw garbage in the backyard or alley or keep dirty front yards." "Do not carry on loud conversations in street cars and public places."' ('Intellectuals and race' column)

    I'm not saying these people will be rich one day at all but speaking from a general point of view that goes far beyond the neighborhood Taylor is talking about. Mentalities can change but it takes a a long time. A recent Rasmussen poll shows that Blacks are aware they are more racists than other ethnic groups and other polls demonstrate that belief in OJ Simpson's "innocence" has waned overtime among Blacks.

    You just have to read a comment section of any Amren article to see this hatred is pretty much mainstream.

    How on earth you extrapolate from Amren’s comment sections to the ‘mainstream’ is quite beyond me. Meanwhile you keep repeating the phrase ‘the datas’ and use apostrophes for commas as numerical delimiters. It’s all very cool.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SDN
    I was saying it was mainstream on Amren's comment sections.
  92. @Kyle McKenna

    You just have to read a comment section of any Amren article to see this hatred is pretty much mainstream.
     
    How on earth you extrapolate from Amren's comment sections to the 'mainstream' is quite beyond me. Meanwhile you keep repeating the phrase 'the datas' and use apostrophes for commas as numerical delimiters. It's all very cool.

    I was saying it was mainstream on Amren’s comment sections.

    Read More
  93. It’s important to point out the positive attributes in people we criticize. Well done, Jared, in doing just that. We try to tell the truth as we see it, and for this, people call us “haters.”

    I’ve been planning to write an article similar to this one for quite some time. I never got around to it. But my recent blog posts, about my visit to Ethiopia, have drawn some criticism; I guess, since Ethiopians are black, I’m not supposed to say good things about them.

    Read More
  94. @Truth
    "Smart Black Americans could have instant career success if they become public commentators who vocally support traditional America (including Black Americans who want to assimilate into that)."

    You are not totally wrong, nor are you anywhere near totally right. If you don't believe me, answer me this question:

    Imagine a black men, tall, handsome, muscular and black as midnight. Kind to children and animals, police and well spoken: He graduated from Harvard with a STEM degree, and by some odd chance, it has be proven, conclusively, that he earned this degree via merit. He spends many hours doing charity work with white Appalachian children in his free time. Listens to classical music, C/W and heavy metal, serves in the Army reserve because "he loves America, and wants to see it succeed. He is under no illusion that black people have earned anything, and admits freely that he is "lucky" to have been "allowed" into America.

    I want you not just to think about this scenario, but to actually close your eyes and visualize "the perfect black man (by WN standards anyway).

    Next scenario; imagine the perfect white woman, well-raised, friendly to nerds, thin, beautiful, blonde, athletic and 19. Smart but not as smart as you, sexy and built, but not sleazy, and confident but still "a chick."

    Close your eyes and imagine now.

    Now "Jack" is not a friend, per-se, but you know him fairly well and like, and respect him.

    Now imagine he starts FUCKING Jill. How do you feel?

    All he is doing, remeber, is answering nature's call, and he is a "wonderful human being", so you are happy for him, right? (Aside from the normal male-to-male jealousy you would have if Jim his white classmate and best friend were to conquer "Jill."

    No difference in your mind, right?

    OK, well, I guess that explains just how much you believe in "assimilation."

    It’s not just about an individual’s merit, it’s about group rights, a massive propaganda campaign (favoring black males) and “affirmative action.”

    In a world where white men and black men were treated equally by the powers that be, it wouldn’t bother me when black men, and white women, occasionally paired up. There will always be intermarriage, and there will always be cases where the best match is not of the same race.

    What bothers me is the societal context in which Jack and Jill got together. Here’s a thought experiment for YOU:

    Imagine the perfect Southern white man in the Old South. We’ll call him Phil. He’s smart, handsome, open-minded and educated. He earned everything he’s got, including the large farm he runs. One of his employees is a young black female, whose name is Edith. She’s a good-hearted woman, and she’s very beautiful. Through her contact with Phil, as his maid, she’s become fond of him and they have an affair. How would most establishment elites, and leftists, view this relationship in an age where black poverty, subservience and sharecropping is the norm?

    Context Truth. It’s all about context.

    Read More
  95. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Elliot
    Tips from someone who grew up with blacks, who attended a fifty-percent-black high school, who has dealt with blacks for 40+ years:

    Blacks are:
    --more emotional--quick to anger, quick to laugh;
    --impulsive, deficient in self-control;
    --compelled to act out feelings, to dramatize their emotions;
    --unable to distinguish reality from fantasy;
    --in need of a strong authority to enforce proper behavior.

    In other words, blacks are more like children.

    Keep that in mind when you interact with a black: you're dealing with a large, strong, potentially unruly and destructive child.
    Read More
  96. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “Two black chambermaids coming down the hall eyed me with interest. “Nice!” one of them said softly. I smiled, and the other said, much louder, “Very nice.” No white chambermaid would have said that”.

    No, White women likely wouldn’t say such a thing. At least, not to a White guy.

    Read More
  97. @Truth
    An Ivy league professor, a quasi-preacher media personality, and the President of the US; yes, lots of commonality there.

    You see, that's just what you don't get; what black person would put Jimmy Swaggart, George H.W. Bush and Richard Feynman in the same sentence and wonder why they aren't doing the same thing?

    Do yourself a favor and think about that, and why you did it.

    Cornel West, Barack Obama, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton are all “professional blacks”. They owe their careers to their adept exploiting of America’s racial anxieties. If they were white, no one would have heard of them. Taylor is a “race man”, just like them, but in today’s America being a “professional white” is a much less attractive career choice than the black equivalent.

    Read More
  98. @FireForEffect
    I was not pro-white when I was growing up, in spite of numerous violent assaults and threats of murder by black adults. Only after the noise grew to gale force, did I begin to search for others who had similar experiences. I bought into the $plc line; hook, line and sinker until the EVIDENCE of daily life overwhelmed the propaganda. I have always been a nerd and have spent a lot of time thinking, collecting facts and pertinent historical events. Jared Taylor is a calm voice in a storm of lies, deceit and perfidy. Your comments are fairly coherent for an admitted $plc troll, but still devoid of truthful or useful content. Good luck hanging out with the Onion and probably Salon and Tim Wise types. They will betray you and do you more damage than I could ever conceive, if I had any wish to do you harm, and I don't.

    Well said and that was my experience as well.

    Read More
  99. To those of you who complain here and elsewhere about Jewish conspiracies, contributions, media power, etc: you sound an awful lot like a bunch of blacks complaining about whitey holding them down.

    There is a parallel.

    Just sayin’.

    Read More
  100. @Anonymous
    There is indeed commonality among all the blacks listed. All are racialists to a man.

    The definition of racism comes from the white Euro -US American, where the laws were passed to pick winners and losers, and to grant priviledge to the aforementioned Euro origin US white fellow.

    No Asian, “Hispanic: or Afro-descended origin individuals have passed laws to abrogate the rights of any such Euro origin white American in principle or concept. That just never happened but we see alot of this cognitive dissonance form the ‘white designated man” pretending the opposite is true. As long as truth is known, all people will have the situational awareness to see the true criminals and their ilk. G*d bless USA

    Read More
  101. I there exists a blog written by a black Steve Sailer, please point it out, and I’ll read it and visit it regularly. I’m not prejudiced.

    Read More
  102. @Aaron Gross
    You wrote (with a few words changed):

    I am disturbed that this article gives a positive view of [men] and the impression that they are not to be feared when all crime statistics prove that it’s extremely wise for [women] to either avoid [men] or be wary around them.
    ...
    No [woman] should ever be comfortable around [men]. [Women] need to be warned about violent [male] behavior, not comforted.
     
    This is based on federal crime statistics, which show that men are more criminally violent than women by approximately an order of magnitude.

    You wrote (with a few words changed):

    I am disturbed that this article gives a positive view of [men] and the impression that they are not to be feared when all crime statistics prove that it’s extremely wise for [women] to either avoid [men] or be wary around them.

    No [woman] should ever be comfortable around [men]. [Women] need to be warned about violent [male] behavior, not comforted.

    This is based on federal crime statistics, which show that men are more criminally violent than women by approximately an order of magnitude.

    If a person were to recommend that a woman not “walk down an alley alone at night” they would no be condemned for making out all men to be rapists.

    Sex differences are ingrained into our customs and laws.

    We have separate-but-equal sex-segregated restrooms. We have sex-segregated athletics at all levels. Men are not allowed to be girl-scout leaders. Doctors need female chaperones. Japan has women-only train cars to stop groping. etc.

    Read More
  103. In accord with Mr Truth, if a similar opinion were written about the white people, they would fail to comprehend the process and the honesty and probably call it racist if a similar 1st Amendment commentary would be in place. As a matter of fact, in a similar vein, a comical movie about white people produced an outcry, all be it, a mute point that the move was absurd and negative when, although I saw it myself to test its veracity, I ended up laughing at all the stupid and ignorant situation that I have encountered with them.

    Just like I see a white fellow in the role of Moses, I enjoy the popcorn and the coke/pepsi snacks as part of the propaganda thang!

    Read More
  104. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    This is some ignorant, racist rhetoric that should not be taken seriously. To the woman that commented black people are more like children you cannot be serious about that as it is the most ignorant thing I have ever read.

    Read More
  105. @Truth
    An Ivy league professor, a quasi-preacher media personality, and the President of the US; yes, lots of commonality there.

    You see, that's just what you don't get; what black person would put Jimmy Swaggart, George H.W. Bush and Richard Feynman in the same sentence and wonder why they aren't doing the same thing?

    Do yourself a favor and think about that, and why you did it.

    “An Ivy league professor, a quasi-preacher media personality, and the President of the US; yes, lots of commonality there.”

    The names he mentioned are all in politics, assuming to support black interests.

    “Do yourself a favor and think about that, and why you did it.”

    That is entirely on you.

    Read More
  106. What do I like about blacks? Well, there’s the, uh…….no. OK, but there’s the…….never mind. Their women… (gag reflex, cleanse palate with sherbet). Their intellectual contributions to mankind…ROFLMAO. This guy, always with the jokes. Oh, yeah, what I like about blacks:

    1 Nothing.

    Is there some way I could possibly like anything about blacks? Well, if they would leave or if we could leave and they wouldn’t follow us that might be a starting point for personal reflection.

    Read More
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
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The sources of America’s immigration problems—and a possible solution