The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewE. Michael Jones Archive
Google’s Conquest of Ireland, Part One
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

After John Haldane’s tight-rope walk over a swamp of politically correct crocodiles at the University Notre Dame’s 2019 ethics and culture conference, John Waters’ talk seemed subdued by comparison. After getting used to the somber tone of his talk, the audience quickly fell under his spell. With his balding pate surrounded by a halo of what was left of his hippie hair, his white stubble beard and cane, Waters had the air of a man who had something important to say after being released from a military infirmary where he underwent protracted convalescence following a battle in which he almost died. The fact that he described another casualty in the culture wars in Ireland did not disguise the fact that he was one of that campaign’s most famous victims.

On January 11, 2014, in a broadcast of The Saturday Night Show, Rory O’Neill, an Irish drag queen who goes by the name of Miss Panti, moved from a discussion of the upcoming Irish referendum on gay marriage, to a discussion of homophobia, to calling the Irish journalist John Waters a homophobe in a series of logical leaps that left everyone but Waters, who was home at the time minding his own business, befuddled by the charge. Waters, who had been a columnist for The Irish Times for 20 years, demanded an apology and got instead weeks of legal prevarication, which only got resolved when the newspaper threw in its hand and paid Waters a six figure settlement rather than let his defamation case go to trial. O’Neill went on to become famous, and Waters, who became a pariah after being forced out at the Irish Times, tries to explain how this could happen in a Catholic country like Ireland in his book Give us back the Bad Roads.[1]https://www.amazon.com/s?k=John+Waters+Give+us+back+...b_noss

The fact that Waters found it impossible to defend himself against the drag queen’s charge had devastating personal consequences, but the incident transcended the merely personal in its significance. Bad Roads is not so much a description of what happened to John Waters, as it is the story of what really happened to Ireland over the course of the first decade of the 21st century. As Waters puts it:

What I had experienced and observed in the 16 months prior to the vote of May 2015 had chilled me to the marrow, and alerted me to the fragility of our democracy. In effect, a baying mob had acquired the free run of Irish society’s media apparatus. The drag queen who had baselessly demonised me had, more or less as a result, become a national celebrity, himself given the run of the so-called ‘National Theatre’ and of radio and TV chat shows coast to coast. In due course he would be given an honorary degree by Trinity College.[2]This and all subsequent quotes from Bring us back the Bad Roads were taken from a ms. Provided by the author. No pagination will be given.

As a journalist, Waters was used to controversy, but “the unmitigated venom” which he encountered online after his appearance on The Saturday Night Show now made it “unsafe for me to walk down the street.” The “sense of menace” he encountered was not only unprecedented in Irish society, it was especially befuddling to those who mistakenly thought that this hate campaign was being waged in the name of tolerance. The main problem was semantic. Waters was forced to defend himself against a word, homophobe, which had no correlation to the world of reality. Rather, the term “Homophobe” was:

a word with a deliberately cultivated demonic aura and a capacity to strike fear into bystanders lest they too be daubed with its nauseous meanings and innuendoes. The condition I found myself in seemed to arise almost by something like ‘appointment’ of Rory O’Neill, by virtue of some odd form of ordinance within his remit as a gay man. He could call me a homophobe and did not need to proffer evidence. All I could do was deny it, but I would, wouldn’t I?

In his 20 years as a journalist for The Irish Times, Waters had never experienced the ferocity of what happened after his appearance on The Saturday Night Show. Waters found himself engulfed in a “tsunami of outrage” which made him responsible for “all of the wrongs suffered by homosexuals in Ireland in living memory and before.”

ORDER IT NOW

Bad Roads is the protocol of a man who woke up in the cultural equivalent of the intensive care unit after a bad accident and was now trying to piece together not only what happened to him but how the accident could have happened in the first place. “How did I end up under the wheels of a homosexual juggernaut,” we can imagine him saying, “when I thought I was safe in my office writing columns for a newspaper?”

Waters couches his book in a literary conceit, writing as if he were addressing his deceased father and the Ireland that his father represented. As part of his report, Waters, who was born in 1955, has to make some fundamental observations and clarifications. This attack could only have taken place because the Ireland he had grown up in—symbolized in Bad Roads by his father, to whom the book is addressed—is no longer the same Ireland which celebrates drag queens by conferring honorary doctorates on them. The Ireland of Waters’ youth is symbolized best by his father, the inveterate tinkerer. Remembering that his father had assigned him to grind the cylinders of a second-hand automobile engine he had purchased, Waters writes that:

One of the things I unconsciously adapted from your personality was the idea of reconstructing myself to cohere with some unfocused ‘moral’ paradigm for the benefit of my growing daughter. It’s strange to think how easily I fell into this without thinking about it, becoming pious and solemn and serious-minded, without knowing what purpose this might serve.

Waters may have found logos in an automobile engine, but he was a reluctant conscript in the culture wars. Up to his appearance on The Saturday Night Show in January 2014, Waters had no strong feelings about homosexual unions as a marriage issue. But he had very strong feelings about paternity. Because of the discrimination he had encountered after he had fathered a child out of wedlock with the Irish singer Sinead O’Connor, Waters felt that fathers were systematically deprived of what should have been inalienable rights which stemmed from biology not the permission of politician or the whims of social workers. Homosexual marriage, he feared, would further weaken whatever remaining rights fathers still had by denying that fatherhood was a biological fact and making it a lifestyle choice granted to privileged minorities.

The state trumps biology now by defining who can call themselves the child’s parents. Under assault from the bullying power of LGBT activists, the now chronic dishonesty and abdication of journalists, the say-so of multinational corporations and the craven self-interest of politicians, virtually the entirety of family protections was being dismantled and rewritten

It is hard to say when I became aware of these tendencies in Ireland. If you pushed me I would say around 2007/8, though I cannot outline for you in any precise way the putative connections between these tendencies and the meltdown in the economy that occurred at the same time. I expect there is one, but the precise nature of it may not emerge with any clarity for a long time.

These tendencies accelerated over time, speeding exponentially at the time of the “marriage equality” referendum, when Ireland:

entered an era of privatised opinion: people are now so browbeaten by unreason and illogic that mostly they’ve decided to keep their positions and beliefs to themselves and opt out of expressing any view of what should happen in the public realm. It’s quite amazing to feel the difference: people now ask questions but respond to your answers with vague noises and platitudes. It’s as if everyone is terrified of being reported for holding unorthodox opinions. Better, then, to wait and see which way the wind is blowing.

Waters was surprised by O’Neill’s attack on him as a “homophobe” because he considered himself a “conscientious objector” in the gay marriage culture wars. Waters was not opposed to gay marriage in principle because “in reality what is nowadays called marriage has long since moved beyond” the traditional understanding:

You may be surprised to hear that I don’t have any theological objection to gay marriage. I have disappointed many’s the TV and radio researcher in this regard. I’ve refused almost all requests to become involved in this debate, partly because my position is not what people expect and partly because of the bullying which has characterised the discussion from the beginning. It’s not that I mind being called names, but there needs to be a prize worth winning or preserving in order to justify running such gauntlets, and I’m not sure that this is the case here.

If unopposed in theory, Waters was nonetheless opposed to gay marriage in practice because it demanded gay adoption as one of its corollaries, and gay adoption opened the door to treating children as a commodity which could be purchased by homosexuals, who by definition could never have children of their own. Waters rightly saw through this ploy as saying that homosexuals had the right to buy and traffick in children in any way that they saw fit, but not as a philosopher, or a Catholic, or a moral crusader. Waters is more traditional than Catholic. He digs his own turf. He defends the rights of “blood”:

In fact, now that I think if it, I’m probably better suited for filing under ‘Anti-marriage’ than under ‘Anti- Gay Marriage’ … I certainly don’t make these arguments from any of the conventional positions, least of all a Catholic one – although it’s no secret that I am a Catholic. I suppose that, deep down, there is a metaphysical basis to the insistence on the primacy of a biological connection between a child and parent, but I don’t see the necessity to couch such arguments in metaphysics when there is still just about enough common sense about to sustain them.

After making a name for himself in Irish journalism as a defender of fathers’ rights, Waters found himself unimpressed “by Catholic objections to gay marriage per se, and even less so concerning recent Catholic protests about the rights of children to know both parents. My interest in this subject has stemmed naturally from my work over the past 18 years or so in trying to convince the world that there’s a purpose to fatherhood and that it’s damaging to children to banish fathers from their lives.”

Waters complained that because the Catholic Church in Ireland was hors de combat on fathers’ rights, she was missing in action in virtually every subsequent battle in the culture wars. The referenda that began by attacking the family ended up gutting the Irish constitution over a remarkably short period of time. There is an element of personal animus involved here because, as he puts it, “when Catholics come looking for me to man their barricades against gay marriage, I find myself torn between remembrance of two silences: theirs and that of the liberals they seek now to face down in the name of protecting families and children.” Waters is incensed because he rightly sees gay adoption as “the cusp of an era of state-trafficking on a massive scale, under the cover of ‘child protection.’”

His logic is irrefutable and born out by historical events: “since it is illegal to sell a child after birth, why should it be different if the transaction occurs before the child is conceived? . . It is manifestly unconscionable, and therefore unsustainable, that governments which preach about the rights of children can countenance their citizens being involved in child trafficking of this kind.”

The social welfare establishment had progressively expanded “economically and educationally based criteria to justify seizing children, usually from vulnerable single mothers,” but no one was allowed to speak up in protest because the LGBT lobby “had all but convinced the public that the changes being proposed would come at no cost to anyone apart from a few bitter traditionalists fixated with Catholic dogma.” The government refused to take on the transnational corporations, the American tax-exempt foundations, and high-tech communications enablers like Apple and Google because the Irish government was dependent on them for its survival. As a result, the most vulnerable Irish—the poor, single mothers and their children, and ultimately the unborn—were deprived of rights that the Irish Constitution had declared “inalienable” and “imprescriptible,” which is to say, rights that cannot be given up or taken away by government or the rich and powerful oligarchs who control the government. Something more was afoot here than simply concern for the rights of a self-proclaimed downtrodden minority. The campaign for homosexual marriage “represented the advance march of an ideology now hitting its full stride. It was by now clear that the agenda did not end with the evisceration of fathers, but was really concerned with ultimately disintegrating all normative ideas of family.”

Waters had been dragged willy nilly into a battle he had no intention of joining largely because of his defense of the biological bond between fathers and their children which had been denied by the family law establishment in Ireland. At this point, O’Neill’s attack on Waters begins to look less like an accident and more like a conscious plan. Once he recovered from the initial shock, Waters began to put the pieces together:

To my mind, there were actually four relevant factors in what I will call O’Neill’s thinking in including me in his assault. One is that I had for some time in my Irish Times column been exploring religious questions from the position of arguing for the necessity that Irish society become mindful of what it might be losing in jettisoning its Catholic/Christian heritage. I was also getting deep into some questions about the functionality of religion in both the life of the human person and the life of society.”

The crucial factor which led to the targeting of Waters as a homophobe and subsequent witch-hunt which sought to remove him from the public eye revolved around his involvement in the 2012 so-called Children’s Rights Referendum. Waters “was among those who unsuccessfully resisted an attempt to include a specific provision for children’s rights in the Constitution, arguing that children already had robust constitutional protections, largely exercised through their parents, and warning that this measure was clearly a power grab by the government to appropriate and transfer these rights from parents to the state.”

John Waters had become “the face of homophobia in Ireland” because he had the temerity to criticize a more virulent form of the same social engineering which had been imposed on American Catholics, many of whom were Irish, during the 1950s. Social engineering had proved to be spectacularly successful in containing and diverting the dissent which inevitably arises in any capitalist economy. As Heinrich Pesch pointed out, capitalism is state-sponsored usury.[3]See my discussion of the conflict between labor and usury in Barren Metal. Capitalism can also be characterized as the systematic appropriation of all surplus value. These two forces work hand in hand. In a debt-based economy, all surplus value ends up in the hands of the creditor, creating an ever increasing imbalance in the distribution of wealth. When governments caught up in this hopeless debt cycle run out of money, they increase taxes on essentials like fuel causing the outbreak of the modern equivalent of bread riots. This is precisely what led to the yellow vest protests in France, the more recent riots in Lebanon, and mutatis mutandis, the riots in Iran. The riots in Hong Kong were caused by usury in the housing sector.

After the collapse of capitalism in 1929, countries throughout the world instituted various forms of national socialism to contain and ameliorate capitalism’s inevitable deleterious effects. In America, that reaction went by the name of the New Deal, according to which Franklin Delano Roosevelt sought to “soak the rich” as a way of re-starting the economy. In order to protect their wealth, America’s wealthiest families—symbolized best by Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie—created tax-exempt foundations, which then moved the money from manufacturing to finance, i.e., usury, thus accelerating the pernicious trend the socialists sought to arrest. Fueled by compound interest and freed from paying taxes, these tax-exempt foundations became so powerful that by the end of World War II their power rivaled, and in many cases exceeded, the power of government to control them.

In 1950, the 82nd Congress of the United States of American appointed the “Cox Committee” to look into this matter. Four years later, the Special Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organization, commonly known as “the Reece Committee,” because it was named after Representative B. Carroll Reece of Tennessee, was instructed to make a study of the use of such resources for “un-American and subversive activities; for political purposes, propaganda, or attempts to influence legislation.”[4]Rene A. Wormser, Foundations: Their Power and Influence (New York: The Devin-Adair Company, 1958), p. 2.

As some indication that government was no match for the foundations it had brought into existence, the Reece Committee dissolved after two weeks of deliberations largely because of the antics of Rep. Wayne Hays of Ohio, who objected to any investigation of the Rockefeller-funded Kinsey Institute. Why he was so concerned about protecting sex researcher Kinsey came to light 20 years later when Hays had to resign as a result of a sex scandal involving Elizabeth Ray, whom Hays had hired as a “secretary” in spite of the fact that she didn’t know how to type.

The power of tax-exempt foundations grew exponentially from that period to the present, mirroring perfectly the exponential growth of usurious compound interest which gave them the wherewithal to work for the oligarchic subversion of representative government and the social order. In its concluding report, the Reece Committee made clear that the term “subversion” in “contemporary usage and practice”:

does not refer to outright revolution , but to a promotion of tendencies which lead, in their inevitable consequences, to the destruction of principles through perversion or alienation. Subversion, in modern society, is not a sudden cataclysmic explosion, but a gradual undermining, a persistent chipping away at foundations upon which beliefs rest.[5]Wormser, pp. 184-5.

The committee conceded that subversion “can easily be confused with honest, forthright criticism,” which is “not only permissible but immensely desirable” but concluded nonetheless that: “Society does not grant tax exemption for the privilege of undermining itself,” when in fact America did just that.

Over the course of the next half century, Americans were forced to the conclusion that their country had changed fundamentally and no one could explain why. In lieu of explanations, Americans got films like Invasion of the Body Snatchers, which appeared in theaters two years after the Reece Commission got shut down and attempted to explain why the man who looked like Uncle George was in reality someone else.

In Bad Roads, John Waters tries to explain how something similar happened at The Irish Times. Technology backed by tax-exempt foundations played a crucial role in the transformations which took place in America after World War II and in Ireland after the turn of the 21st century. What television accomplished in the United States got accomplished by the computer and internet in Ireland 60 years later.

[The full article is available in the January 2020 issue of Culture Wars]

Notes

[1] https://www.amazon.com/s?k=John+Waters+Give+us+back+the+Bad+Roads&i=stripbooks&ref=nb_sb_noss

[2] This and all subsequent quotes from Bring us back the Bad Roads were taken from a ms. Provided by the author. No pagination will be given.

[3] See my discussion of the conflict between labor and usury in Barren Metal.

[4] Rene A. Wormser, Foundations: Their Power and Influence (New York: The Devin-Adair Company, 1958), p. 2.

[5] Wormser, pp. 184-5.

(Republished from Culture Wars by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 148 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. The rest of the article isn’t available.

    • Replies: @Anthony Aaron
  2. Excellent. Too few Americans are aware of the pernicious role tax-exempt foundations play in their lives, sponsoring all manner of mischievious programs such as importing stone-age Africans. I’m always stunned by my liberal friends who describe Foundations as philanthropic. Do they not realize that through their giving, they avoid taxes?

    My brother-in-law, who was an attorney and accountant for a large family foundation in America, told me that they expect to yield 8% per year on investments and must give away 5% per year’s income to retain their tax exempt status. Sounds like a net profit to me.

    As has been pointed out, any net shortfall of tax revenue by the Federal government must be made good by the ordinary taxpayer. Such a deal.

    • Replies: @Ignatius
    , @Alden
  3. Anonymous[239] • Disclaimer says:

    Ireland has been destroyed by globalists because they hate the British so much that they believe everyone else is their ally and has their best interests in mind. A lot of Irish people literally seem to see the world in terms of “British and everyone else”, and many of them genuinely seem to believe that is how the entire world thinks.

    The Irish believe that their sole enemy is Britain when in reality Britain is fairly benign in comparison to the sorts of ruthless globalist characters who now have huge influence in Ireland.

  4. Thank-you Dr. E. Michael Jones, another excellent article.

    I did not understand the ramifications for children and adoption of homosexual ‘marriage’. Clearly Waters background in fathers rights gives him critical insight.

    I fled corporate America back in the early 90´s after watching family men lose their jobs while open homosexuals preached their gospel and kept their jobs.

    Mistakenly assuming they wanted the economic advantages of minority status (Affirmative Action, etc.) I never dreamed their goal was “ultimately disintegrating all normative ideas of family.”

    Of course the children pay the price. Sickening is not a strong enough word.

    Stay strong for all of us, yours in Christ.

    • Agree: ld
    • Replies: @Anthony Aaron
  5. @Fran Macadam

    As the article states just before the Notes start, it’s available here https://culturewars.com/news/googles-conquest-of-ireland

    • Replies: @Republic
    , @Fran Macadam
  6. @altCensored.com

    There have been a significant number of instances of gays abusing adopted children (personally, even ONE instance is too many) … sometimes in instances where one member of the gay couple acts as a sperm donor for a surrogate to have and bear the child for them.

    In one report, it was found that the gay men then would pass ‘their son’ around among their gay buddies for the sexual adventures of their buddies — and themselves, of course.

    The depravity today is beyond anything most people can imagine … and that’s the way these criminals and such want it. They count on ‘ordinary people’ not wanting to hear about these abuses – in the same way many democrats/progressives/leftists don’t want to know about so many things that might otherwise upset their view of their world. It’s just easier to pretend it doesn’t exist — and the evil ones in our society count on that detachment to make their lives easier.

    • Disagree: ld
    • Replies: @Morton's toes
  7. What television accomplished in the United States got accomplished by the computer and internet in Ireland 60 years later.

    Nonsense. Irish attitudes changed over the last 30 years in response to a large number of clerical child-abuse scandals. The Catholic Church’s stock fell so low in Ireland that it forfeited the right to dictate social policy.

    In 2011 the then Taoiseach, Enda Kenny, reported in the Dail on the Cloyne Report into child abuse in a single diocese. Despite his own Catholic faith, he was clearly appalled not only by the abuse, but in particular by the role of the Vatican in attempting to cover it up. It is worth watching his speech.

    The Cloyne Report related only to one scandal. There were many more, each one having an impact on public opinion. Google is not responsible.

    I deplore gay adoption and drag-queen story hour as much as anyone else, but the rot that preceded it in clerical Ireland was far worse.

    • Agree: Matra, ld
  8. Rahan says:

    The child abuse scandals in the Irish Catholic church are not likely to be the only ones, rather they are the ones that matter most to people pursuing certain agendas.

    Pederasty among the Irish gay community and third world community is likely to be on just as wide, if not wider scale, and more vicious on the level of the mechanics of the individual act.

    The GloboHomo progressives are only “against pedophilia”, when the goal is to dismantle some traditional institution that’s in their way: the Church, conservative politicians, the traditional family unit.

    Once this has been more or less accomplished and the targeted institutions are in ruins, then suddenly pedophilia starts being less and less an absolute evil. Then the grooming starts with conditioning society to love child drag queens and see kids get chemically sterilized and brainwashed as some sort of delightful human right.

    It’s one thing to point out abuses of power in an institution in order to help this institution perform better. It’s another thing to do the same with the end goal being the destruction of this institution.

    These historical institutions are the only defense of the individual against the satanic alliance of the corporations, the state, and special interest groups.

    1 in a 100 is capable of inventing himself from the ground up and be strong enough to withstand the universal pressure from all sides. The remaining 99 need defensive institutions such as family, faith, physical friendly neighbors, physical social circle, and so on. Dismantle the family, the faith, physical social interaction with friends, stable neighborhoods, and stable careers–and the individual is now like a mollusk without a shell, you can do anything you want to them.

    Turn them into drug-addicted, porn-addicted, medication-addicted lonely madmen, and you’re the king of the world, with everyone else being mere pawns. Units generating profit and pleasure for you.

  9. HoekomSA says:

    The Catholic church was infiltrated by various antagonists, Communists, Jews and Homosexuals during the 1930’s and 40’s. (see Bella Dodd) As they were politically rather than community orientated, they rose in the political structures and by the 1960’s they were ready to implement the silent Coup during Vatican 2. Initially the thin edge of the wedge, the influx of homosexually orientated priests increased until it became a very powerful clique within the Vatican. So the Homosexual lobby has been attacking Ireland traditions both via the tax exempt foundations and media (the educational/entertainment complex) as well as through the powerful pederast clique within the Catholic Church.

    As an aside the Catholic church moved to celibate priests only around 1000AD when the church was being large properties for charitable purposes. Celibacy was a way of reducing nepotism in the church.
    Previously it was the individuals choice to be celibate or married. Since the church is no longer so rich or powerful, maybe its time to permit married priests again, to make it more attractive to more normal people and improve the quality of priests in the church.

  10. dearieme says:

    The “sense of menace” he encountered was not only unprecedented in Irish society …

    Oh come off it. Irish society glories in its history of menace: see its history with respect to Jews and Protestants – or Roman Catholics who’ve backed the wrong horse.

    Because of the discrimination he had encountered after he had fathered a child out of wedlock with the Irish singer Sinead O’Connor Maybe he should have married the wench? Or used a condom?

    Waters felt that fathers were systematically deprived of what should have been inalienable rights which stemmed from biology not the permission of politician or the whims of social workers.

    That’s a hopeless cause: your social rights come from society – meaning, all too often, venal politicians and jacks in office. What on earth can should have been inalienable rights even mean?

    The state trumps biology now by defining who can call themselves the child’s parents

    But the state’s laws on adoption have always “trumped biology” – that’s the whole point of them. So the principle has long been accepted.

    I’ve got a lot of sympathy for the chap but some of his arguments just don’t stand up. Anyway, if going back to bad roads also meant going back to a shabby third world country dominated by a corrupt priesthood buggering little children, then perhaps he should consider the wisdom of “be careful what you wish for”.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @c matt
  11. getaclue says:
    @James N. Kennett

    Most of the “rot” was abuse by homosexuals infiltrated into the Clergy of the Church, also there has been a huge infiltration in the Church by Masons/Communists (a program started by Stalin–Communist Bella Dodd testified she got in over 1,000 “priests” to destroy the Church from the inside– in large part they have succeeded if you are not blind….)/Satanists (recent PA Grand Jury report proved this point, the hompredation was not just that but had desecration of Consecrated Hosts involved and other Satanic “Rituals”….) (Pecorelli’s list named many top Catholic Clergy as infiltrated Masons — including Archbishop Bugnini etc.— and has never been disputed (Pecorelli was inside and obtained the list there I do believe) and Pecorelli was, of course, murdered soon after its release, do a little research there is plenty on this out there….)

    — exactly as it is in the USA, where billions of Laity money has been paid out for homosexual predation not “pedophilia” — the statistics clearly show it is not “pedophilia” it is adult homosexual men targeting teenaged boys and young men– if you research you find that honest “reformed” homosexuals note that this is, and has been, in fact a “thing” in the homosexual “world” — there is even a name for it “chicken” hunting etc. — this is of course not covered by the Globalist pro-homosexual mainslime media and the homosexuals infiltrated into the Clergy now are Bishops/Cardinals and have done all they can not to have this truth out there (but anyone the least bit informed now knows the truth) –because many of them are the ones who encouraged and/or hid (if not also engaged in….) this same homopredator behavior (a recent article by a Priest basically said that he discovered you couldn’t become a “Jesuit” now unless you were an active Homosexual, they have that “Order” locked down it seems….) — the homophobe bs and homosexuality are being used to shut down Christianity and that is all part of the NWO agenda and is of course something the Masons/Communists have been pushing from day one, the NWO is all theirs and the Banksters behind them — all of this is part of destroying Western Civilization so given the collapse the One World Government NWO can come to the “rescue”– Government by Totalitarian Banksters and their “useful idiot” lackeys.

    • Replies: @Bert
  12. This reads as though it was written by someone with very little knowledge of Ireland.

    What television accomplished in the United States got accomplished by the computer and internet in Ireland 60 years later.

    This quote in particular demonstrates perfectly the misconception that Jones and Irish ‘conservatives’ have about the cultural transformation of this country.

    Almost from the independence of the Irish state was this liberal transformation inevitable. When the incompetent ideologue Eamonn de Valera became the most influential leader after the death of Michael Collins, he began to build the Irish state around poverty and religion – attempting to codify his bizarre vision of an uneducated and superstitious agrarian paradise. Needless to say, this was a poor foundation for a national ethos.

    Irish nationalism and to an extent, Irish identity, became inextricably linked to Catholicism and ‘noble’ poverty. When economic progress eventually came to Ireland in the 70s and 80s the influence of de Valera’s vision began to recede. Then the hammer-blow finally came when it turned out that the Catholic Church had been abusing women and children en masse. Our Catholicism, which was close to vile Jansenism in nature, became completely discredited in the eyes of all. No one took it seriously any more. And unfortunately, because the era of poverty and religious abuse had been so closely linked with Irish nationalism and Irish identity, people stopped taking that seriously also.

    By the 1990s there was essentially an ideological void in Ireland. With the peaceful end of the troubles irredentist nationalism also receded and there was no longer any vision for the nation. ‘What makes one Irish?’ people began to ask. Clearly it was no longer de Valera’s wonderland, and the Northern question seemed to be resolved. This was the vacuum which internationalism and liberalism filled. A vacuum unfortunately entirely of our own creation, or at least the creation of a few ideologues and their theological overlords.

    Irish ‘conservatives’ and those remaining serious Catholics did what such people always do. They clung to their old ways, extolled the wonders of how Ireland used to be, and chastised people for wanting anything else. Or they just hid and ignored the changes. This was not a winning strategy, and naturally made people hate them even more.

    By the time John Waters was accused of being a homophobe there was no more religion in Ireland. No more Conservatism. No more Nationalism. He might have been confused by the accusation, but ultimately nobody cared. Nobody cares about the drag queen Panti Bliss either. It was simply Liberalism beating the dead and buried corpse of the old order. Both are tired relics of a dynamic that has no serious listeners any longer on this island.

    The one positive thing I will say about modern Ireland is that as a people, we take very few things seriously. and that includes Liberalism. It’s a wealthy and prosperous country, and still vast majority white (even if the government would like to change that).

    Conservatism is not coming back. Catholicism is not coming back. But neither will we devolve into something akin to Sweden. Everyone is too concerned about their next holiday to Bali or Vietnam to give a damn about the gibberings of our media cliques. They, like the clergy of old, are simply disdained and ignored.

    It will be interesting to see how far they get before we tire of them.

  13. Ignatius says:
    @ThreeCranes

    Too many people confuse or conflate philanthropy with charity. Much of the philanthrophy that occurs serves self-interest and in no way benefits a greater good.

    • Agree: Bubba
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  14. @HoekomSA

    “Celibacy was a way of reducing nepotism in the church.”

    That’s the first sensible argument in favour of it I’ve heard. I’m sure over the years a lot of genius has been lost as the cleverest Catholics failed to reproduce – contrast with the Jewish tradition, where the best religious scholars got the daughters of the wealthy, or post-Reformation Protestant clergy, among whose children we have Jane Austen, Nelson and two recent Prime Ministers, albeit not very good ones.

    As the rabbi said to the Catholic priest in the old joke, “it’s better than pork, isn’t it Father?“.

    There’s a married priest (ex Church of England – one of the refuseniks who found a home in Rome) in my local Catholic parish, and the sky’s not fallen in. St. Peter was married, after all.

    (The only good thing about the Irish cultural and religious disaster is that there are a lot fewer people prepared to kill my people in the name of Cathleen ni Houlihan or Our Lady Queen of Ireland)

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    , @RadicalCenter
  15. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @dearieme

    Oh come off it. Irish society glories in its history of menace: see its history with respect to Jews and Protestants – or Roman Catholics who’ve backed the wrong horse.

    Roman Catholics who’ve backed the wrong horse tend to lose their money.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/ireland/5578895/Ireland-Where-the-turf-meets-the-surf.html

    Compared to the English, the Irish treatment of their neighbors has been, well, downright neighborly.

  16. @AltSerrice

    It’s a wealthy and prosperous country, and still vast majority white (even if the government would like to change that).

    Everyone is too concerned about their next holiday to Bali or Vietnam to give a damn about the gibberings of our media cliques.

    I sincerely hope that Irish people will pay more attention to what their government would like to do, and to what the Irish media think of them. The Irish government has allowed a little immigration from places like Sudan and Somalia, and some commentators have already had the cheek to tell ordinary Irish people that they possess “white privilege”!

    • Replies: @Dutch Boy
    , @Johan
  17. Hibernian says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    (The only good thing about the Irish cultural and religious disaster is that there are a lot fewer people prepared to kill my people in the name of Cathleen ni Houlihan or Our Lady Queen of Ireland)

    And what of those who were prepared to kill my people in the name of a Crown which doesn’t really care any more for people like them than people like me?

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
  18. Dutch Boy says:
    @HoekomSA

    I would like to think so but we then will doubtless have the spectacle of divorced priests to endure. I am old enough to remember when Catholics rarely divorced but that is long past.

  19. Dutch Boy says:
    @James N. Kennett

    The Irish birth rate is just a tad below replacement level now but have no fear, those Sudanese and Somalis will take up the slack in no time. A loss of the will to reproduce is an inevitable consequence of liberalism.

    • Replies: @Pop Warner
  20. Sligo says:

    Fags have done what the Brits never could; conquer the Irish. Genocide, replacement, and wars against everyone from Fenians to IRA didn’t do it. But dressing up like a queen and taking it in the ass seem to have convinced the Irish of the error of their ways. The High Kings are gone; long live the “High (on Meth) Queens”.

    I’ll never listen to an IRA song again in the same way… Maybe the Gay IRA will lead us into the New Age,,, Erin go Braless

  21. @Anonymous

    I don’t quite understand how the Irish are so stuck in the past and blind to the threats of today. A people can recover from political domination, but they will not recover from mass importation of hostile groups with a higher birthrate. It’s like the Irish know nothing of Muslim rape gangs and acid attacks.

    There’s an old story about English mathematician GE Hardy proclaiming that there was no military use for the theory of relatively or the theory of numbers. Wrong on both counts. ‘Singularly unprophetic’ was the phrase that someone used.

    I remember a news story from years ago where a couple of Irish guys stated that Irish culture was ‘so strong’ that one could import 100,000 Chinese and within 20 years you’d have Chinese Orangemen and Chinese Irish nationalists. That the Chinese immigrants would lose their own culture and adopt Irish culture, as if it were some virus.

    Completely deluded idiots.

    Demographics is destiny. A million Chinese, Paks, Afghans and Bantu aren’t going to give two flying #[email protected] about Protestant/Catholic politics, Irish history, the famine, etc.

    Import a million foreigners, you lose your culture.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    , @Amon
  22. kevhin says:

    poor irish they are really good people,one of the few european ethnicities that i would save from the apocalipsis.

    certainly they dont deserve this fate

    • Agree: James N. Kennett
  23. @Hibernian

    We must be fair. I don’t think the British Army ever had a policy of killing Irishmen at random in the Queen’s name (the death toll would have been huge), whereas stuff like Birmingham, Enniskillen and Kingsmill targeted innocent English and Irish Protestants* deliberately.

    Given what’s happening in Ireland, the Brits aren’t the only ones ruled by people who don’t care about them.

    Still, I think it’s not very productive to pick at old scabs. The present and coming problems in the Republic are very similar in cause and effect to those in the UK. We have the same enemies and they aren’t us, although the powers that be will do all in their power keep us divided – it’s worked really well in Scotland.

    * given that the IRA were prepared to shoot people purely because their forebears had come to Ireland 400 years ago, Republican tolerance for what’s happening in places like Blanchardstown and Tallaght is remarkable.

  24. Exile says:

    Irish nationalist Keith Woods with Unz contributor Eric Striker on the selling of Ireland to Google and the cultural free-fall of Ireland:

    https://www.bitchute.com/video/AD6I7HH3uMZ3/

    • Replies: @Paul C.
  25. Dan Hayes says:
    @jbwilson24

    You don’t require any millions of foreign interlopers to lose Irish culture when the home-grown media (RTE, Irish Times, etc, etc) will step up to do the job!

    BTW, a million Chinese interlopers would destroy/replace Irish culture but would nevertheless preserve Ireland. Same for Poles but not for Paks, Afghans and Bantus.

  26. TheJester says:
    @AltSerrice

    “Conservatism is not coming back. Catholicism is not coming back. But neither will we devolve into something akin to Sweden. Everyone is too concerned about their next holiday to Bali or Vietnam to give a damn about the gibberings of our media cliques. They, like the clergy of old, are simply disdained and ignored.”

    I would not be so optimistic. A population that puts the greatest value on its vacations has no chance of surviving the “globohomo” movement quietly working behind the scenes to transform society into a sex and pleasure-crazed dystopia. In fact, it fits right into the mold.

    What you predict for the “new” Ireland is exactly what has already happened in Britain, Germany, France, Sweden, and later in Italy, Spain, and other southern tier European countries … when they joined the European Union and the economic, cultural, and moral pathogens found in Postmodernism infected them as well.

    Ireland joining the EU was the “Judas Kiss” that foretells the end of Ireland as a coherent, historic culture with a future just as it has the rest of the countries in the EU.

    P.S. I’m Irish by heritage and recently my wife and I spent two weeks touring Ireland. What a wonderful country and culture! Enjoy it while you can.

    • Agree: Bubba
  27. @Anthony Aaron

    Naming gay men adopting babies for family status as human trafficking is pretty aggro. I don’t predict we will see that one catching on.

  28. They also ( such as in nuthouse Germany) worship BO and the ground he walks on, which reveals everything one needs to know to come to the conclusion that they are out of their minds.

    AJM “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro jazz artist.

    PS : Totally non-sequitur but anyway : My dad and his two brothers were born in Belfast.

  29. anonymous[191] • Disclaimer says:
    @AltSerrice

    Nothing like an economic collapse to wake people up to what really is important in life. Like Americans and the rest of the western world, things have been swimming along pretty good for 70 years with a few minor dips in the economy. One wonders what it would be like if there was a depression as long, hard and deep as the 1930’s, would it get rid of liberal progressive nonsense and renew true nationalism?

    • Agree: Bubba
  30. @Anthony Aaron

    It is only PART of the article, which requires purchase to read most of it. When I posted this, even the same preview wasn’t yet available at the link.

    • Replies: @PeterMX
  31. Hibernian says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    We must be fair. I don’t think the British Army ever had a policy of killing Irishmen at random in the Queen’s name (the death toll would have been huge), whereas stuff like Birmingham, Enniskillen and Kingsmill targeted innocent English and Irish Protestants* deliberately.

    What about the Lord Protector’s name? Or King Billy’s? The death toll was huge. Do you deny that there were people who didn’t mind population reduction by disease and starvation in the 1840s?

    Terrorism in places like Birmingham kills regardless of the creed of the victims, just as 911 killed Protestant, Catholic, Jew, Hindu and Muslim in NYC. There are many offspring of the Irish Catholic diaspora there. They are the Bostons and Philadelphias of Britain.

    I hate the IRA. In the mid-1980s they were brazen enough to collect money from the general public in a grocery store on the SW side of Chicago. I witnessed this personally. I had a cousin, now deceased, who said, in the early 90s, that the IRA lost their way in the ’80s. In my view they lost their way when De Valera had Collins killed in the 1920s. I think you are my cousin’s British opposite number.

    Still, I think it’s not very productive to pick at old scabs.

    Some of them aren’t that old. The Good Friday agreement was in the ’90s. Things were crazy right up to then, and only a fool would put all or almost all of the blame on one side.

  32. @Hibernian

    Well if we’re going back to King Billy or Cromwell we’ll be here all decade, and I’d better start giving people with Norman surnames a hard time for the Harrying Of The North.

    It doesn’t matter how old or new the scabs are – if the English can be in imminent danger of becoming a minority in England (primary schools are one third minority already), do you think Ireland will be immune? I’ve seen the cultural changes which took sixty years in England happening in half the time across the water.

  33. @Hibernian

    when De Valera had Collins

    Eamon was as much spic as mick. For a similar Irishman, see Bernardo O’Higgins.

  34. joe862 says:

    I had no opinion of the irish when I got out of school in 2001. Since then I’ve had extensive experience with them. They’re absolutely terrible people. Lazy, selfish, dishonest, disingenuous swine. Terrible people. Absolute garbage.

    • Replies: @Wally
    , @obwandiyag
  35. Wally says:
    @joe862

    Where did you experience “the Irish”?

    Boston?

  36. @joe862

    You forget bitching and bitching about everything absolutely all the time without end forever and ever amen.

  37. Anonymous[428] • Disclaimer says: • Website
    @AltSerrice

    What a load of rubbish, Ireland has been manipulated by the EU into signing over its national sovereignty, and now will likely be destroyed through immigration. How many times did they vote down the Lisbon Treaty. Look up the company Cerebus if you want to know what’s coming next after you started to eschew your faith. You will note that Cerebus is the three headed dog that guards the gates of hell. You may wonder why they would choose such a name, and what business they would want with Ireland. If Dan Quayle’s job there doesn’t raise questions not sure what will.

    Go on Irish, enjoy your roads and internet, a similar deal was offered to Jesus. Laura Weinstein is coming for you, your “white” don’t you know, and not your own race or people, funny I have Michael Collins’ book and he certainly wouldn’t agree with any of this.

    • Agree: Alfred
    • LOL: AltSerrice
    • Replies: @AltSerrice
  38. Alfred says:

    Norwegian courts prevented me from seeing my son between the ages of 8 and 12. That was the wish of the mother. She faked a kidnap story and the police and the courts played their part. Their supreme court – mostly women in 1995 – decided that I had not broken the law “but because I was a foreigner, I needed to be punished”. Of course, on that basis any foreigner is at risk of any false accusation in Norway. No need to actually do anything. It is enough to be a foreigner. 🙂

    The education of my son was destroyed. He did very badly at his school leaving exams at 18. He became a toilet-cleaner at a university that his old classmates attended.

    I brought him to Australia. We found out that his marks were just good enough to get him into a private physiotherapy school in Oslo. After a year of studying physiotherapy, his teachers told him that he was too intelligent and that he should try to take up medicine. He studied hard and retook his school-leaving exams. He was accepted at the Oslo University Medical School. He became the class representative – elected by other students. Now, he is a doctor.

    Sadly, his childhood and the way he was raised turned him into a rather selfish person. He made false accusations about me having mistreated him at some time in the past and he stopped all communication with me. But I am happy that at last I don’t have to worry about him as I did for so many years.

    My point is that removing fathers from the equation is a disaster for society. Very few fathers are able to do what I did for my son – despite the institutional bias against me for being non-Norwegian and a male.

    • Replies: @GMC
    , @Lost american
  39. GMC says:

    Another Huge Tax scam is all those Collegiate sports programs – University Football, Basketball, and all the other sports programs and their revenues are Tax exempt. Think of it – all those televised games, commercials, donations, sports wears, and everything else is non taxable – yet 4 yrs. of ” education” at those Universities can cost a hundred thousand bucks and more. Any time I read the words Think Tanks, I see a bunch of low life , highly paid backstabbers , who help destroy International and Domestic societies – and they are all proud to be in the so called, ” Intellectual Theater of Evil “. Mr/Ms O Neill is in that theater Freak show also.

  40. Bert says:
    @getaclue

    For one year in the 1970’s, I was a science faculty member at a small Benedictine college in the U.S. The administrators were all priests and most of the faculty were Catholic laypersons. There was a Benedictine abbey on campus although the monks did not participate in the functioning of the college. The behavior of the monks that I saw walking around the campus suggested to me that many of them were homosexuals. Their overt swishiness together with a good deal of hiliarity seemed completely out of place per my understanding of what an organization of serious purpose should be.

    Unless the purpose was, as you suggest, to destroy Western Civilization.

    • Replies: @Jake
  41. Jake says:

    How could this happen in Ireland?

    Ireland agreed to stop fighting against being engulfed by all things and identities WASP. Ireland – rather, Ireland’s Elites, chose to be BFF with all things and people WASP, which meant that Ireland would need to reject its heritage of acting to get free of the WASP tentacles.

    Ideas have consequences. This is the fruit of surrendering to WASP culture – your culture at some point becomes perverse from to bottom.

    • LOL: Matra
  42. Jake says:
    @Bert

    Malachi Martin’s novel Windswept House provides most intriguing discussion about what Vatican II meant (it was essential) to the unleashing of freaks and monsters in the Catholic Church, especially clergy, but also rich laity who were ‘players’ in the liberal and military wings of militantly post-Christian mid-20th century culture.

    Vatican II meant, for example, that suddenly in Ireland a host of assumed good Catholics began damning past Irish nationalists and finding endless good things to praise in English Protestant history. And they began dismantling every aspect of traditional Irish Catholic culture.

  43. Amon says:
    @jbwilson24

    It was the British engineered genocide through stavation on top of an utterly ruthless near slave state that fantasised about exterminating the Irish that has caused a genetic hatred of the British to emerge in all Irish people.

    • Replies: @Bert
  44. Amon says:
    @Anonymous

    Geh, I wonder if centuries of religious persecution combined with the Irish being treated worse than slaves in their own homeland and an act of genocide through stavation has anything to do with it.

    Its almost like the British throughopen racial hatred and open attempts at ethnic cleansings of Ireland has caused themselves to become the objects of hatred.

    • Agree: Alden
  45. Anonymous[844] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ignatius

    Manhattenite and CEO of Rockefeller & Co (tens of billions in the family’s private assets) was mysteriously found dead in a car in Massachusetts with a gunshot to the head. Suicide, of course.

  46. @Anonymous

    >muh EU is bad
    >muh abandoning your faith

    Boring, heard those talking points before. Gay and bluepilled. Come back with something original.

  47. Dan Hayes says:
    @Hibernian

    Show proof that De Valera had Michael Collins killed in the 1920s. And please, no fantasy citations to Neil Jordan’s “Michael Collins”.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  48. Bert says:
    @Amon

    The funny thing is that the arrogance and brutality of the British united both the Protestants and the Catholics in hatred against them in the late 18th century. The experiences of the Presbyterians in Ulster led them, after immigration to the Colonies, to be the staunchest fighters for American independence. Without the Presbyterian Irish in the Colonies, the Revolution would not have succeeded.

    • Replies: @Amon
  49. Razor says:
    @Anonymous

    Nonsense. Relations between Irish and British people have never been closer, and that applies equally to our respective Governments.

    No, the problem with Ireland is our national inferiority complex, it’s essentially post colonial slave mentality. I observerd it clearly as I grew to maturity in the 1970’s. Many Irish could not conceive ourselves as being as good, or capable as the Brits, and light years behind the US in all respects.

    I thought by the 1990’s that we had left that behind as the Celtic Tiger began roaring. However, as witnessed when the best educated generation in Irish history gathered in Dublin Castle, celebrating the passing of the abortion referendum, congratulated themselves as being as good as our betters, (USA & UK), and maybe even better, because we had done if by referendum. The self-regarding and nauseating pride was palpable. Now we were truly in the vanguard of the leading progressive countries.

    This is the fallout from the corruption of the Catholic Church, turning it’s face from the little ones, to protect its own status from its internal scandals. The tragedy is that we need a prophetic Christianity now, perhaps more than ever, just when the Church has abandoned the battlefield in ignominy.
    I referred to Ireland’s best educated generation in history. Unfortunately, it seems that such education has at best conferred on them merely vocational skills while neglecting any moral foundation, or capacity to think for themselves. Those who disagree with the zeitgeist, if any, lack the moral courage to speak out and for once provide leadership, abandoning the field to the Cultural Marxists. Yes, we are slavishly following our betters down the road of degradation and degeneracy.

    • Agree: S
    • Replies: @S
    , @S
    , @Lost american
  50. Jones is still under the delusion that nonwhites see him as Irish rather than white.

  51. Awareness of the enemy is a good start. The hydra snakes of Ireland have arisen again. So now for the laity to band together in faith, with the remnants of the good, and start St Patrick style snake expulsions. I might read some Seamus Heaney again. Good luck fellas.

  52. A bit off topic, but have you noticed the tranny readers are all dressed up as caricatures of demonic mommies?

    My guess on Ireland is that the previous anti abortion stance made the country rich in a supply of white kids. The global transhumanist probably prefers their eternal life coming from blood and guts of European kids to the world’s abundant supply of boring brown ones. Big Gay is just the foot soldiers to sell mommy on war against daddy, and thus making kids easier targets for globohomo grooming. However big libertarian did far worse by selling the Irish daddy on nonexistent benefits of low corporate taxes. It was only a matter of time for the Ireland’s demise after that move.

  53. We need more border security but also more Elite Scrutiny. Latter is sorely lacking.

  54. c matt says:
    @dearieme

    your social rights come from society

    Your rights come from your Creator, or they don’t exist at all. Those rights are enforced/respected by society, or not. Maybe not a practical distinction, but certainly a metaphysical one.

    • Replies: @dearieme
  55. GMC says:
    @Alfred

    You’re right about the father, in too many cases, being the easy target of the system- at least your son was able to turn it around and make something of himself. If you go to the rescue of another person, you may have to pay a very heavy price for it .

    • Replies: @Alfred
  56. Rurik says:

    Ireland lost its faith because they were (rightly) appalled at the beyond-heinous sex crimes of some priests against little boys, and more to the point, how the church covered it all up, and thereby facilitated more of it.

    The tragic irony, is that rather than a national repudiation of homosexuality- (from which came the depravity of boy-rapist priests), they ((the undisputed cultural elites of Europe at the ((EU)) used the tragedy to promote homosexuality and diversity ((the calling cards of our Western elites)).

    So the cultural elites were able to kill two birds with one stone.

    Kill the ((hated)) Catholic church, and with it, the spiritual foundations of Ireland for centuries, and use its death and the consequent spiritual vacuum to promote the cultural and spiritual sewage of homomania and diversity, in its place.

    Such a deal!

    query: how many of the pedophile priests were preying on little girls?

    One, two percent? Vs. endemic boy-rapists among the Catholic priesthood. Sodomites, in other words. Sodomites standing at the pulpits of God’s houses, profaning God and His message, by being delivered by men who lust after little boys.

    Jerry Sandusky as anointed and exalted intermediary between Christians and their God.

    Of course the rot would bring down the Church. What institution can remain propped up by men who want to (and often do) rape little boys, as its spiritual leaders? With a Pope as their vanguard, and the Vatican as their sanctuary.

    The tragic thing is how ((they)) were able to make hay out of the tragedy, and replace Catholicism with Globo-homo, when it should have had the opposite effect, and drove the homos underground, (where they belong ; )

    PS. for the record, I don’t hate fags. I don’t even mind them, so long as they do what they do behind closed doors.

    But when they demand to be Boy Scout troop leaders, as openly gay men, and demand to take the boys out camping, and be role models, well.. I guess I don’t despise them so much, as the Boy Scout leadership that said ‘no problem’, flaming fags can be troop leaders for little Christian boys.

    There’s something about the “Christian” leadership in the West that is morally and spiritually dead. An all-pervasive moral cowardice.

    For all those Boy Scouts of America leaders that capitulated to the homo-lobby, they should take the next step in their spiritual plunge into the abyss, and just find a nice cliff, and get the job done right.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  57. Skeptikal says:

    Fascinating! Thank you.

  58. S says:
    @Razor

    No, the problem with Ireland is our national inferiority complex, it’s essentially post colonial slave mentality…Now we were truly in the vanguard of the leading progressive countries…Yes, we are slavishly following our betters down the road of degradation and degeneracy.

    Your juxtaposition of slavery with so called ‘progressivism’ is quite correct and apt as the connections between progressivism/liberalism and chattel slavery and it’s trade are deeply rooted, particularly so in the Anglosphere countries.

    It is not at all coincidental that the historic center of progressivism in the United States, ie Massachusetts, was also the very epicenter of the chattel slave trade in British North America.

    The so called progressives claim to fame is the supposed 19th century ‘abolition’ of slavery.

    In reality, with the British Empire taking the lead and the US closely following behind, chattel slavery and it’s trade was monetized, ie financially streamlined, and not abolished.

    The ‘immigrant’, from a bottom line financial point of view, is the slave for whatever period of time (days, weeks, months, years) he or she is paid significantly below what was, or what would be, the prevailing real time local costs of labor without the ‘immigrant’ being present or the ‘immigration’ taking place.

    [In the case of the Chinese being imported in, as found out by the California state legislature in 1876, this was often upwards of 70 percent below whatever the prevailing real time local rate of labor was.]

    Just as with chattel slavery, with wage slavery (ie so called ‘cheap labor’) you need broken and defeated peoples as a source.

    Who else would be in the position to be so preyed upon to work at, let’s say half, what everybody else was being paid?

    In the 19th century this source, amongst others, was a British occupied and famine stricken Ireland, and, or, an opium addicted and war crushed/ravaged China.

    Today it is often other peoples who (having first been reduced to an unnaturally low state of being) are preyed upon as a source of ‘cheap labor’, ie Central and South Americans, or East Europeans.

    The highly respected US based economist Henry Carey in 1853 specifically pointed this out when he declared that the already evident Anglosphere cheap labor/mass immigration system was simply ‘the slave trade of the last century reproduced on a grander scale’.

    And it’s not a myth that the old chattel slave ships, appropriately enough in this light, were often ‘recycled’ to be used to transport the wage slaves (ie ‘cheap laborers) who now paid their own way for the ‘privilege’ of having their labor systematically stolen from them. (See links below)

    To sum it up, under the cover of abolitionism, chattel slavery and it’s trade was simply and quite cynically distilled to it’s financial essence with the 19th century introduction of the cheap labor/mass immigration system.

    This is the economic and political basis of the modern liberal/progressive multicultural society, a world which not coincidentally closely parallels the chattel slave holding society it evolved from.

    Out of the frying pan and into the fire as it were.

    The Big Lie, the lie of the millennium, was the 19th century abolition of slavery.

    Many amongst the Irish, sadly as you point out, have unfortunately internalized these destructive slavery oriented progressive ‘values’.

    Hopefully, the Irish can find the will to turn things around.

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/slavery_on_a_grander_scale

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/a_virtual_round_the_world_voyage

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    , @utu
    , @Alden
  59. Amon says:
    @Bert

    The unfunny thing is that the British still acts this way even today with near total disregard for what anyone in the UK outside of the English actually thinks about the behavior of the government and the Royal House.

    It would not surprise me one bit if it comes out that the Irish culture war is a politically engineered plot by the UK government to alter the voting demographics of Ireland to being the entire island back under British control while ridding them of the Irish people.

  60. SoldierOn says:
    @HoekomSA

    “As an aside the Catholic church moved to celibate priests only around 1000AD when the church was being large properties for charitable purposes. Celibacy was a way of reducing nepotism in the church.”

    Wrong. The celibate priesthood is a discipline to ease the underlying dogma—continence. It had nothing to do with nepotism. Catholic priests were always required to be continent, even married ones. There is an excellent book By Fr. Christian Cochini, The Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy, that provides a plethora of evidence on this subject. There is zero evidence (Fathers, Councils, Synods, Doctors, Saints, Popes, etc.) the Church ever permitted married priests to exercise the marital right. The primary reason is the priest’s duty to offer sacrifice. Interestingly, this is consistent with the Old Testament priesthood which also required ritual purity by priests (they could not have sex so many days—I think 8—before offering sacrifice). The only reason OT priests were married is because only Levites could be priests. Obviously, the priesthood would have died out if they didn’t have children. On the other hand, priests in the New Testament have to offer sacrifice every day, and priests are no longer tied to a specific familial line; thus, perpetual continence. Celibacy (not being married) was enacted to make the dogmatic requirement—continence (not having sex)—easier.

    All discipline in the Church (in this case, celibacy) has an underlying dogma (continence). The discipline can be changed, but the dogma cannot. If priests are having sex, even with their wives, they are going against the constant teaching of the Church. If priestly continence is destroyed, so is the priesthood. If the priesthood is destroyed, so is the Catholic Church. If the Church is destroyed…. Go ahead, tell me how good that will be for society. The results of the current batch of incontinent priests kind of speaks for itself.

    The argument (used by another reply post), “St. Peter was married,” is a non sequitur. There is no evidence his wife was still alive, or that they ever had relations after Peter’s apostolic call. In fact, the evidence suggests otherwise (that he was a widow). Either way, Peter was absolutely continent.

    For a good summary, see also:
    http://www.unamsanctamcatholicam.com/history/79-history/465-celibacy-in-the-early-church.html

    Finally, the Church was infiltrated well before the Twentieth century by Rabbinic Judaism and all its branches (Freemasons, communists, etc.). This was the reason behind many subsequent Papal Encyclicals and other documents against Freemasonry, communism, liberalism, and modernism. The Alta Vendita (published in the mid nineteenth century) forced the Church to respond, but it was too late.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Disagree: Miggle
    • Thanks: Dumbo
    • LOL: kevhin
    • Replies: @Miggle
  61. dearieme says:
    @c matt

    You imply that people who don’t believe in a Creator shouldn’t have any rights. Is that right?

  62. Skeptikal says:
    @S

    “It is not at all coincidental that the historic center of progressivism in the United States, ie Massachusetts, was also the very epicenter of the chattel slave trade in British North America. ”

    In what sense was Massachusetts the center of chattel slavery?

    I have read quite a few references to Newport, Rhode Island, as a major slaving center, or of families that made their fortunes in the slave trade. But the translatlantic slave trade ended in 1803.

    After that I believe the source of slaves for, say, the large cotton and sugar plantations of Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas was the “breeding” states of Virginia, Maryland, and North and South Carolina.

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @S
  63. S says:
    @Razor

    Along the same lines of the just previous post..

    On September 30, 1851, at the tail end of the Famine when Ireland looked to be ‘done for’, the London Times published an editorial entitled ‘The American Minister in Ireland’. As it’s title alludes, the subject of the editorial was about an ongoing tour of Ireland being made by the then US ambassador to the UK, Abbott Lawrence.

    Abbott Lawrence was a patriarch of the Massachusetts based Lawrence family of textile factory magnates. It was this family during the 1840’s and 1850’s which would finance the construction of both Lawrence ‘Immigrant City’, Massachusetts, and it’s infamous sister city Lawrence, Kansas.

    The excerpted editorial is very multicural, liberal, and progressive all in one. According to it, mass immigration for ‘cheap labor’ purposes is all very good and the resulting ‘mixing’ of races is God ordained.

    That this enmasse predation of the Irish people as wage slaves (ie ‘cheap labor’) means the genocide of the historic Celtic Irish, who are to be ‘known no more’, is seen as not a problem by the Times and taken in stride.

    The historic Anglo-Saxon Plantation (now over the centuries having become somewhat Anglo-Celtic ‘mixed’) of the north of Ireland, which the editorial contemptuously describes as a race of slaves, being ‘more mixed’, ‘more docile’, and ‘which can submit to a master’, will take the objectionable Celtic Irishman’s place.

    ‘It [the Irish people] will mix with the Anglo-American, and be known no more..’

    London Times (Sept 30, 1851)

    ‘The prosperity and happiness he [Lawrence] speaks of may some day reign over that beautiful island. It’s fertile soil, its water-power, its minerals, and other materials for the wants and luxuries of man, may one day be developed; but all apearances are against the belief that this will ever happen in the days of the Celt.’

    ‘That tribe will soon fulfill the great law of Providence which seems to enjoin and reward the union of races. It will mix with the Anglo-American, and be known no more as a jealous and separate people. Its present place will be occupied by the more mixed, more docile, and more serviceable race, which has long borne the yoke of sturdy industry in this island, which can submit to a master and obey the law…’

    The Irish during this same Famine period (1847) entirely concurred with the London Times assessment that their enmasse predation as ‘cheap labor’ (unless stopped) would directly result in their being ‘known no more’.

    The Irish did not call it ‘mass immigration’, ‘cheap labor’, or a ‘helping hand’, but rather called it ‘extermination’.

    According to the linked Spectator of London editorial members of the British aristocracy in Ireland were being shot in 1847 for promoting and, or sponsoring, the mass exodus of the Irish from Ireland as so called ‘cheap labor’ to the United States.

    The other link below is to another Spectator editorial from 1850. It is about US plans to construct manufacturing plants (ie textile) in famine stricken Ireland, which the editorial decries as a threat to British manufacturing, a ‘protectionist nemisis’.

    As with US manufacturing base and the Chinese today…if you can’t get enough of the slaves to come directly to you, you go directly to where the slaves are.

    Had I mentioned it was Lawrence ‘Immigrant City’, Massachusetts, that the super progressive Elizabeth Warren chose to launch her 2020 presidential bid from?

    The new boss, same as the old boss.

    [See comment #78 of the Majority Rights link below for the Sept 30, 1851 London Times editorial excerpt. A link to the full editorial can be found in my archived posts.]

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/the_death_of_a_multi_racialist/

    http://archive.spectator.co.uk/article/20th-november-1847/12/extermination-and-vengeance

    http://archive.spectator.co.uk/article/22nd-june-1850/15/american-factories-in-ireland

    • Replies: @Razor
  64. utu says:
    @S

    Chattel slavery is not the same as wage slavery. Your arguments are crude and may appeal only to extreme anarchists or communists. Try to add more nuance to your arguments.

    • Replies: @S
  65. Razor says:
    @S

    You misunderstand my use of the term “Post Colonial Slave Mentality”. “A colonial mentality is the internalized attitude of ethnic or cultural inferiority felt by people as a result of colonization, i.e. them being colonized by another group.[1] It corresponds with the belief that the cultural values of the colonizer are inherently superior to one’s own”. as per Wikipedia. Not that I consider Wiki as any kind of gold standard, but in this case I am in complete agreement.

    Of course, as E Michael Jones points out, we are slaves to our addictions and bad habits, so that we have as many masters as we have bad habits and addictions, and this is absolutely true of the contemporary western decadent and dissolute culture. Unfortunately, much of contemporary Ireland has gleefully adopted this demonic culture, evidence that we are as advanced as our fellow Anglo speaking brethren.

    Ireland abandoned Catholicism because of the frailty and sinfulness of many Churchmen. In their simple minds, they expected such men to be perfect and sinless, admittedly something which the Churchmen themselves promoted in their own self interest. My late mother-in-law, herself a devout Catholic, told my son, whom she nannied when he was small, not to regard the behaviour of Priests and Bishops as the measure of Christianity, or Catholicism as she would have put it.

    In the minds of “The Faithful”, these sinful Churchmen were conclusive evidence of the fraudulence of Faith and the Christian story. They don’t have the subtlety of mind to see that prelates are just as frail as the rest of us. They don’t seem to be able to image that the most direct route for the Deceiver to reap his harvest is to corrupt and seduce the shepherds. The message of Christ stands, even without the fealty of the clergy.

    The solution for Ireland and perhaps also other post Christian societies, in not to seek to go back to the past, but to redouble our efforts to live a Christian life. As I often say to my son and my daughter, our mission is to act, through our behaviour and example, as beacons pointing towards the Divine. “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” John 13:35

    Too many young Irish are now in a pit of despair at the emptiness of our culture, while at the same time slavishly engaging in it. This is evidenced by pervasive levels alcohol and drug abuse and historic levels of sexually transmitted infections and tragic levels of suicide, especially among your males.

    My own thinking was moving towards the Benedict option, long before I ever heard of such a thing.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @S
    , @MikeatMikedotMike
  66. Mefobills says:
    @Rahan

    Dismantle the family, the faith, physical social interaction with friends, stable neighborhoods, and stable careers–and the individual is now like a mollusk without a shell, you can do anything you want to them.

    Rahan, thanks for your insights. Of course you are correct.

    While reading I was thinking of one-born-free dumb, and his libertarian world view. He would be against your notions, as if everybody is the 1 out of 100. Even when presented with facts that go against his worldview, he persists. This shows us that some people are irrational, and hence should not vote.

    The line of logic goes like this: It is your fault if you are not the 1 in a 100, and hence it is ok for Plutocracy to pick you pockets; because after all plutocrats don’t exist in a true finance capitalist “free market” economy.

    If we notice the sophisticated usurious thefts and depravity that “free-dumb” engenders, then there must be something wrong with us, as libertarian “ideology” is pure as the driven snow, and beyond reproach. This also goes for gay behavior – they are free as long as they are not hurting others. But they are hurting others, as they carve out spaces for their depravity.

    Civilization is more fragile than people think. If the next generation is degraded by being in a single parent latch-key family, and these children’s heads are filled with ‘if it feels good do it” and everything is relative, then these kids grow up to be adrift, and incapable of bearing high civilization.

    The kids grow up to become unwitting dupes of finance plutocracy, where their life energy is stolen and diverted. They act out by wearing vagina hats, running around screaming, and perhaps descending into the gay/lesbian disco.

    Real men stand for high civilization, and they want their progeny to have life. And we are not at all happy with the gay disco and its (((enablers))).

  67. S says:
    @utu

    When I use the term wage slavery (rather than so called ‘cheap labor’ which I see as a term of propaganda) I’m not using it in the sense of low pay, or generic wages, but rather specifically when people are brought in from outside (ie ‘immigrants’) so as to pay significantly below the prevailing real time local costs of labor.

    [I’m quite aware what is termed the radical left has trashed much of the language, including the term ‘wage slavery’. In using that term in a much more proper way I’m doing my small part to reclaim a portion of the English language. It’s the best term for what I’m trying to get across.]

    The term ‘slavery’ itself in its essence simply refers to the systematic theft of the value of an individual’s labor.

    The descriptor before it is the means of committing this theft.

    Historically this theft of labor was most often accomplished via physically owning a person, a ‘chattel’, and hence the term chattel slavery.

    Another means to systematically steal labor is through a person’s sexuality, particularly females, hence the term sex slavery.

    The most efficient and profitable way of all though to systematically steal a person’s labor is to first through violence (or coercion) reduce entire populations enmasse to an unnaturally low state of being, such as was done to the Chinese in the 19th century, or, over a longer term, the Irish, and then (often as ‘immigrants’) pay [wages] to them well below whatever the prevailing real time local rate of labor is.

    Hence, my use of the term wage slavery and why I say chattel slavery and it’s trade was monetized and not abolished. [I can just about guarantee that anyone outside the Anglosphere countries can see and understand this much more readily than those within.]

    Ultimately, the amoral person engaging in this type of exploitation, whether the slavery of a person be chattel or wage, doesn’t care what race the person is, if they are in rags, or chains, all they care about is paying far below whatever the local rate of labor happens to be.

    Anyhow, historically there seems to have been widespread Stockholm Syndrome between the powerful people profiting from slavery and their hangers on, and a heavily propandized and bamboozled general public which was not.

    Back in the 18th century in British North America, if a person dared to say chattel slavery and it’s trade was a bad business, I imagine they would have been met with every kneejerk argument in the book why that was not the case, even by people who ought to know better, and had no interest in preserving or defending the business, which was most folks

    Nowadays, with wage slavery, ie so called ‘cheap labor’, it seems to be much the same.

    May just have to agree to disagree, and leave it at that.

  68. gsjackson says:
    @Rurik

    I remember walking down a residential street in Dublin in 2014. Two teenage boys — mid-teens, I’d guess — were walking in the other direction with their arms around each other, and by the time they reached me they had stopped to share a passionate kiss twice. Their broad smiles indicated that they felt very much at home in the culture.

    My thought was: et tu, Ireland? But I guess the Old Sod had been conquered for globo-homo several years before that. O’ brave (((new world))).

    • Replies: @Rurik
  69. Hibernian says:
    @Dan Hayes

    It’s commonly believed; I don’t have proof. Someone assassinated Collins, and not likely a lone nut. The Irish Revolution ceased to be like the American Revolution at that point, in my opinion, and, also in my very humble opinion, the IRA lost its way at that point.

    I sincerely believe in a united Ireland, but, as is obvious from things I’ve said, I’m far from a radical.

    • Replies: @(((They))) Live
  70. Rurik says:
    @Razor

    I enjoyed your thoughtful and insightful post, however..

    Ireland abandoned Catholicism because of the frailty and sinfulness of many Churchmen. In their simple minds, they expected such men to be perfect and sinless,

    If the Vatican had simply tolerated and hushed up some larceny here or there, or even indiscretions of the flesh, then that would be one thing..

    But the boy-rape seems to have been endemic, and pervasive, and tolerated for decades, if not generations.

    If I contemplate it, I honestly find it hard to even imagine a more beyond-heinous abomination against God and the Church (and man) and everything that is holy or decent, than to use the sacred and sacramental accoutrements of the Church, and the authority therein, and put on airs of holiness, as the earthly manifestation of God’s love and law, in order to intimidate little boys into tolerating their rape by sodomites, masquerading as priests – with the apparent blessings of the Vatican.

    Let’s not downplay the enormity of that, I’d suggest. “Frailty and sinfulness’ are not quite adequate for that level of evil. I’d equate it to finding out your priest was a cannibal, who consumed the flesh of children from the orphanage, when no one was looking, and that the church leadership knew about it, and tolerated it. In fact for me, the evil of cannibalism would be less viscerally revolting than the use of innocent boys to sate these monster’s depraved appetites.

    And really, it isn’t that a few priests raped a few children, but rather that the practice seems to have been very widespread, and most alarmingly, hushed up, and even tolerated at the very highest levels of the Vatican, implicating even the Pope himself.

    How, when you’re taught that the Pope and his priests, and the Church, are to be loved and revered and honored and respected, as the very incarnation of God’s earthy presence, do you reconcile that to the knowledge that your priest has been raping choir boys, and the Bishops and Church hierarchy knew about it, which meant that many more boys had been raped, than had the Church leaders done something about it, rather than just moving these monsters around from parish to parish?

    I’m not trying to denigrate the Church. and certainly not its flock, many of whom are members of my family. But just trying to point out, that many who left the Church over the scandal, didn’t do so because they had “simple minds”, but rather because they had a sense of morality and goodness and probity that transcended the ‘authority’ of the Church.

    Just as those who’re mortified to see the Pope running all over the place demanding that Europe open its gates to unlimited armies of young Muslim men, and everyone else that wants to squat there, (billions, make no mistake), should be entitled to do so, or the Pope is going to condemn those Catholics (who’re sane), and think his counsel unwise, (if not unholy) as reprobates and ‘racists’.

    I guess I’m just scratching my head over here, wondering what’s left of the Catholic faith, when it’s leader is demanding the dissolution, rape and death of Christendom.

    I’m I too being ‘simple minded’? Perhaps, ‘racist’?

  71. Rurik says:
    @gsjackson

    Their broad smiles indicated that they felt very much at home in the culture.

    No doubt the Pope would approve.

    To pass judgment, would be close-minded and bigoted.

    I know an Irish guy well, who’s not too keen on the president (or prime minister, or whatever) being an openly gay man.

    He’s tells me of an anecdote, (everyone knows he’s outspoken, so if you don’t want an honest answer, then don’t ask him uncomfortable questions). Anyways he was at his Catholic family members house, (he too was raised Catholic growing up in Ireland) and the Catholic matriarch was there, but a brother in law or someone, mischievously decided to ask him in front of the family, what he thought of the current Pope, whereupon he simply blurted out, as he does, ‘I think he’s a fag’.

    But as it turns out, no one was upset, so I guess the Pope doesn’t command the homage in Ireland that he once did.

    et tu, Ireland?

    I feel your angst, gsjackson.

    My heart bleeds for Ireland today.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  72. S says:
    @Skeptikal

    In what sense was Massachusetts the center of chattel slavery?

    At the time of the 1776 Revolution chattel slavery and it’s trade existed throughout the British North American colonies. However, due to climate, there was something of a division of labor in the sordid business.

    Southern planters and hangers on tended to be the consumers of chattel slaves, elements of the New England elites (such as those of Boston, Mass, amongst others) the dealers.

    Not in anyway to defend the consumers, but when a product is bad, such as hard drugs or chattel slaves, it’s the dealers of the same which are generally considered the worst of the lot.

    I have read quite a few references to Newport, Rhode Island, as a major slaving center, or of families that made their fortunes in the slave trade.

    I’ve come across articles that have said Boston Mass was the primary center of the trade in British North America, others have said Rhode Island. Depending on the specific time period referenced both can be true.

    But the translatlantic slave trade ended in 1803.

    After that I believe the source of slaves for, say, the large cotton and sugar plantations of Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas was the “breeding” states of Virginia, Maryland, and North and South Carolina.

    All likely true enough. That wasn’t my point though.

    My posts was exploring what exactly was going on in the north. [I say this within the context of my seeing both the north with it’s wage slavery (ie so called cheap labor/mass immigration) and the south’s clashing chattel slavery, as both having been pretty poor moral causes at the start of the Civil War. The guns were turned on the wrong people in that damnable war.]

    The link below is to a site created by a fellow who couldn’t understand why so few had any knowledge about the north’s participation in chattel slavery and its trade. He, a person raised in the north, chooses to look at it from something of a Marxist angle, even so it’s quite interesting.

    How many know, for instance, that in New Jersey at the start of the Civil War (1861) there were legally owned, albeit ‘grandfathered’, chattel slave(s)? Or, that it was families much like those of the early 19th century Massachusetts industrialists Abbott Lawrence described upthread, which had been the very same families who had been heavily involved in the chattel slave trade?

    And that many of these same New England elite families and hangers on, not only dealt slaves, but had also owned them as personal slaves in the north, by the tens of thousands?

    Just as in the south due to this, many of these similarly corrupted elites in the north had grown used to doing anything, but anything, than paying the prevailing real time local costs of labor to typically their own people. That, or providing others that service in the south (also often their own largely Anglo-Saxon people) by way of slave dealing.

    Within the Anglosphere, chattel slavery and it’s trade set the horrid template for the cheap labor/mass immigration system we have today, and made the cult/ideology of multi-culturalism a necessity, lest the entire thing come apart.

    http://slavenorth.com/profits.htm

    • Agree: Jon Baptist
  73. gsjackson says:
    @Rurik

    Is there any place left in western or central Europe where the et tu question/observation might still be appropriate? You’d like to think maybe Poland. But …. I feel another anecdote coming on:

    I go to Europe for around three months every summer for, among other reasons, setting eyes upon and sometimes making the acquaintance of females who aren’t unsightly blobs (the norm in my corner of the U.S.). Last summer it was two months in Poland — Krakow and Lodz. Early on in Krakow there was some sort of homo-fest, and hundreds of them descended upon a shopping mall in which I was eating. Lots of transparently neurotic, narcissistic young people, convinced because they didn’t quite fit in that they must be part of LGBTQ Nation.

    They were all carrying rainbow-colored knapsacks, presumably to indicate solidarity with said nation. Conditioned now to notice this accessory, I saw these bags constantly the entire time I was in Poland, and then also during a month in Scotland. Even on the most touristy-looking people. O’ glorious enlightenment.

    That said, if you ever have occasion to spend Easter in Poland be prepared for culture shock. All of the stores and most of the restaurants were closed from 4 p.m. Friday to 10 a.m. Tuesday. As best I could determine, the average Polish Catholic family spends about 15 hours in church during this period.

    • Replies: @fwgg
    , @Rurik
  74. S says:
    @Razor

    Too many young Irish are now in a pit of despair at the emptiness of our culture, while at the same time slavishly engaging in it. This is evidenced by pervasive levels alcohol and drug abuse and historic levels of sexually transmitted infections and tragic levels of suicide, especially among your males.

    Thanks for your thoughtful response.

    I am very sorry to hear that is the case in Ireland. The Irish certainly deserve better.

  75. @Razor

    “In their simple minds, they expected such men to be perfect and sinless, admittedly something which the Churchmen themselves promoted in their own self interest. ”

    This is an obscenely obtuse statement, given the context. Those “simple minded” folks didn’t not expect perfection, they expected their male children not to be groomed and ass raped by degenerate homosexual men who abused their own authority as men of God.

    If that’s a distinction that you are unable to make, then you’re not qualified to decide whose minds are simple and whose aren’t.

    • Replies: @Razor
  76. Mefobills says:
    @Rurik

    I guess I’m just scratching my head over here, wondering what’s left of the Catholic faith, when it’s leader is demanding the dissolution, rape and death of Christendom.

    I’m I too being ‘simple minded’? Perhaps, ‘racist’?

    You are not being simple minded. Quite the opposite… you have resisted the narrative spewed from the Teeveee. You are listening to your natural instincts and believing what your eyes tell you.

    Also, race is real. If you are not an anti-semite, then you are ignorant, or lack morality. If you think the races are all equal, then you are ignorant or a dupe who has fallen for the narrative spewing forth from the Teeeveee.

    It is ok to be racist. Being a racist doesn’t mean you want to do harm to others who are not of your race. It means that you understand the races are different, and hence different conditions must apply in accord with their racial tendencies. Also, there is some overlap in the races, so it is always good to default to a individual approach when possible.

    A non-racist is a danger to themselves and others, as they are disconnected from reality.

    The Pope needs to be removed because he is a deluded fool, out of alignment with the Logos.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  77. fwgg says:
    @gsjackson

    In order to stop this, you would basically have to seal off your own population, like best Korea, but this has very significant opportunity costs does it not? How do you make a conservative society that the 110-130 and above IQ want to live in, since this is basically the IQ zone that is most susceptible to liberal ideas, but at the same time you need these people to build a technologically advanced society, and they are basically the professional managerial class, and you may call them NPC midwits, but without them, your country basically regresses to Third World craphole levels, so you have to keep them somehow.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  78. fwgg says:

    Or how do you keep your midwits ( who are the dominant cultural influencers and policymakers) wedded to socially conservative ideology, and shield them from subversive liberal ideas? Note that your garden variety Ashkenazi Jew falls squarely in the midwit IQ zone.

  79. Mefobills says:
    @fwgg

    How do you make a conservative society that the 110-130 and above IQ want to live in, since this is basically the IQ zone that is most susceptible to liberal ideas, but at the same time you need these people to build a technologically advanced society

    National Socialism, or a Kingdom.

    Pay close attention to who becomes the King, or who the ruling elite are, and what ideas are rattling around in their noggins.

    Democracy obviously does not work. Voting would be OK to select from an already pre-selected cadre of leaders. The pre-selection has to be done carefully – to keep out psychopaths.

    China uses polling for feedback rather than voting.

    The majority of the U.S. population is now fat, and their hormone systems are off-kilter, and their brains have been saturated with false narrative spewing from the owned media. Do you think American’s (or other Westerners) are able, on average, to make good choices with their votes?

    The Amerindian tribes of Chelan have found a unique way to pre-select to make their form of democracy work:

    • Replies: @Parfois1
  80. JMcG says:

    The book is 40.00 for the kindle version on Amazon!

  81. PeterMX says:
    @Fran Macadam

    Providing part of the article is obviously a way of giving you a taste of Dr. Jones writing in the hope you will subscribe to his website or buy a book from him. Shortly after completing his education and being hired as a Professor at a Catholic school decades ago, he was soon fired from his job for opposing abortion. Let that sink in for a moment. Forced to make a living on his own, he launched his own magazine and later his website. After working hard for all these years and getting little recognition, recently with the advent of the internet, Youtube and now a website like Mr. Unz’s, Dr. E Michael Jones is finally getting some recognition, but still not from the mainstream media. You will not see him on CNN, NBC or read any of his articles in a mainstream newspaper. If you watch PressTV (Iran’s state sponsored broadcaster), he has been invited on there, but he is shut out of making a living in the US, except by launching his own magazine/website. He has to make a living too and if anyone likes his articles enough, I’m sure he’s very happy to have new subscibers. I have not subscribed either, but I believe it’s a cheap investment to read a great writer.

    Over the last sevaral years, I started watching many fascinating interviews of Dr. Jones, completely free to me on the internet. I think Youtube helped make Dr. Jones much more known and popular. So, recently most of his videos were deleted by Youtube. Dr. Jones is a traditional Catholic with the Catholic church’s traditional (pre Vatican II) views on Jews. For that reason, this great thinker is unknown to most of the world, while CNN, NBC and others hire intellectual pipsqueaks to say what the broadcaster wants viewers to see (hear).

  82. Paul C. says:
    @Exile

    I’m only an hour in (it’s pretty long) but an excellent discussion, very informative. Thanks for sharing.

  83. Paul C. says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    I read your and Hibernian’s comments and it’s a good exchange.

    We have the same enemies and they aren’t us, although the powers that be will do all in their power keep us divided

    IMHO this analysis is spot on. The divide between many countries is not with the people but the ruling factions. Iraqi’s and many others in the Middle East and around the world have every right to hate American’s, but it’s those who rule America (Zion/Int’l Jewry) who formulate the policy. That doesn’t excuse those doing the unjust killing.

    I would speculate the same is true in England’s history with Ireland and other colonized countries.

  84. Paul C. says:
    @Rurik

    9/11 started my “truth journey” but only about 6 years ago. Since then I’ve gone down every imagineable rabbit hole. The Vatican was one of those. Anyone that researches the Vatican cannot come away without the realization that it’s satanic to the core. The Pope is a Freemason as there are many photos of him with a hidden hand. I’m not sure when the Freemasons took control of the (Catholic) Church, but my research indicates it was no good from the beginning, just a power grab to control and shakedown the masses. The Freemason takeover is akin to one gang or mafia subsuming another.

    I was never religious or even read the Bible, but after this awakening I left the Church as many Catholics are doing. As a result of my truth journey and hundreds of rabbit holes, I finally encountered the ultimate Truther, Jesus Christ. Now that I’m reading the Bible it’s clearer than ever that many Catholic church teaching’s are anti-Christ, in the sense that they violates his words. On the other hand, the Church upheld values against abortion, homosexually, and the liberal agenda. If the Church reverts back to those positions it may have some relevance, but I hope many come out of her and establish a direct relationship with Christ.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  85. @YetAnotherAnon

    “I don’t think the British Army ever had a policy of killing Irishmen at random in the Queen’s name.”

    Bloody Sunday!

    • Disagree: YetAnotherAnon
  86. Razor says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    “This is an obscenely obtuse statement, given the context. Those “simple minded” folks didn’t not expect perfection, they expected their male children not to be groomed and ass raped by degenerate homosexual men who abused their own authority as men of God.

    If that’s a distinction that you are unable to make, then you’re not qualified to decide whose minds are simple and whose aern’t”

    I think in your obvious (righteous) anger, you’ve missed my distinction. The point I sought to make, perhaps inartfully, was that faith is not dependant on clergy with feet of clay. Christ, through scripture, speaks directly to us, if we are prepared to study, contemplate and pray in all humility for discernment. Wisdom is there for those who humbly seek it.

    I have already referred to the corruption of the clerical church in hiding the horrific behaviour of the predators within and, in fairness, those predators were a small minority. I feel great pity for those honourable Cherchmen who selflessly dedicated their lives to the Good News.

    The incidence of child abusers in the Church is probably no higher than in any other occupation which provided trusted access to children. That’s the point. Such people select occupations which enable such access.

    The primary sin of the institutional church was in choosing to hide this Demonic behaviour to avoid the inevitable scandals rather than protect the
    children. That was a betrayal of the innocent, of their own primary mission, of their flock and ultimately of God himself. In acting in this way, they have succeeded in separating too many of the flock from the real Master and preparing the ground for the Unspeakable.

    The point I was trying to make is that all too many of the formerly faithful have thrown the baby out with the bathwater, abandoning faith altogether and uncritically accepting the licencious standards of “Progressivism” and Cultural Marxism. The institutional Church was never the Church, which is the body of Christ and as such the Faithful, which Christ promised he would be with till the end of time. He never said that the institutional church would be free from corruption, and we already in this age knew that, from the corruption which led to the Reformation.

  87. Miggle says:

    Something that astounded me was the relatively sudden rise of the homosexual lobby, and that rising suddenly it nonetheless has immense power, is invincible.

    No-one had heard of it around 1970. At some time there was the cry that the actions of “consenting adults in private” should not be criminal. Okay, but they never stopped. After two or three decades there arose the debate over “same sex marriage”. They won that one, and then made primary school / grade school children their next target, sexualizing little children to indoctrinate them with belief in the fluidity of sex. That victory won they move on to sex-change operations on pre-pubescent children.

    They are immensely powerful. Invincible. Ready to destroy the careers of straights who step out of line. The accusation of homophobia is used as a weapon just like the accusation of anti-Semitism.

    There are many, many similarities between the homosexual lobby and the Jewish lobby. They are both about subverting society.

    So, is the homosexual lobby a branch of the Jewish lobby, with all its skills?

    I think so.

    It seems there is plenty of homosexuality in Israel, but I predict that that will suddenly disappear, and the next step will be for Jewish propaganda to shout that Gentiles are Sodomites. Same thing.

    So the author is writing about the continuing subversion of Irish society by the Jews.

    • Replies: @Alden
  88. Miggle says:
    @SoldierOn

    You talk a lot of nonsense, SoldierOn, a mark of childhood indoctrination and the need to close your mind when you were little. But I’ll take up only one point. The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to Timothy bestows on Timothy the authority to appoint bishops and tells him how. Look at Chapter 3 Verse 2, the beginning of a longer sentence:

    A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

    If a bishop must have one wife the notion that a priest must be celibate is absurd. Presumably Jesus was, Paul was, Peter was, but that does not lay down an inflexible rule.

    • Replies: @SoldierOn
  89. Alfred says:
    @Hibernian

    just as 911 killed Protestant, Catholic, Jew, Hindu and Muslim in NYC.

    There was only one Israeli victim – in the financial centre of New York. Try to do a chi-square (χ2) test on the probability of that being their lucky day and the chances would be in the trillions to one.

    • Agree: Rurik
  90. Alfred says:
    @GMC

    If you go to the rescue of another person, you may have to pay a very heavy price for it .

    It did cost me hundreds of thousands of dollars in today’s money. In direct costs plus loss of income for many years.

    The stress caused me to have “avascular necrosis” in my right knee (loss of blood circulation). Doctors in London did MRI scans and that was the diagnosis. A specialist in Harley Street told me that I was essentially a cripple and they could not do anything about it. They did not believe that stress can cause it. Months later, I found I could walk without agonizing pain. It totally healed as the stress decreased.

  91. Rurik says:
    @Mefobills

    Quite the opposite…

    Thank you, Mefobills,

    If you are not an anti-semite, then you are ignorant, or lack morality.

    Well, not to split hairs, but then isn’t that why many of us are here? To delve into the minutia of philosophical angels dancing on needle tips?

    So, for the record, I don’t actually consider myself an anti-Semite. Hardly, even. At least insofar as I understand the meaning of that word. IOW, I don’t hate Jews, simply for being Jews. In fact, there are a lot of Jews for whom I have a deep and abiding respect, affection for, and place in my personal pantheon of ‘Rurik’s heroes’.

    Not that I don’t understand what you mean, when you say anti-Semite, because today we’re all threatened and bludgeoned by our ((occupied)) governments, to equate the worst crimes of Zion, (there are not words), with simply having been born a Jew. IOW, to criticize the massacres by Jewish supremacist snipers, of unarmed protesters, protesting their collective genocide = means automatically, (and by law) that the person criticizing, is only revealing his own secret desire to shove all Jews into gas chambers and ovens.

    That’s the paradigm that they’ve deliberately created. Criticize Israel for USS Liberty or 9/11 – means Ipso facto = that you hate all Jews (simply for being Jews) and you want to kill or persecute them all.

    They’ve done this as a trick to protect Israel’s serial crimes and atrocities from criticism, but I wonder how many Jews are on board with the program, and are willing to tie their personal existential identities to the behavior of Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman.

    It is ok to be racist.

    Oh my gosh. Here again the nuances are exploding into a trillion spinning shards.

    Few words are more wrought with high-charged emotional weaponry than that particular word.

    Like ‘terrorist’, it’s all about who is using it to describe whom. I’m sort of getting a kick out of the ‘prince Harry and Meghan Merkel farce unfolding in Merry Olde. It seems Oprah and other black supremacists were engaged in using Meghan as their mole, to root out ‘racism’ in the royal family.

    At least that’s how it looks like to me, admittedly not knowing the inner goings on. (Even if I confess that the farce is delicious to watch. Heh)

    But I am aware of the obsession with race and ‘racism’ today, (who isn’t?!).

    This is the thing.. like the word ‘terrorist’, they’re never going to allow a word like racism or racist to be objectively defined. Because the moment it’s definitively defined, it loses its potency as a weapon directed subjectively at people the ((regime)) does not like.

    If racism means you consider your race as superior, and as such, is justified in all manner of persecutions (Affirmative Action), up to and including even genocide of the ‘inferior’ race(s), then that most egregious of all connotations, could not possibly be more aptly applied than it is today in Palestine, and the occupied territories there of. But watch your university professor squirm (piss himself) if you were to say such obvious things in the lecture hall, in front of a few dozen other university students and staff.

    The Pope needs to be removed because he is a deluded fool, out of alignment with the Logos.

    That this current Pope is a catastrophe, and even, I’d posit, an abomination.. I can hardly argue with your demand for his removal, (if there’s something to be salvaged of the Catholic Church and faith), and I suspect you’re correct about the rest as well.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
    , @Mefobills
  92. Rurik says:
    @gsjackson

    I was in Poland, and then also during a month in Scotland. …

    O’ glorious enlightenment.

    Well, first off, let me just say that you’ve arranged your life in an enviable way, if you can manage these escapades to do God’s work. My respects, Sir.

    As best I could determine, the average Polish Catholic family spends about 15 hours in church during this period.

    The vibe I’ve gotten, is that the resurgence of Polish Catholicism has an infused nationalism with it, and as such, isn’t as Globohomo as the Western, Irish version of Catholicism- melded as it is with Globohomo and ‘diversity’ as its ((new)) sacraments.

    So I’m sad to hear they too, worship at the alter of the homo-**** (as Priss would put it)

    What’s to be done?

    The only solution I know of, would be to end the Federal Reserve Bank, the fount, and ‘The Eye of Sauron’ of their nefarious power. Or at least- do all our collective nations and individuals can to kill their fiat currency, the dollar.

    I like the Eye of Sauron analogy, because it represents pure evil

    (as good a characterization of the id of Zion (the fiend) as Hollywood has produced..)

    ‘if you want the IMF loans, you will take the refugees’

    and in the movie, when it died, the minions of Zion were all swept away in a breath..

    Lot’s of beautiful symbolism in this short clip. Gollum (representing human greed / Dick Cheney) falling into the pit, and taking with him the golden ring of precious greed / betrayal.

    The determination of Western man, to cling to his friend, and their future, on the cusp of the abyss..

    The death of The Fed, and with it, all the orcs and minions of Sauron..

    I imagine that if the we could figure out how to kill the Fed, then it would be much like the movie, with places like Paris, returning to sanity and French rule, as the power behind the orcs occupying Paris- would dry up like dust and blow away..

    (sorry for the use of videos and such, but I try to use them as just tools)

  93. SoldierOn says:
    @Miggle

    So does that mean everyone else can have more than one wife? Why absurd? Presumably, Jesus was celibate? Quoting a Bible verse does not make you intelligent. Did you read my post, or were you too busy working out your gamma issues?

    • Replies: @Miggle
  94. @Rahan

    Well, our family left the Catholic Church, but your comment is right on in every respect.

    Of course the elites who want to take down any institution powerful enough to mobilize opposition to its sick plans for us and our children, which you have outlined eloquently. They concluded that the catholic church was such an institution, so they selectively focused on child sexual abuse by catholic clergy while downplaying or ignoring the same or similar kinds of abuse by Jewish, Protestant, and Muslim clergy and laymen.

    Nonetheless, the catholic church now is nothing for the evil people to worry about. The church has gone so far as to “join the other side” when it comes to sexual morality, the nature and normal roles of men and women, and even the right of white people and our cultures to survive and to flourish and control our own lands.

    When it comes to “porn-addicted … lonely madmen” and worse, the priesthood is apparently a good place to look.

  95. @HoekomSA

    Failing that, you could join a Christian church that allows its ministers to be normal, well-rounded, mature MEN — with all the joys, sacrifices, responsibilities, experiences, and insights that come with a faithful marriage to a woman and the difficult rewarding work of raising new lives together.

    You know, Protestants.

  96. Rurik says:
    @Paul C.

    On the other hand, the Church upheld values against abortion, homosexually, and the liberal agenda.

    Yes, there was a time when the Catholic Church was the go-to religion, as personified by great Catholics like Father Charles Coughlin.

    I just did a quick check and I see that ..

    in 1939, the Roosevelt administration finally forced the cancellation of his radio program and forbade distribution by mail of his newspaper, Social Justice.

    How’s that for the First Amendment. Reminds me of Walt Disney’s treatment on the morning after the “surprise” attack on Peal Harbor.

    And as others have pointed out, it isn’t just Catholic priests whose serial predations against children and subsequent cover-ups are rampant. Many rabbis are just as guilty, and so too it seems is the Boy Scouts of America, having covered-up pedophiles and rapists in their ranks. The pediphilia in the British peerage is notorious, and how about those sterling paragons of virtue in our own government, like Dennis Hastert? The rot is all-pervasive in our new, ((improved)) civilization, it seems.

    And, I don’t know of any Catholics showing as much slavish obeisance to the fiend, as John Hagee and the rest of the Christian Zionist evangelicals do.

    I’m not demeaning the Catholic Church, simply pointing out why it’s being repudiated far and wide, and with perhaps good reason. The Church has lost its faith, and, as RadicalCenter has pointed out;

    The church has gone so far as to “join the other side” when it comes to sexual morality, the nature and normal roles of men and women, and even the right of white people and our cultures to survive and to flourish and control our own lands.

    yep

    As for Jesus’ humble message of love, and speaking truth to power, please count me in.

  97. @YetAnotherAnon

    Appreciate your comment about your married priest.

    I attended a parish in the US Midwest with a married priest (convert from Protestantism) and it was quite strange for this cradle Catholic to see the priest’s wife and children in the front pews during his sermon. But wonderful.

    It’s probably not a coincidence that he was one of the relatively few priests I’ve met in the US and Canada in the past 30 years who was friendly, engaging, caring, and didn’t appear to resent our country or people who didn’t entirely agree with him.

    He also actually knew what he was talking about. He was also able to render credible, informed, realistic advice about love, sex, temptation, and the search for true love, marriage, and children, given his own experiences as a normal man. (I was single at the time.)

    Many catholics don’t know that the RC church has a rule “authorizing” Protestant clergy to come over and serve as priests while, of course, remaining married and continuing to father their own children. My married priest jokingly called it “the poaching rule” because it enables the RC church to entice normal men to come across the denominational line.

    The existence of this “rule” conclusively shows that the RC church does not seriously consider the general requirement of unmarried childless misfit priesthood to be a moral or scriptural issue.

  98. Rurik says:
    @Rahan

    Pederasty among the Irish gay community and third world community is likely to be on just as wide, if not wider scale, and more vicious on the level of the mechanics of the individual act.

    I heartily agreed with the tenor and tone and cogent points you make, but for the record, it isn’t just the pederasty in the Church that I personally find so abhorrent, (not for the mechanics, as you correctly point out, are likely more delicate, but for the abuse of Holy Power, the worst abuse of all).

    But my point is that it’s not just the child abuse in the Church, but that the Church has become one of the leading proponents of settling those Third Worlders, you mention.. into our communities all over the formerly, white, Christian United States – and, likely Ireland.

    Our Church has responded to Christ’s call for us to “welcome the stranger among us,” for in this encounter with the immigrant, the migrant, and the refugee in our midst, we encounter Christ.

    http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/immigration/index.cfm

    The Bishops’ Committee on Migration and its staff in Migration and Refugee Services (MRS) carry out the commitment of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to serve and advocate for refugees, asylees, forced migrants, immigrants, and other people on the move.

    Just do a search for ‘catholic church Muslim refugees’, and you’ll see it’s rampant.

    At least if they were advocating for more Mexicans, one could understand that Mexicans are generally Catholic, and so at least from a purely economic point of view, that makes sense. But it isn’t just Catholic Mexicans that the Catholic Church is demanding every Western nation allow to settle in transformational numbers, but EVERYBODY. From every backwater and sorry ‘shithole’ on the planet, to be absorbed by Ireland, until Ireland doesn’t resemble anything like Ireland.

    All those Third World men, who do rape Christian children wholesale..

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grooming-child-sex-abuse-exploitation-rotherham-rochdale-police-a9215261.html

    Are being facilitated by none other than the Catholic Church.

    It sort of begs the question…

    It’s one thing to point out abuses of power in an institution in order to help this institution perform better. It’s another thing to do the same with the end goal being the destruction of this institution.

    Is there anything left of the institution to salvage?

    • Replies: @Mishima Zaibatsu
  99. Miggle says:
    @SoldierOn

    Thanks for proving my point, SoldierOn. You talk a lot of nonsense, Point proved.

    There is zero evidence (Fathers, Councils, Synods, Doctors, Saints […]

    There is zero evidence that they ever imposed celibacy. Such a command would not have passed unnoticed. And no such thing appears in the New Testament, the real authority. The only thing of relevance we find there is the one I quoted. In God’s Word, the Holy Bible, we find that a bishop must be married. We can play with language, was it “one” or “a” which have often been mixed up in English, but even if that passage meant a bishop must not be polygamous it blows away your claim that the rule of priestly celibacy goes back to the beginning. And it is not imposed in the Greek Orthodox Church today. Why not?

    The worst catastrophe that ever befell the Church was Constantine’s conversion. Immediate degeneracy followed, the Church no longer about Christ but about power, the hegemonic claims …

    I won’t finish. I’d like to transcribe the text of the Paris Placards of 1534, which prove your heresy, absolutely blow you away; and I’d like to transcribe the definition of the catholic (universal) Church that forms one chapter of the Westminster Confession of Faith, makes it clear that it’s not the hierarchy of the Pope of Rome. But I won’t. Not now.

    Do you even know that the Roman Church switched from Greek to Latin as its language in response to a letter to the Pope of Rome from the Pope of Carthage urging that change? I don’t think so.

    • Replies: @SoldierOn
  100. gsjackson says:
    @Rurik

    I’ll just pass along what Joe Sobran told me 32 years ago when I asked him why not frankly admit to antisemitism: “Why give yourself up as a hostage?” He was all too familiar by then with how the marginalization project can speed along without giving it any help.

    And the term, of course, is grossly inaccurate. That’s the game — take a detailed indictment and funnel the whole thing into a buzz word that has been through the demonization wash and dry cycle.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  101. @Hibernian

    We know who shot Collins, its not a mystery, at that point Collins was no longer part of the IRA, his part of the IRA became the army of the free state, which then defeated the IRA in the civil war

  102. Rurik says:
    @gsjackson

    You knew Joe?!

    Wow. Joe is in my Pantheon of heroes, I was talking about.

    >><<

    And why admit to anti-Semitism when it isn't true?

    It's like saying I'm a racist. Sure, depending on the context, I could be considered one, but I don't hate any people for simply being born what they are.

    That doesn't mean I think we're all exactly the same, that's absurd. But neither does it mean we should or do hate each other.

    Hate is a cancer, and I believe that. And obviously not all Jews (or blacks or whites, etc…) fit the stereotypes. Why fall into that trap. I might be considered a white nationalist in some contexts, but that doesn't mean I'm a racist, unless being a racial realist means you're a racist. Does it? IDK, they'll never allow the word to be defined.

    But Joe was crucified for writing some things that were true, but politically incorrect, and he was betrayed by his former "friend', Buckley, ((to their common enemy)) and I remember despising Buckley for that. I still do, in a way. Like the way I'll always feel about McCain.

    Anyways, amazing that you knew Joe enough to have a conversation with him. For some reason I always considered Joe and Charlie Reese to be in the same category of great writers of iron integrity. Something very rare today.

    Thanks gsjackson.

    [RIP Joe]

    • Replies: @gsjackson
    , @jack daniels
  103. SoldierOn says:
    @Miggle

    …but even if that passage meant a bishop must not be polygamous it blows away your claim that the rule of priestly celibacy goes back to the beginning. And it is not imposed in the Greek Orthodox Church today.

    You do know that bishops in the Eastern Orthodox cannot be married, right?

    No, the quote you selected does nothing of the kind. All it says is that bishops cannot have more than one wife. If you read my post, which you clearly did not, you would see celibacy was imposed to make continence easier. My “claim” was for continence, not celibacy. Is English your second language?

    Referencing the Paris Placards of 1534 and a language preference of the early Church is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Great gamma tactics, but very obvious.

    • Replies: @Miggle
  104. Miggle says:
    @SoldierOn

    If you read my post, which you clearly did not, you would see celibacy was imposed to make continence easier. My “claim” was for continence, not celibacy. Is English your second language?

    So give us your definition of continence. The ability not to wet your pants or poop your pants? Only fuck one woman? Or do those verses from 1 Timothy 3 describing the required qualifications of a bishop exactly describe and define continence? I just quoted the beginning from 1 Timothy 3:2. Here is the whole passage, this time from the Jerusalem Bible, perhaps motivated avoidance of “bishop” I’m sure you understand, “presiding elder” but don’t play that up. It might be a better translation, elaborating the true meaning of “bishop”. But the JB is a Roman “Catholic” bible, so may be a bit dodgy in places. Anyway, here it is, 3:1 twice, the first from the KJV, the other from the JB, the rest from the JB:

    [MORE]

    3:1

    This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.

    3:1

    Here is a saying you can rely on: To want to be a presiding elder is to want to do noble work.

    3:2

    That is why the president must have an impeccable character. He must not have been married more than once, and he must be temperate, discreet and courteous, hospitable and a good teacher;

    3:3

    not a heavy drinker, nor hot-tempered, but kind and peaceable. He must not be a lover of money.

    3:4

    He must be a man who manages his own family well and brings his children up to obey him and be well-behaved:

    3:5

    how can any man who does not know how to manage his own family have responsibility for the church of God?

    3:6

    He should not be a new convert, in case pride might turn his head and then he might be condemned as the devil was condemned.

    3:7

    It is also necessary that people outside the Church speak well of him, so he never gets a bad reputation and falls into the the devil’s trap.

    3:8

    In the same way, deacons must be respectable men …

    Stop playing with “continence”. There it is. A bishop must bring up his children well. All the above together can be called continence. Except you never explained that rarely-used word.

    Celibacy would certainly not make continence easier. We only have to look at the tidal waves of child sexual molestation that have been sweeping over your denomination for so long.

  105. gsjackson says:
    @Rurik

    I found myself sitting behind Joe at an oldtimers baseball game in D.C. in 1987, introduced myself as fanboy and claimed to be in the same line of work (actually at a notorious neocon redoubt — the Heritage Foundation — but I was a young naif who knew nothing at the time about the neocon-paleocon schism in Reaganism). He didn’t hold that against me, seemed to like me, or perhaps more to the point his daughter did, and we became good friends for the next two and a half years. His manner of socializing was to invite close friends over to his house (which he shared with three kids and a grandson, and is a whole story in itself ) regularly, and for a while I was on a 2-3 times a week schedule.

    Back then those sorts of serendipitous events managed to happen occasionally. I had been a big fan of Joe’s for years and had often thought how great it would be to have a beer with him. Had many.

    I can’t believe how lean he is in that picture. And that looks to have been a little after I knew him, when portly might be an adjective that came to mind. He was, shall we say, rather neglectful of the physical aspects of life, and physical health issues caught up to him far too early. Maybe he tried to get the health under control for a time, but diabetes snuck up on him anyway.

    RIP. Joe wasn’t without his shortcomings — like all of us — but essentially he was who you think he was. Pure intellectual integrity.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  106. @Rurik

    The main proponents of the invasion are the ‘gay mafia’ types who are also involved in financial corruption and attempts to tear down the church’s teachings, not orthodox Catholics.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  107. Alden says:
    @ThreeCranes

    I’ve been aware of the disastrous war waged against America by the tax exempt foundations since I became an adult. I encountered them right out of college.

  108. Alden says:
    @S

    Very interesting and informative thanks for the information. I’m not a conservative. I’m a pro labor White Nationalist.

    • Replies: @S
  109. Alden says:
    @Miggle

    Lou Cabrillo of European American Affairs once made a list of the biggest 150 gay organizations. The heads of 132 of the biggest 150 gay organizations were Jews. This is men organizations, not lesbians.

    I’m old enough to remember the early gay movement. The men were heavily Jews. The lesbians not so much but still the lesbian leadership was heavily Jewish. And the lesbians led the feminazi movement for decades.

    Maybe it was some natural inclination to be gay. Or maybe it was like the Jewish embrace of black criminals. Just another Jewish method of destroying us filthy infidel goyim.

  110. @Rurik

    Waters acted immorally by fathering a child out of wedlock. And isn’t Sinead O’Connor the radical thot who tore up a picture of the pope on Saturday Night Live?

    Biology confers no rights if a parent behaves irresponsibly. The harmful effects of single-parent child-rearing are well-documented. If a father plans to stick around he should prove it by marrying the mother.

    I am surprised that the normally doctrinaire defender of traditional morality EMJ is willing to give Waters a pass on fathering out of wedlock, but I guess he is hard up for intelligent allies.

    • Replies: @Razor
  111. Razor says:
    @jack daniels

    Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. When I used to read the Irish Times, John Waters was one of my preferred columnists, because he challenged the received wisdom and the increasing liberalism of both the Irish Times and Ireland generally. I gave up on the Irish Times several years ago. I don’t believe in financially supporting what the Irish Times has become, which I abhor.

    I don’t know the details of John Waters relationship with Sinead O Connor, clearly a woman who has been troubled probably all of her life. What is clear, whatever about his relationship with Sinead, he committed himself powerfully to being the best father he could to his daughter. Now, if he had begotten a child upon O Connor, to use somewhat archaic legalistic terminology, and abandoned any responsibility for her, and sought to avoid such responsibilities, he might well be fairly criticised.

    As to marrying the mother? That is no guarantee of a long term relationship, as you must know. How many marriages in the US end in divorce?

    It was clearly not Waters wish to have his child reared by a single parent, which is why he committed to being the best father he could. I have no idea how good or otherwise he actually has been to his daughter; I do know he fought long and hard to have the opportunity to do so.

    Although I have never met the man, having read his columns over many years and seen him often interviewed on TV and participate in TV discussions, the very clear picture I have is of a man of strong beliefs, ethical and honest and a seeker after truth. He is a man who has never been afraid to question the sacred cows of the rapidly liberalising Ireland over many years. And whether he was right or wrong in doing so, I deeply respect this man. I don’t know what you base your criticism on apart from the condemnation of the stone throwers.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
    , @(((They))) Live
  112. Mefobills says:
    @Rurik

    In fact, there are a lot of Jews for whom I have a deep and abiding respect, affection for, and place in my personal pantheon of ‘Rurik’s heroes’.

    Me too. I measure people by how far they have traveled. To be a Rurik hero, a Jew would have traveled far indeed. We can still admire them, and be an anti-semite. Exceptions don’t make the rule. You are implying that being an anti-semite is a brainless, thoughtless, emotional response by some sort of ignorant rube. The reality is being an anti-semite is a LEARNED POSITION, and hence the province of thinkers, and people who can discern patterns.

    Again, it is ok to be an anti-semite, it is a learned position. Those who are not, have not thought enough, do not have facts at hand, and hence are somewhat ignorant.

    If racism means you consider your race as superior, and as such, is justified in all manner of persecutions (Affirmative Action), up to and including even genocide of the ‘inferior’ race(s), then that most egregious of all connotations,

    Yes, the definition matters. I defined it to prevent wrong think:

    It is ok to be racist. Being a racist doesn’t mean you want to do harm to others who are not of your race. It means that you understand the races are different, and hence different conditions must apply in accord with their racial tendencies. Also, there is some overlap in the races, so it is always good to default to a individual approach when possible.

    You are assuming that racists are rubes lacking in thought and nuance. I’m saying that a true racist knows the things I state above are true, and further …evolution predicts it as so.

    Also, “one race as superior” cannot be true in an evolutionary sense. Each race is evolved for its environmental niche. Each race is superior to its niche.

    I’m going to say it again, and not back away from my position, because my position is eminently defensible – and is grounded in logic and morality.

    A non-racist is a danger to themselves and others, as they are disconnected from reality.

    You must aspire be a racist and an anti-semite. It is the learned and moral position.

    And we agree, the Pope is a deluded fool, who cannot think straight on the race question, much less on sexual depravity and degeneracy.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  113. Dumbo says:
    @Razor

    Sinead O Connor, clearly a woman who has been troubled probably all of her life

    That’s an understatement.

    As to marrying the mother? That is no guarantee of a long term relationship, as you must know.

    Certainly not with Sinead. She married four times, and all her children appear to be out of wedlock from different fathers anyway.

    She recently converted to islam, maybe as a final rebuttal to Catholicism.

  114. @Razor

    I stopped buying the Irish times years ago, in the end only John Waters and Kevin Myers were worth reading, once they left I saw no point is giving them my money

    https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2014/04/john-waters-answers-the-liberal-establishment-and-the-craven-irish-times/

    An interesting article by John Waters on how the IT works, nasty people IMO

  115. @Dutch Boy

    Well good thing they made abortion legal, certainly that will raise the birthrates and not give the ruling class another excuse to import millions of savages, right?

  116. @Jon Halpenny

    Bloody Sunday was a cock-up, not a conspiracy, let alone a policy.

  117. Rurik says:
    @Mishima Zaibatsu

    not orthodox Catholics.

    I have no problem with orthodox Catholics, the flock. My problem is with the Vatican and the leadership, whom I consider anti-Christ, (and I say that in a secular way, iow not The anti-Christ, but literally, anti-Christ in their promotion of homomania, and by opening the gates of Christendom to those whom would supplant it, and bury it under their own identity, until Christendom [Europa] was no more).

    Where are the Catholics, who speak truth to the forces of evil, as this Christian is doing?!

  118. Rurik says:
    @gsjackson

    more to the point his daughter did,

    You leave us hanging. Was there any, em.. amour?

    I had been a big fan of Joe’s for years and had often thought how great it would be to have a beer with him. Had many.

    OK, I’m jealous. In a good way.

    Pure intellectual integrity.

    When I look back at the ascendancy of the tribe over our civilization, I see there were (some heroic) men of integrity who opposed it, and one of those men was Joe.

    Our civilization and its trajectory is in large part dependent upon moral and intellectual stalwarts, willing to take on the forces of darkness, come what may. (There again, I’m reminded of that scene on LOTR, where the wizard stands before demon, and demands ‘you shall not pass!’)

    And when the intellectual debate was beginning to rage in conservative circles, over the degree to which our culture and institutions were being subverted to the interests of Jewish supremacy, at the direct expense of Christian and conservative values, I remember the battle lines being drawn at the time, and the gate keeper of conservative, intellectual front line of defense, William Buckley’s National Review. And I remember witnessing with visceral disgust, as Buckley caved to their demands, like a spineless, craven mouse. But what was far, far worse, was how he tossed the only man at that magazine, whose integrity was inviolate, under the bus, to appease his by now, Zionist masters.

    A total and abased capitulation, was bad enough, (especially with the stakes involved!) but then to betray a friend, because that friend would not sell his soul for thirty shekels, (and a few moments of prominence on the Talmud Vision), to the devil himself, was a time of great sadness for me, at least in that whole context.

    And today we see the results. When Buckley sold out conservatism, it set the stage for the cucks at Conservative Inc. and The American Cuckservative, and all the other cucked out whores of “Christian conservatism’ whom all seem to be like human colostomy bags, (as one guy put it), slurping shekels down their gullets like squealing pigs at a $lop trough.

    Bush, Cheney, Boehner, Mitt, Jeb!, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, and God help us, I could go on and on. John McBloodstain, and his spawn. Liz Cheney, etc.. ad nauseam..
    Are all Buckley’s legacy.

    Just this little snippet from Joe’s Wiki page sort of says it all.

    In 2001, Pat Buchanan offered Sobran a column in Buchanan’s new magazine The American Conservative. Editor Scott McConnell withdrew the offer when Sobran refused to cancel his appearance before the Institute for Historical Review.[16]

    He wouldn’t crawl on his belly before his enemies.

    Pure intellectual integrity.

    You said it, gsjackson!

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

    Cute quip from Ann Coulter on the page 😉

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  119. Rurik says:
    @Mefobills

    You are implying that being an anti-semite is a brainless, thoughtless, emotional response by some sort of ignorant rube.

    I hope not.

    It’s such a nuanced issue. So wrought with hyperbole and invective.

    I’ll try to characterize it thus: Many people hate me, because of what I was born as. A straight, white, American male. They say I am responsible for the plight of blacks today, no matter where they are, because I enslaved them and now continue to persecute them and hold them down (with my racism), as witnessed by their non-parity in American society, both in their over-representation in the criminal justice system and their under-representation as CEOs and scientists, etc…

    Now, if I were to suggest any number of things, like that I had nothing personally do with any of that, or that perhaps there are other reasons for their non-parity, as in biological reasons..

    Then I would be excoriated from the length and breath of my society, as the vilest form or reprobate racist of the most irredeemable sort. No university anthropology dept. head would come to my defense, just as no politician or Christian minister or priest, would defend my good name.

    They’d all pile on, and demand my crucifixion as a ‘racist’, wouldn’t they?

    Suggesting there are biological reasons for black (or other) non-parity, is the worst kind of racism that exists in the worst backwaters of American (or otherwise), racist white societies.

    And that is considered the universal rule today, from New Zealand to Seattle to Helsinki, Finland.

    The narrative, (and it’s more or less settled in the zeitgeist of the West today), is that all the suffering, and all the failures of all the non-white peoples of the world today, are all a direct consequence of my intractable racism, and my congenital unwillingness to allow all non-whites to prosper and persevere.

    I did it, you see.

    Even here on Unz, I’ve discovered there are people with whom I’m otherwise ideologically in tune with, but because I was born a white American, they hate my guts. It matters not what I believe, what I’ve done, or who I am as an individual, all that matters to some, is that as a white American, I am deplorable, and my only possible redemption would be to wallow in public self-loathing and abased contrition for all my crimes.

    So, you see I’m a little bit sympathetic to those for whom blanket condemnations are tossed about, regardless of anything they may or may not have done.

    I try to take people as individuals. I know that’s a cliché, but there it is.

    Now, are the races different, and as you point out, suited to their respective environments? Of course they are, but you can’t say that, or you’ll be crucified in the public square of acceptability.

    We all have to live in the cartoon-like, pretend world of the zeitgeist/narrative. Because that’s where 90+% of the rest of the people live in.

    Take for instance the debate raging today over anti-Semitism vs. anti-Zionism. All semantics, but they’re writing laws all over the West, demanding that they’re both one and the same, and that any criticism of Israel, (no matter how egregious its assorted atrocities and crimes) is nothing more than a transparent and bigoted hatred of all Jews, simply because they were born Jews.

    So basically the world has gone insane, as far as I can tell.

    Is race real and are there difference, even cognitive differences? Duh.

    Is whitey guilty for all the failures of the non-white world? I doubt it.

    Are all white Americans guilty for all the wars and suffering in the world, both past and present?

    Guess how many people on this site would agree with that?

    There has to be an agreed upon definition for things to be discussed, or it’s all cacophony.

    Is it reasonable for Gentiles to hate Jews, simply because they were born Jews?

    I don’t think so.

    Is it reasonable for Gentiles to be suspicious of Jews? Perhaps, considering the histories of our peoples going back though the centuries, with the most recent century being salient, (to say the least ; ).

    You defined ‘racism’;

    It means that you understand the races are different, and hence different conditions must apply in accord with their racial tendencies.

    And I’d agree, but there’s sill little reason for any hostilities towards the different races based on your definition.

    But you didn’t define anti-Semitism, and yet your point is that learned Gentiles should all be anti-Semites, no?

    If so, perhaps you should take the time to define precisely what you mean by anti-Semitism, no?

    • Replies: @Lost american
    , @Mefobills
  120. @Anonymous

    Britain is and rightfully so Ireland’s sole enemy. Who partitioned Ireland to benefit a small British settler minority? Britain is the one that is so determined that Ireland is tied to it. We could have a border down the Irish Sea and have absolutely nothing to do with one another but no , Britain is so desperate to have a foothold in Ireland that ALL Irish people have the same rights in Britain as native British lol. Britain keeps saying we can’t survive without them lol ,United Ireland in another 10 to 15 years .

    • Agree: Parfois1
  121. @Razor

    To Razor-“there it is” (a common saying among lowly troops in Vietnam”) – those damn cultural Marxists. This is why for near two thousand years Catholic theologians and other great non Catholic writers called pride the sin from which all other sins come.
    The human ego can be monstrous.

  122. @Alfred

    Alfred- it is bad in America too. I lived it.
    Bob Geldof of the Boomtown Rats in Ireland or England worked hard
    for father’s rights. I don’t know if he achieved much. But at least he spoke out.

  123. @Rurik

    Rurik: those people criticizing you because you are white are idiots and above all they are lazy cowards.

    • Agree: Rurik
  124. gsjackson says:
    @Rurik

    In explaining the comment about the daughter (no amour), I guess I’ll need to include a parallel explanation of how I came to part ways with Joe.

    When I met them at the game — he was there with only his youngest daughter — she had just turned 15. I was 36, though still very ‘young, dumb and full of c*m,’ as the saying goes.

    At some point in the ensuing months Joe suggested that we do a newsletter together. Originally Tom Bethel was to be on board, but he dropped out shortly and it was just the two of us planning what was to be called The Sobran Report. And so began about a two year process of trying to secure funding from one or more of Joe’s well-heeled admirers.

    There were some interesting episodes towards that end. We had dinner a couple of times with Pat Buchanan and his wife, not to touch up Pat but to get some advice from him since he had started publishing his own newsletter recently. On one occasion, we drove all the way to Hoboken, NJ to have dinner at a restaurant owned by a couple of extraordinarily gregarious Italian-Americans who were big fans of Joe. They were vehemently anti-abortion, but not otherwise to be mistaken for choir boys. If I understood them correctly, they were not mobbed up per se, but many friends and relatives were, the latter category including (distantly) Frank Sinatra, whom, if memory serves, they held in high disregard. That was a trip.

    But the funding never materialized, and after a lot of false starts I became a bit frustrated, since I was champing at the bit to get started. At one point Joe said that an elderly lady in Virginia was definite and all systems go. A couple days later he told me that he didn’t want to do it with her because she would expect a lot of his traditional values schtick and while he hadn’t changed any of his views on such matters he was more interested at the time in exploring his libertarian/anarchic leanings. Whether the JQ and its exploration might have been a factor, he never said. So my thought then was that I didn’t want to come across as pressuring him, so I’ll just wait to hear from him when he has something he’s comfortable with lined up. For his part, he may have thought I was getting a little annoyed having the project continuously presented and then pulled away. In any case, we never spoke again. (The newsletter eventually came to life a few years later titled Sobran’s, with him doing all the writing and someone else handling the technical/marketing stuff).

    Now a few weeks before this parting, right after I had broken up with a girlfriend, he told me that the daughter had a crush on me. I filed this info away for future reference when she got out of high school several months later, since she was a decidedly attractive girl with an appealing personality. But it’s possible Joe considered this immediately actionable information, and I’ve since wondered whether the reason he kept me around all that time was match-making. I should have known Joe was not your conventional parent.

    He raised four good kids — all with a mild rebellious streak, but solid people — mostly by himself, having gotten custody from his first wife, though definitely not in the Ozzie and Harriet mode. They lived in a house that was essentially a fully stocked, unshelved (that is to say strewn all over) library of books, magazines and manuscripts. So great was the clutter that on at least two occasions the electricity was shut off because the bill had come through the mail slot in the front door and disappeared into it. The seating arrangements were kept clear of clutter so that Joe could use the place as a sort of old-fashioned salon where his friends — typically marginalized intellectuals of the UR reader sort — came almost every night to get the world sorted out. I thought that, in its odd way, it was a very wholesome environment for kids to grow up in.

    BTW, if Joe were around today and found his way to the UR, I’m sure he would be a Rurik fan. He would appreciate the eloquence, and the deep feeling for the human wreckage caused by bad ideas. He had the former, not so much the latter. He stayed pretty much all the time on the plane of intellectual abstraction, not even indulging in discernible malice for the people who had destroyed his career. In a way it seems like he’s handed the baton to you.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  125. @James N. Kennett

    Irish attitudes changed over the last 30 years in response to a large number of clerical child-abuse scandals.

    There are a hundred times more pedophiles in the school system than in the Catholic church.

    Somehow I don’t see you campaigning to abolish all public schooling.

    I wonder (((why)))?

    • Replies: @Lost american
  126. Rurik says:
    @gsjackson

    When I met them at the game — he was there with only his youngest daughter — she had just turned 15. I was 36,

    That may raise some eyebrows, but if Joe was cool with it, then Saul Goodman.

    We had dinner a couple of times with Pat Buchanan and his wife,

    You have traveled in some interesting circles, Sir!

    he didn’t want to do it with her because she would expect a lot of his traditional values schtick and while he hadn’t changed any of his views on such matters he was more interested at the time in exploring his libertarian/anarchic leanings.

    Isn’t it a tragedy that writers, philosophers and assorted rogues, are forced to have to have patrons? At least that’s one great advantage of writing on platforms like the UR. Sure, Mr. Unz owns our ‘umble efforts, and may do with them what he wishes, but we get to froth to our heart’s content, and hopefully, create some kind of wider ripples…

    The seating arrangements were kept clear of clutter so that Joe could use the place as a sort of old-fashioned salon where his friends — typically marginalized intellectuals of the UR reader sort — came almost every night to get the world sorted out.

    Sounds like a slice of heaven.

    Now, I won’t quote your whole last paragraph, except for..

    the deep feeling for the human wreckage caused by bad ideas.

    You said that, not me!

    And saying it, with characteristic eloquence and humanity, displays an obvious “deep feeling for the human wreckage caused by bad ideas”, I’d say the baton is yours, Sir.

    discernible malice for the people who had destroyed his career

    You know, that picture I posted above –

    has, for me, been a window into what that man endured. I see so much in his expression in that photo. It could have been just a fluke, and he was squinting at the light, (and I could be reading into it more than is there), but I see a man who has been betrayed by his friends. With an anguished pathos of resignation for the human experience.

    You know who I’m reminded of?

    Another man with, how did you craft it.. a “deep feeling for the human wreckage caused by bad ideas”. Who also endured the malice of our collective enemy.

    My hat is off to all of you.

    Thank you gsjackson, for your recounting your time with Joe, and bringing him into our lives once again. And for your kind words for my humble efforts here. I’d like to think that I might, at least aspire to be worthy of Joe’s and your approval.

    Cheers.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  127. gsjackson says:
    @Rurik

    If Joe was suffering from the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune he did a good job of hiding it. As I say, he stayed on the plane of intellectual abstraction pretty much all the time, and never let things get personal. He observed his persecutors with clinical detachment, and the sort of righteous outrage that you express so well was a number he just didn’t do. That’s why I say he handed the baton to you — it’s time for a little righteous outrage.

    And I don’t think he felt abandoned by his real friends. He understood the ((marginalization process)) and seemed to accept it as a cost of doing the kind of business he wanted to do, which was to serve God and the truth. Buckley’s betrayal stung, of course, but they eventually made up and Buckley gave him some financial support beyond the National Review years. Joe had a legion of admirers, many of whom expressed their admiration freely, and there wasn’t a time during his writing career when he didn’t bask in that admiration to one degree or another.

    On the other hand he did once say, exact quote: “The world is such a terrible place.” I took it as a statement of Catholic orthodoxy about the fallen world, confirmed regularly by his own experiences and observations. It’s important to keep in mind about Joe that he saw himself as G.K. Chesterton — a happy warrior for the faith, with a keen interest in public affairs and a gift for turning phrases. And the same disregard of the body as the porcine Chesterton, who died in his 50s.

    Joe reminds me quite a bit of the author of this piece, from whose points we have strayed quite a bit — E. Michael Jones. A big difference between them is that Jones has tended to the requisites of an orderly and healthy life better than Joe did, and with luck will be with us for many years to come. E. Michael certainly has every bit the stones Joe did, if not more.

    To be clear: I never lobbied to date Joe’s daughter at any point. He seemed to be encouraging it when she was 17 and a senior in high school, but I never acted on it.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
    , @Rurik
  128. gsjackson says:
    @gsjackson

    Correction: Chesterton made it to 62. Also, the more apt comparative term for the metaphor “stones” would be “bigger” rather than “more.” We all have just two, though in many they are virtually invisible.

  129. Parfois1 says:

    I’m I too being ‘simple minded’? Perhaps, ‘racist’?

    May be only simple minded because your justified abhorrence to pederasty hits your moral nerve. I feel the same about the sexual abuse of children by anyone, especially by those in place of authority and trust.

    However, don’t tar the whole Catholic clergy with the same brush; and you might consider the MSM’s agenda to destroy whatever is left of religion and its sacred tenets and the best tactic is to discredit the whole for the sins of its parts, the logical fallacy you fell into.

    I was brought up as a Catholic, attended Catholic schools and was expelled from the last one because I refused to attend evening prayers due to my agnosticism. During those 12 years I never heard of a single instance of pederasty, although there were rumours once that a girl was too pettish with a cleric teacher, later denied by her as adult. In addition to schooling, I also went to summer camps for weeks under the care of priests and seminarians and their conduct was exemplary. Of course, I cannot claim that there was no abuse, but all boys knew what faggotry was all about and likely to detect and talk about it.

    I’m sure there are out there many millions of old boys who can tell the same story.

    However, they were strict disciplinarians and corporal punishment was common, almost banal, even for trivial failings such as spelling mistakes.

    Overall, it was a good character-building education.

    Cheers

    • Thanks: Mulegino1
    • Replies: @Parfois1
    , @Rurik
  130. Parfois1 says:
    @Mefobills

    Thank you for posting that video. An eye-opener, what I have been preaching: no bloody politicians!
    There is hope yet!

  131. Parfois1 says:
    @Parfois1

    Another one of those glitches!

    Comment #130 is a reply to Rurik’s “simple-mindness” somewhere upstream.

  132. @anonymous coward

    anonymous coward-how right you are but the mainstream media invents the culture and indicates that only Catholic priests have done harm. It is the MM that harbors the majority of sexual perverts and pedophiles. It is too bad that the masses believe what they read in the garbage MM including the Irish Times. My Irish father taught me to not believe most of what they printed.
    My pop died and held strongly to his Catholic faith that had given manners and good structure to society, and especially to seek more than what this material world had to offer. He was a blue collar man working long hours and like millions was drafted and served in the European theater or slaughterhouse. The MM laughs at people like him.

  133. @Rurik

    you are right on target about this Pope Francis. Is he a “plant” to destroy Catholic values and everyone I know disagrees with his idea of open borders. He is very much disliked, even hated.

    • Agree: Rurik
  134. Gmk says:

    Ireland, since the brutal days of English rule by extreme force has developed a classic case of Stockholm Syndrome. In that any powerful visitor to the land, in this case the tech titans are greeted with little to no natural level of distrust and eventually can do no wrong in the eyes of the Irish. Anything from the outside showing any degree of major influence is instantly respected and in time placed on a pedestal from which that entity can assume an infallible manner. Before it was the Catholic Church. Now it is the progressive agenda of Global Corporations. Hear no evil and see no evil is the mantra in Ireland as the corporations reign free to do as they please and change Irish society in a manner which is almost too easy. Divorce, gay marriage, abortion, public embrace of the transgender agenda and essentially any new progressive policy be it eugenics, post birth abortion etc. will be accepted by the Irish people with glee as they savor the taste of what they see as modernity, urbane thinking and being part of a larger global network. One should never forget the massive Catholic Church sex scandal covered many decades, so widespread in sheer scale, yet the Irish turned a blind eye to the crimes of the the previous monolithic power i.e. the Catholic Church. In time the Catholic Church has been supplanted in power over the masses by Global Corporations and the progressive agenda that follows. The Irish seem they really can’t get enough of what is foisted upon by corporations out to invert Irish society and it’s values . Yet the Irish seem incredulous to what is transpiring and now think solely about salaries, mortgages and how much they can put aside for the new BMW.

  135. Rurik says:
    @gsjackson

    — it’s time for a little righteous outrage.

    On that, you’ll get no argument from me. It’s wwwaaaaayyyyy past time for righteous outrage.

    Buckley’s betrayal stung, of course, but they eventually made up and Buckley gave him some financial support beyond the National Review years.

    Well, Buckley didn’t just betray Joe, he betrayed all of us.

    He was at that critical juncture at a society’s precipice of disaster, when he could have either been an intellectual Charles ‘The Hammer’ Martel, or a craven Judas, betraying the very thing (intellectual conservatism and Western values), he was charged with protecting, to its worst ((enemy)), in exchange for self-serving material perks, and massages to his vanity (appearing on Talmud Vision).

    So even if he patched things up with Joe, I still imagine he’s in Dante’s ninth. Where he belongs. [Rot in Hell – Buckley]

    Joe had a legion of admirers,

    No doubt, but I did read once that his finances weren’t the best, and that he resented his ‘obscurity’, such as it was. Not sure if any of that is true, (you’d know better than anyone else) so I’m glad to hear his days were happy ones, because he was the good guy. It’s all a true tale of human honor vs. human betrayal. And we’re all living with the results of that betrayal.

    from whose points we have strayed quite a bit —

    Yes, but I sort of think that the farther down the page an article goes, the further we commenters are allowed to stray, no?

    And I do think I laid out my critique of Catholicism sufficiently, if I’m not mistaken.

    ‘The Catholic people are some of the best in the world, and I love many of them personally.

    Whereas the Catholic leadership are demonic cretins of the very worst sort. Especially the Pope, and any one of them who either perpetrated or countenanced the abuse.

    The sad thing about an institution like the Catholic Church, or a government like ours, is that they’re top down hierarchies, and all that’s necessary to corrupt them, is to corrupt the men at the top. So we witness today our entire federal government, are corrupt and using the levers of power entrusted to them, to do as much harm to the American people (and others) as they’re able, all in slavish service to the most intractable enemy America and Americans have ever had.

    And it’s the same with the Catholic Church. Promoting the homo agenda, open borders, and the dissolution of Christendom, in slavish service to the enemies of Christ, the enemies of Christendom, and the enemies of truth and grace and simple human decency.

    How worse much worse can it get than that?

    Cheers.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
    , @gsjackson
  136. Rurik says:
    @Parfois1

    May be only simple minded because your justified abhorrence to pederasty hits your moral nerve. I feel the same about the sexual abuse of children by anyone, especially by those in place of authority and trust.

    It staggers me that so many people knew of Jerry Sandusky’s serial abuse (rape) of little boys. The same little boys he set up a ‘charity’ for, in order to “help” such children.

    Isn’t that something, these people put on airs like they’re so magnanimous and deserving of society’s respect, as they perpetrate the most ignoble and horrific crimes imaginable, against societies most vulnerable people. And the idea that they did so, wearing the frocks of God’s own anointed, makes it unimaginably worse. I cringe at the very thought of it.

    However, don’t tar the whole Catholic clergy with the same brush; and you might consider the MSM’s agenda to destroy whatever is left of religion and its sacred tenets and the best tactic is to discredit the whole for the sins of its parts, the logical fallacy you fell into.

    Well, I never did ‘tar the whole Catholic clergy’. I wouldn’t dare, as I know most of them (and certainly the congregation) are good and decent people.

    But please consider, right now the Methodist church (like the Boy Scouts) is coming apart at the seams, and the reason is ((Globohomo)). You see the Methodists are being browbeaten into worshiping the homo ****, (as Priss would indelicately put it), instead of God’s word. And there are some Methodists, who actually believe what it says in the Bible of ‘men laying with men’, and so forth. That it’s a sin.

    So these Methodists are telling the promoters of Globohomo, that they’re not on board for the agenda. And the church is splitting up. I suppose it’s obvious that I have a lot of respect for the leadership and members of the church that are unwilling to go along with the homosexual agenda.

    I imagine that once they split, the homo-side, will undoubtedly ‘sanctify’ homo “weddings” in their sanctuaries.

    Would you continue to worship at a church or cathedral if they sanctified homosexual ‘weddings’ there?

    At what point, should we the people, denounce our religions leaders, (even infallible ones), when they clearly are openly Moloch’s own servants?

    Overall, it was a good character-building education.

    No doubt. Most of the Catholics I know are exemplary people.

    Cheers.

  137. gsjackson says:
    @Rurik

    “I did read once that his finances weren’t the best.”

    Yeah, Joe always had to scramble for money after leaving National Review, which was a real pity because otherwise he never would have given it a moment’s thought. It didn’t motivate him at all; he just wanted to live the life of the mind.

    I don’t know that I’d describe him as “happy.” The money thing and little frustrations arising from the neglect of such quotidian matters as electric bills while lost in thought were a continual plague. But he really did enjoy what he did — reading, thinking and writing. He said that he would often amuse himself while writing and laugh out loud.

    I’m not sure how observant a Catholic he was, but on the intellectual level he was, like Chesterton, a great defender of the Church. The perfidious priests is an issue that arose largely after I knew him, and I’d be interested to know his take on it. He must have written something on the subject. I’m confident he wouldn’t be a fan of the current Pope.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  138. gsjackson says:
    @Rurik

    “Buckley didn’t just betray Joe, he betrayed us all.”

    Maybe it was betrayal, but you gotta wonder just what team Buckley was playing on all along. Was he a Bonesman at Yale? His affiliation with the CIA goes way back, and you’ve got to think the Company was fairly Zionized by the time he came to televised prominence in the ’60s. I’ve certainly come to believe — from what I’ve read on this site — that Israel and the CIA were complicit in the JFK assassination.

    Buckley’s vaunted “fusionism” of free market capitalism, an interventionist foreign policy with strong military posture, and traditional values morphed into predatory neoliberalism (aka crony capitalism), endless wars for Israel, and complete abdication of the culture to the Zio-beast. All on his watch, as the supposed godfather of conservatism.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  139. Matra says:

    Ireland, since the brutal days of English rule by extreme force has developed a classic case of Stockholm Syndrome

    First of all, it wasn’t oppressive. Secondly, the Irish Catholic always goes with power. Far more Irishmen fought for Britain than Republican revolutionaries because when WW1 started the British looked strong. In the mid 19th century close to 50% of British soldiers were Irish volunteers because the Empire was strong. When the Church was all powerful they went all in with that. The moment the Church displayed weakness they went full Globohomo, and today they mock Brits (especially the English) and Americans for their ‘atavistic’ nationalism. There is zero chance the Irish will rebel against Globohomo. That will have to be done by Americans, British, or Europeans.

    • Replies: @(((They))) Live
  140. @Matra

    If Irish Catholics always went with power they would have converted to Church of Ireland rather than live under the penal laws

    Irishmen fought for Britain in WW1 in the hopes that they would get home rule in return, before that I suspect many just need the money

    • Agree: Hibernian
  141. Rurik says:
    @gsjackson

    He said that he would often amuse himself while writing and laugh out loud.

    ha

    So I have something in common with the man. Glad to know it.

    I’m confident he wouldn’t be a fan of the current Pope.

    You knew the man, me only from his writing, but I’m betting that you’re right about that.

  142. Rurik says:
    @gsjackson

    I’ve certainly come to believe — from what I’ve read on this site — that Israel and the CIA were complicit in the JFK assassination.

    I agree, and wouldn’t be surprised to discover Buckley knew..

    Buckley’s vaunted “fusionism” of free market capitalism, an interventionist foreign policy with strong military posture, and traditional values morphed into predatory neoliberalism (aka crony capitalism), endless wars for Israel, and complete abdication of the culture to the Zio-beast. All on his watch, as the supposed godfather of conservatism.

    Extremely well put.

    And he has so many followers of his legacy. The American Cuckservative fired Phil Giraldi for telling the obvious truth- like the elephant in the living room, we’re all expected to ignore.

    It riles me as these ‘gatekeepers of conservatism’ work earnestly to betray conservative America to its most intractable and determined enemy. And always for the shekels.

    In many ways, the Bible really does flesh out human failings. Buckley and Dreher are modern day Judases, if ever there was one.

    If we humble participants on Unz, know well of Wilson’s and FDR’s treachery in service to Zion, then how is it possible Buckley and Dreher did/do not know?

    Cheers.

  143. S says:
    @Alden

    Thanks for the kind word.

    The failure in the 19th century to have dealt with chattel slavery and it’s trade in a truthful manner, and instead to have cynically pawned off it’s monetization via the introduction of wage slavery (ie the so called ‘cheap labor’/mass immigration system) as it’s ‘abolition’, has been a catastrophe of unprecedented proportions for the peoples of the world and for humanity as a whole.

    It was the clashing of the North’s wage slavery (ie ‘cheap labor’) system with the recalcitrant South’s entrenched chattel slave system that was a major (if not the primary?) unheralded cause of the US Civil War.

    The system of ‘compromises’ since roughly 1820 between the Northern wage slave and Southern chattel slave States irrecoverably broke down by the latter 1850’s (ie ‘Bleeding Kansas’, etc) and hence the war.

    Eliza Frances Andrews in her 1908 book The Wartime Journal of a Georgia Girl, like Henry Carey before her, pointed out what was going on here on pgs 11, 12, and 13 of the introduction to her book excerpted and linked below.

    Andrew’s family had been one of the self described ‘4000’ families which had ruled over the pre 1865 South. These were the three thousand families with one hundred or more slaves and a thousand allied business owning families.

    The US Civil War was ‘a question of dollars and cents…the rise of the modern industrial system made wage slavery a more efficient agent of production than chattel slavery.’

    Our Southern States, being still in the agricultural stage, on account of our practical monopoly of the world’s chief textile staple, were the last of the great civilized nations to find chattel slavery less profitable than wage slavery, and hence the “great moral crusade” of the North against the perverse and unregenerate South.

    It was a pure case of economic determinism, which means that our great moral conflict reduces itself, in the last analysis, to a question of dollars and cents, though the real issue was so obscured by other considerations that we of the South honestly believe to this day that we were fighting for States Rights, while the North is equally honest in the conviction that it was engaged in a magnanimous struggle to free the slave.

    It was within this context that the Lawrence family of Massachusetts textile factory magnates mentioned upthread would finance the construction of both ‘Immigrant City’, Mass, and it’s ‘abolitionist’ sister city Lawrence, Kansas during the 1840’s and ’50’s respectively.

    It was the expensive and inefficient African chattel slave labor which picked the Southern cotton which in turn fed Northern textile mills, driving up the price of finished cotton cloth.

    The New England industrialists therefore wanted the recalcitrant South to adopt it’s Northern wage slave (ie ‘cheap labor’/’mass immigration’) system, which like the South’s chattel slave system also centered upon the systematic theft of labor, but was simply the much more profitable and efficient way to go about this robbery.

    In the continuation of this cynical tradition it is entirely fitting that the super ‘progressive’/liberal Elizabeth Warren, who has not yet met an ‘immigrant’ from, well, anywhere, that she does not love, would choose Lawrence, Massachusetts to launch her 2020 election bid from.

    They dote upon their slaves.

    https://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/andrews/andrews.html

    https://matteroffact.tv/lawrence-mass-immigrant-city/

  144. Johan says:
    @James N. Kennett

    Might be a good tactic to not feed the liberal progressive lunacy, they crave for attention, especially negative which inflames the so much craved for holy indignation. Even negative attention (criticism) has as an effect that it keep things alive, spreading the lunacy. Don’t feed the mad beast.

  145. Mefobills says:
    @Rurik

    If so, perhaps you should take the time to define precisely what you mean by anti-Semitism, no?

    Anti-semitism is a learned response. People are not born anti-semites.

    If a person has a learned response, then the have learned something and are no longer ignorant.

    I’m saying that if you are not an anti-semite, then you haven’t learned.

    Our (((friends))) were kicked out of 109 countries. OK? There are reasons, and if you don’t wrestle with the reasons then, you fall back into ignorance.

    You can be against the behavior of a group of people, and still recognize the outstanding individuals from that group.

    But, the fact remains, Jews do operate as an in-group, and close ranks when threatened. You must take these realities into account.

    It is Jew hypnosis that anti-semites are blood thirsty individuals out to rape and pillage the earth, and that Jews are eternal victims, pure as the driven snow

    You have been caught up in the propaganda net on this subject and haven’t fully let go yet.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  146. @Jon Halpenny

    I no more accept the conclusions of the Saville Inquiry than I believed the Widgery Report. Both were whitewashes to facilitate the political agenda of the day.
    The fact that McGuiness ( may he rot in hell) was 2 I/C of the IRA in Londonderry on the day, armed and positioned on a rooftop, but didn’t shoot, according to him.
    The fact that Saville swallowed this guff makes a joke of this expensive farce–Blair and successors were quite happy to sacrifice retired soldiers Saville to appease the ‘RA, just as easily as they sacrificed serving soldiers.
    Truth be told, other than the man who did it, I doubt if anyone knows who fired the first shot, be he 1Para or Provo.
    Anyhoo, what a bunch of victimology-spouting hypocrites Sein Feiners are.
    One Guiness and you start singing maudlin dirges about your martyrs who won your “freedom”…. to suck the EU’s dick–you’ve sold your future generations to un-elected tyrants–enjoy!

  147. Rurik says:
    @Mefobills

    You can be against the behavior of a group of people, and still recognize the outstanding individuals from that group.

    But, the fact remains, Jews do operate as an in-group, and close ranks when threatened. You must take these realities into account.

    It is Jew hypnosis that anti-semites are blood thirsty individuals out to rape and pillage the earth,

    I agree with everything you’ve said, but the problem is the current ‘definition’ of anti-Semitism, which as nearly as I can glimmer, is the exact same ‘definition’ of racism: an irrational hatred of all Jews (or blacks) based on pure bigotry and ignorance and a pathological (if congenital, and only effecting white people) inclination to ‘hate’.

    Ironically, it seems almost as a pure act of projection, on ((their)) part.

    Like the way they openly intended to genocide all Germans off the planet, with their Morgenthau Plan, turns into Germans trying to genocide them.

    The Holocaust, which means to consume utterly by fire, is exactly what they did to so many German civilians in cities like Dresden, and that is what they claim (dishonestly) was done to them.

    Israel’s very existence was born in mass-acts of terrorism, and Israel continues to commit state-sponsored terrorism on their victims. And yet they have the rancid nads to call the victims of their genocide and terror – ‘terrorists’.

    So yes, I have no problem calling out Jewish supremacists and Zionists for their serial crimes and atrocities, but if I were to grant them their wish, and accept their twisted labels, then I’d be walking into their trap.

    Sort of like Holocaust denier. Sure, I doubt the gas chambers and lamp shades and soap made of Jewish fat, but I would not call myself a Holocaust denier, because the would suggest two things which are not true. One, I acknowledge that many Jews were persecuted and many were killed in the camps during the war. So if Jews want to call that their ‘Holocaust’, then who am I to tell them they can’t? Some Jews were persecuted, some were killed, I think that is universally accepted, so let them call it what they want.

    And the other thing is the emotional association they’ve carefully constructed around that word, and especially the pejorative ‘Holocaust denier’. Why accept their terms, when they’ve done such a swell job of creating so much emotional baggage associated with it. It’s like ‘Nazi’ or Adolf Hitler. They’ve made a gazillion movies portraying Nazis as the incarnation of pure evil, and injected their nuances in very show or advertisement they make.

    So I will criticize what I consider wrong, but I won’t do so wearing the labels they’ve constructed for the purposes of demonizing those who criticize them.

    Walk into any room or university or workplace, and holler out that you’re a proud anti-Semite! And check out the reactions. It’d be the same thing as saying you’re a racist! And people would wonder at your sanity. If your boss was there, he’d fire you on the spot. The girl you’ve been dating would leave the room (and you) in disgust.

    To a degree, we must use the language universally recognized by all people in our society. With those subtle and carefully constructed connotations. They’ve been practicing their methods of control for a long time, and now it’s downright scientific. Pavlov and BF Skinner, and all that. Edward Bernays and so on. They know what they’re doing.

    Better I think, to skirt their traps, and avoid using words that can be “twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools”.

    Don’t tell people that you’re an anti-Semite, and then try to convince them why, because their programming will work against you. Better, I would suggest, to simply point out to people the truth, and then let their eyes gradually open, and their find their own way there.

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 Subscribe to All E. Michael Jones Comments via RSS