May 15, 2015

Boston University Hires Anti-White Professor Who Tweets Racist, Sexist Remarks about White Men

via The Chronicle of Higher Education

An incoming assistant professor at Boston University who drew sharp criticism for racially charged posts on Twitter about white people said on Tuesday that she regretted that her passion for issues of race had caused her to speak about those issues “indelicately,” The Boston Globe reported.

The professor, Saida Grundy, had used Twitter to criticize white people as agents of oppression, among other things, and described white male students as a “problem population.” Her online remarks prompted a torrent of criticism . . . She has removed her tweets from public view.

Robert A. Brown, the university’s president, spoke out on the swirling controversy in a public letter issued on Tuesday. “We are disappointed and concerned by statements that reduce individuals to stereotypes on the basis of a broad category such as sex, race, or ethnicity,” Mr. Brown wrote. He added that he believed Ms. Grundy’s remarks “fit this characterization.”

“As a university president,” Mr. Brown continued, “I am accustomed to living in a world where faculty do — and should — have great latitude to express their opinions and provoke discussion. But I also have an obligation to speak up when words become hurtful to one group or another in the way they typecast and label its members. That is why I weigh in on this issue today.”

He went on to caution faculty members not to interpret his remarks as “tantamount to not supporting a new colleague.”

Ms. Grundy, who is scheduled to start her new position in the university’s sociology department on July 1, broke her silence on the controversy on Tuesday afternoon. In a letter to the editor published by the Daily Free Press, the university’s student newspaper, she said that the “inconvenient matter of race” had recently made itself “an unavoidable topic of discussion in our country.”

“I regret that my personal passion about issues surrounding these events led me to speak about them indelicately,” she added. “I deprived them of the nuance and complexity that such subjects always deserve.”

She said she was “unequivocally committed to ensuring that my classroom is a space where all students are welcomed.”

A Gentle Introduction to White Nationalism, Part 2

via Radix

Part 1

In my last essay, I outlined the essential aspects of White Nationalism--that White people are unique capable of Western civilization, and that the current trends of demographic decline and replacement have dire implications. This is the number one concern for White Nationalists. Nothing else matters. We can discuss things like public health, economics, and foreign policy, and we often do, and usually trend conservatively, but these are minor issues in the greater scheme of White survival.

Yet, despite the growing awareness within the public sphere that Whites are a dying breed, there has been surprisingly little response. By “response” I mean searching for a solution. There is plenty of sentiment that Whites have had their time, and it is our duty to go gently into the good night, but this is literally asking for polite genocide, an unconscionable request.

When racially aware Whites protest this, they become social and political pariahs. It is “racist” to object to our own decline. Why is this? No other race is shamed and demonized for caring about the long term survival of their culture and their people. Yet, here we are. It is demoralizing, but truth speakers are often reviled. We are the Cassandras of the modern world, doomed to be ignored until the final hour. At the same time, myself and others believe that there is hope. It is not five minutes until midnight, but five minutes past. We have time, despite the direness of our predictions.

The problems that we are discussing have long range implications. Whites will not achieve projected minority-majority status until around 2030. A lot can change in fifteen years, and that’s why it is important to discuss these problems now. If White Nationalists are correct, then the West, as it is manifest here in the States, will continue to decline as more non-Whites are imported. The remaining Whites in this country will be forced to take action, lest they fade into history. So what are we to do?

There exist no mainstream political institutions that share our view. Our only chance, if we were to operate through existing channels, would be to either pursue either the Democratic or Republican party. Yet, this is largely impossible. If we look at politics through the lens of race and class, the reason for this quickly becomes clear.

The Democratic Party is truly the party of the non-White. It exists for advancing the interests of Hispanic, Black, female, and gay interests, while pursuing a generally socialist agenda. The socialist label is by no means an attempt to slight the Democrats or their interests, this is simply a statement of fact. The Democratic Party acts to rectify real or imagined instances of social and economic inequality by means of the of government. Because Whites have been the dominant political force in America, most Democratic interests are directly contra White interests.

Since this was a historically White country, it is only natural that the institution of the USA would favor Whites. Consider what would happen if you were to move to Japan: You would find that the system was “racist” in that the existing structures favored the Japanese. This is exactly what we had here in this country: a system by and for Whites. And there is nothing to apologize for. Make no mistake, this is our country. Everyone else, despite their citizenship status, is merely a guest.

The fact that the Democratic Party opposes the above statement at the most fundamental level renders it an impossible avenue for advancing the cause of White Nationalism. For this reason, I will spend no more time on it.

It is tempting to posit that the Republican Party is the White party. Republicans are often stereotyped as rich, old, White men, and in some sense this is true, and, seeing as how most White Nationalists are at least moderately conservative, to conflate the two seems like the obvious answer. Yet, there is something to the Republican stereotype that it is all about big business, because it really is all about big business. The alignment of White and Republican interests are incidental, not intentional.

Why do I say this? Well, the simplest answer is that the Republican Party has historically not supported White interests. The mainstream purview of the GOP is twofold: economic and foreign policy.

On the economic side of things, there is deregulation and lowering taxes. On the surface, this may seem like it would help White interests, but the majority of this is done for the purpose of aiding multinational corporations, who exist in an international limbo that does little for helping material circumstances here in America. After all, most Whites are not billionaires, nor even millionaires. White per capita income is a mere $57,009, hardly the wealth that Republicans policies cater to. If such policies do aid Whites in any meaningful way, this is merely a side effect, and not the intended consequence.

If we look at foreign policy, the Republican Party has consistently acted in favor of further involvement in the Middle East. This hawkish intrusion into the Muslim world is partly financial, partly religious, and partly political.

The financial side of things is simply oil. How much money companies like Chevron expend in lobbying and financing political campaign, I have no idea. What I do know is that the Republicans exist to serve their corporate masters. But I spoke on this earlier, and will leave it at that.

The political and religious justifications for Republican foreign policy are a little more convoluted. Intelligent, politically savvy, pro-Israel Jews have aligned themselves with zealous Christians seeking to immanentize the eschaton detailed in Revelations. This marriage of Judaism and Christianity has led to the buzz word, “Judeo-Christian,” as well as the seeming desire for unending war in the Middle East.

We are not corporate wage slaves laboring for the parasitic, transnational corporation, nor tools of war to be used by Jews or Christians for petty ethnic squabbles or apocalyptic ruminations.

And yet, Whites overwhelmingly vote Republican, against their own self-interest. Why this is, I am not really sure. Most liberals I know are overwhelmingly disappointed with the current lineup of Democratic politicians, and most conservatives do not actually like any of the Republican counterparts.

My suspicion is that most Whites unconsciously understand they they lack their own party. They tell themselves, “I don’t like the Republicans much, but by God at least aren’t Democrats.” This leads to a political identification that does not really stand for anything but simply sets itself up in opposition to something else. And that’s a dead end.

But it’s because of this that I’m so positive about the future. Events like the Ferguson and Baltimore riots, as well as pervasive anti-White sentiment coming from media, academia, and government can only lead to White disenfranchisement, all compounded with endless foreign wars and a government that no longer supports its people are exactly what we need.

At times it may seem hopeless, but understand that desperation is the impetus for change. It would be one thing if White Nationalists were whining about things that had no real world implications. If Blacks were truly just like us, or if Democrats weren’t anti-White, or Republicans weren’t a big business, Judeo-Christian cabal, then none of this would matter. But the evidence is on our side, and all the evidence points to a United States culture and government that does not even bother to cater to its own people.

When Whites realize this, and more importantly realize that it is okay to be racially aware and work in their own self-interest (as all other ethnic and religious groups have done for all of human history), only then real change can happen.

I am not going to suggest what solutions White Nationalists might propose. Plenty of that has been done already, from the wildly speculative to the imminently practical. What I do know, however, is that the first step is destigmatizing the movement. Much of that is simply moving White Nationalist issues into a more mainstream lens, and not cowing or apologizing to allegations of racism while at the same time working to avoid being categorized as fringe politics.

None of this happens overnight, and patience will be the mother of success. Ideas take time to percolate, but the world moves in our favor. If you find yourself disgusted by the marginalization of our people, then take heart. Everything, from the unending riots to the unfair affirmative action cases to the myriad other anti-White policies and sentiments serve us in the long term.

Democrats are wont to point out that American military involvement overseas radicalizes peaceful Muslims. Well, the exact same thing is happening here in the homeland. We are losing our country, and it makes us mad. Ordinary Whites who would have zero interest in racial politics are forced to turn to it as the current situation necessitates it.

If you feel angry and disenfranchised, good! You rage will be instrument of our salvation. But never feel alone. There are millions of Whites who are just as fed up and tired of a country where we, the architects of this nation, are marginalized and discounted.

We are the sons and daughters of Europa. Heirs to the greatest civilization that the world has ever known. But somehow, we’ve been lulled to sleep and the reins of power have slipped from our hands. We need merely to reawaken, because when we do, we will take the world by storm.

America’s Self-Destruction

via Darkmoon

Last Saturday, a massive Victory Parade was held in Moscow commemorating the 70-year anniversary of the surrender of Nazi Germany to the Red Army and the erection of the Soviet flag atop the Reichstag in Berlin.
 
There were a few unusual aspects to this parade, which I would like to point out, because they conflict with the western official propaganda narrative.

First, it wasn’t just Russian troops that marched in the parade: the troops of 10 other nations took part in it, including the Chinese honor guard and a contingent of Grenadiers from India. Dignitaries from these nations were present in the stands, and the Chinese President Xi Jinping and his wife were seated next to President Vladimir Putin, who, in his speech at the start of the parade, warned against attempts to create a unipolar world—sharp words aimed squarely at the United States and its western allies.

Second, a look at the military hardware that rolled through Red Square or flew over it would indicate that, short of an outright nuclear mutual self-annihilation, there isn’t much that the US military could throw at Russia that Russia couldn’t neutralize.

It would appear that American attempts to isolate Russia have resulted in the exact opposite: if 10 nations, among them the world’s largest economy, comprising some 3 billion people, are willing to set aside their differences and stand shoulder to shoulder with the Russians to counter American attempts at global dominance, then clearly the American plan isn’t going to work at all.
One small detail about the parade is stunning: Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, a Tuvan Buddhist and one of the most respected Russian leaders, who presided over the Emergencies Ministry prior to becoming the Defense Minister, did something none of his predecessors ever did: at the beginning of the ceremony, he made the sign of the cross, in the Russian Orthodox manner. This simple gesture transformed the parade from a display of military pomp to a sacred ritual.
Then followed the slow march with two flags side by side: the Russian flag, and the Soviet flag that flew on top of the Reichstag in Berlin on Victory Day 70 years ago. The march was accompanied by a popular World War II song? Its title? “The Sacred War.” The message is clear: the Russian military, and the Russian people, have put themselves in God’s hands, to do God’s work, to once again sacrifice themselves to save the world from the ravages of an evil empire.

Similar processions took place in many cities throughout Russia, and the total number of participants is estimated at around 4 million. Western press either panned it or billed it as an attempt by Putin to whip up anti-western sentiment. If you think about it just a tiny bit, nothing on this scale could be contrived artificially, and the thought that millions of people would prostitute their dead for propaganda purposes is, frankly, both cynical and insulting.

Instead of collapsing quietly, the US has decided to pick a fight with Russia. It appears to have already lost the fight, but a question remains: How many more countries will the US manage to destroy before the reality of its inevitable defeat and disintegration finally catches up with it?

As Putin said last summer when speaking at the Seliger youth forum, “I get the feeling that no matter what the Americans touch, they end up with Libya or Iraq.”
Indeed, the Americans have been on a tear, destroying one country after another. Iraq has been dismembered, Libya is a no-go zone, Syria is a humanitarian disaster, Egypt is a military dictatorship executing a program of mass imprisonment. The latest fiasco is Yemen, where the pro-American government was recently overthrown.
But it was the previous American foreign policy fiasco, in the Ukraine, which prompted the Russians, along with the Chinese, to signal that the US has taken a step too far, and that all further steps will result in automatic escalation.
The Russian plan, along with China, India, and much of the rest of the world, is to prepare for war with the US, but to do everything possible to avoid it. Time is on their side, because with each passing day they become stronger, while America grows weaker.
While this process runs its course, America might “touch” a few more countries, turning them into a Libya or an Iraq. Is Greece next on the list? What about throwing under the bus the Baltic states — Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania — which are now NATO members, i.e., sacrificial lambs?

There is no question that the Americans will continue to try to create mischief around the world, “touching” vulnerable, exploitable countries, for as long as they can.
But there is another question that deserves to be asked: Do the Americans “touch” themselves? Because if they do, then the next candidate for extreme makeover into a bombed-out wasteland might be the United States itself.
Let’s consider this option.

As the events in Ferguson, and more recently in Baltimore, have indicated, the tensions between African-Americans and the police have escalated to a point where explosions become likely. The American “war on drugs” has been essentially a war on young black (and Latino) men; about a third of young blacks are behind bars. They also run a high risk of being shot by the police.

Given the gradually collapsing economy—close to 100 million working-age Americans are unemployed—it would seem that for an ever-increasing chunk of the population cooperating with the authorities is no longer a useful strategy: you get locked up or killed anyway.

The swift introduction of the military might seem a bit odd, considering that most police departments, even small-town ones, have been heavily militarized in recent years, and even the security people at some school districts now have military vehicles and machine guns. But the progression is a natural one. On the one hand, when people who habitually resort to brute force find that it isn’t working, they naturally assume that this is because they aren’t using enough of it. On the other hand, if the criminal justice system is already a travesty and a shambles, then why not just cut through the red tape and impose martial law?

There is an awful lot of weapons of all sorts in the US already, and more will come in all the time as the US is forced to close overseas military bases due to lack of funds. And this military hardware will probably get used. It will be used because it there. And it will be used in the stupidest possible way: shooting one’s own people.

Bad things happen to militaries when they are ordered to shoot their own people. It is one thing to shoot at “towel-heads” in a far-away land; it is quite another to be ordered to shoot at somebody who could be your own brother down the street from where you grew up. Such orders result in “fragging” — i.e. shooting your own officers — by refusing to follow orders and by opting for the other side.

And that’s where things get interesting. Because, you see, if you shoot at, imprison, and otherwise abuse a defenseless civilian population long enough, what you get in response is an armed insurgency. The place insurgencies are easiest to organize is in prison. Having a third of young American blacks locked up gives them all the opportunity they need to organize an effective insurgency.

To be effective, an insurgency needs lots of weapons. Here, again, there is a procedure for acquiring military technology that has become almost routine. What weapons are being used by ISIS? Why, of course, American ones, which the Americans provided to the regime in Baghdad, and which ISIS took as trophies when the Iraqi army refused to fight and ran away. And what weapons are being used by the Houthi rebels in Yemen? Why, of course, the American ones, which the Americans provided to the now overthrown pro-American regime there. And what are some of the weapons being used by the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad? Why, of course, American ones, sold to them by the Ukrainian government, which got them from the Americans.
There is a pattern here: it seems that whenever Americans arm, train and equip an army, that army stands a really big chance of simply melting away, with the weapons falling into the hands of those who want to use them against American interests. It is hard to see why this same pattern wouldn’t hold once the US places much of itself under military occupation.
And that’s where things get really interesting: a well-armed, well-organized insurgency composed of thoroughly radicalized, outraged people who have absolutely nothing to lose and are fighting for their home turf and their families against a demoralized, defeated US military that has failed spectacularly in every country it has tried recently to subdue.

The US might get to bomb a few more countries before this scenario unfolds, but it seems likely that — unless total war against Russia and China breaks out — that eventually the US will turn on itself and begin attacking its own people.

When that happens, all those countries whose troops marched through Red Square last Saturday won’t have America to kick around any more.

America will have self-destructed.

Why Chris Kyle's Claim He Shot More than 30 People in Post-Katrina New Orleans Is Proof the American Dream Still Has a Pulse

via Stuff Black People Don't Like

The gods envy us. They envy us because we're mortal, because any moment may be our last. Everything is more beautiful because we're doomed. -- Achilles in Troy (2004)

The story of Chris Kyle is one of those that makes you want to believe the United States of America still exists. 

When I saw American Sniper at the theater in early 2015, I left scratching some limb long ago removed... they say soldiers who have had an arm or leg amputated will still feel a scratch on the long removed appendage years later.

Patriotism. 

Love of country. 

I wanted, desperately, to believe in the same country as I just saw on the big screen; where Bradley Cooper so powerfully depicted Kyle as a larger than life hero, the embodiment of the American Dream. 

But we live in the American Nightmare: the metamorphoses of the American Dream into something our Founding Fathers could never have envisioned coming to fruition. 

However, one claim of Kyle's has always struck me as either an undeniable falsehood or one brimming with more truth than most people will ever want to contemplate: that he was in New Orleans during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and that he personally sniped more than 30 people.  

Tragically, American Sniper left out any reference to Kyle's claim he went to New Orleans in 2005 and shot more than 30 people (a belief many people claim is preposterous). 

But any person still believing the American Dream is only in hibernation, waiting for the right moment to be reborn with the ferocity of Andrew Jackson's temper, can only hope Kyle's boast was based on some truth. 

For it's well known the truth of what actually happened during the black lawlessness in Post-Katrina New Orleans has been sanitized for mass consumption. Something horrible happened in 2005 New Orleans, which bubbles up continuously in the news even in 2015

And though the legacy of Kyle will be questioned by those pushing the narrative only further enveloping the country in the American Nightmare, something beautiful bubbles to the surface when contemplating what he might have done in 2005 New Orleans. [In the Crosshairs: Chris Kyle, a decorated sniper, tried to help a troubled veteran. The result was tragic., The New Yorker, 6-3-2013]:
Not long after the radio-show appearance, Kyle was contacted by Brandon Webb, a veteran who had served with him on SEAL Team Three. Webb, now the editor of SOFREP, a Web site covering special-operations forces, invited Kyle and another former SEAL to participate in a taped discussion about life as a special operator. Webb asked Pat Kilbane, an actor, to moderate the discussion. Kyle met them at a bar in San Diego to tape the program. 
The session went well. Kilbane told me that he was struck by Kyle’s “aura,” noting that whenever “he walked in the room the dynamic would change, the energy in the room would shift.” Afterward, a larger group went out for dinner, closed the hotel bar, and hung out in Kyle’s suite, drinking until late. The SEALs began telling stories, and Kyle offered a shocking one. In the days after Hurricane Katrina, he said, the law-and-order situation was dire. He and another sniper travelled to New Orleans, set up on top of the Superdome, and proceeded to shoot dozens of armed residents who were contributing to the chaos. Three people shared with me varied recollections of that evening: the first said that Kyle claimed to have shot thirty men on his own; according to the second, the story was that Kyle and the other sniper had shot thirty men between them; the third said that she couldn’t recall specific details.
Had Kyle gone to New Orleans with a gun? Rumors of snipers—both police officers and criminal gunmen—circulated in the weeks after the storm. Since then, they have been largely discredited. A spokesman for U.S. Special Operations Command, or SOCOM, told me, “To the best of anyone’s knowledge at SOCOM, there were no West Coast SEALs deployed to Katrina.” When I related this account to one of Kyle’s officers, he replied, sardonically, “I never heard that story.” The SEAL with extensive experience in special-mission units wondered how dozens of people could be shot by high-velocity rifles and just disappear; Kyle’s version of events, he said, “defies the imagination.” (In April, Webb published an article on SOFREP about the incident, but took it down after concluding that Kyle’s account was dubious.)
In Ray Nagin's book (the disgraced - jailed - mayor of New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina), he writes of a coup attempt that was thwarted at the SuperDome. Much of what actually happened in the absence of white civilization in post-Katrina New Orleans is either classified by the United States Military (or in heavily redacted Blackwater documents), with the corporate media stepping in to obscure the facts as nothing more than unconfirmed rumors or legends born in the lawless atmosphere of late August New Orleans.

But in Kyle's claim of trying to restore order in New Orleans rests the type of man who helped birth a civilization on the North American continent ultimately putting a man on the moon.

And in this claim, however incredulous it may seem, resides a pulse for the American Dream.

For something undeniably shocking occurred in New Orleans in 2005 during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and there's something incredibly satisfying in believing the American Sniper was deployed there to restore law and order.

Lower Than Omega: Black Superior over White

via EGI Notes

If even one Negro low-life is killed by a police officer, Blacks will break out into riots. In contrast, thousands of English children, over a period of years, are sexually molested by aliens, with the crimes covered up for racial reasons. And, not only do the Whites there do nothing about it, but the politician who presided over the whole debacle was just overwhelmingly re-elected.
Now that the smoke has cleared somewhat after Britain’s election there is one result that should be absorbed by anyone who cares about the future of the West. The Labour MP for Rotherham, a woman who presided over a vast child rape epidemic and noticed nothing, was re-elected with a substantially increased majority. 
After months of lurid media coverage, after the exposure of the local Labour establishment, the resignation of the entire Labour council, the sacking of Labour-appointed culpable officials,  when no-one in the entire local Labour establishment could pretend they did not know what was going on, Sarah Champion was still able to pull in nearly twice as much as her closest rival, a UKIP candidate. 
This is a woman who consorts with Muslim politicians who still deny the child rape epidemic. Her only response  was to say that White men are the main culprits nationwide. 
For those who say that the only thing between us and a White awakening is a free media, it is a fact worth pondering over for a moment.

Whites are at the bottom of the racial heap, the most objectively worthless population group in existence. Superiority is not some sort of automatic birthright; superiority has to be earned. Likewise, a reputation as a weak, worthless, worm-like inferior coward race is also earned.

SOS Racisme: A Case Study in Anti-Nationalist Jewish Activism

via The Occidental Observer

SOS Racisme’s famous logo: “Don’t touch
my pal,” urging Europeans and Jews
(somewhat patronizingly) to protect their
Black or Muslim “pal”
Translator’s Note: It is common among American readers to suppose that although Jews are quite powerful and are a critical force for immigration and multiculturalism in the U.S., this is not the case in Europe; e.g., Jews are less than 1% of the population of France. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Éric Zemmour is a Sephardic Jew as well as a prominent journalist and pundit in France. No doubt he is the “most nationalist” voice allowed in French mainstream media, all but telling people to vote for the Front National. I found his bestselling book Le Suicide français, while sometimes false or circumspect, surprisingly frank on certain issues.

Zemmour observes that “the Jewish far-left, from the Trotskyite movements to the UEJF [Jewish student union], was at the reins” of SOS Racisme, a major “anti-racist” group. In alliance with the institutional left, SOS Racisme worked to divide the right-wing vote, to politically isolate nationalist parties (above all the Front National), to censor nationalist discourse, and to hijack incipient Black/Arab movements. Zemmour argues that SOS Racisme thus “sapped the foundations of the French nation.” Zemmour’s quote from the anti-nationalist Globe founded and financed by the Jewish left is particularly striking: “Of course, we are resolutely cosmopolitan. Of course, everything that is of the soil, the beret, the bourrée, Breton bagpipes, in short petty-French or chauvinistic, is foreign or even odious to us.” The parallels with the history of groups such as the NAACP, the ADL, and the SPLC are striking.

The following are extracts taken from Éric Zemmour, Le Suicide français (Albin Michel: 2014), “SOS baleines,” pp. 243-249. The title is editorial.


The emergence of the Front National, during the municipal elections of 1983 at Dreux, would be a historic opportunity for the left to stay in power. Yet, [center-right leader] Jacques Chirac had first agreed to a union of the right.[1] Even Raymond Aron had blessed this alliance in L’Express, referring to the left’s totalitarian depravities: “The only fascist-style international in the 1980s is red, not brown.” But the moralistic, anti-racist, anti-fascist discourse of the left ended up riddling the leader of the Gaullist party [Chirac] with guilt, along with the pressures from all sides, of his centrist allies (friends of Simone Veil and Bernard Stasi), the media, and the Jewish organizations, without forgetting the provocations of the FN’s leader (“the detail of history”[2]) which were exploited well. Mitterrand thus avenged himself against the Gaullists who had long [divided the left by] isolating the Communist Party and its popular electorate in their revolutionary ghetto.

SOS Racisme was founded on October 15, 1984. Julien Dray [a Sephardic Jew and future Socialist MP] and his friends exploited the media coverage of the second “Arab march”[3] to announce the creation of their new fledgling association. The marchers were a bit less numerous than the previous year but the TV channels rushed there anyway. SOS Racisme launched its career with this media putsch, this misappropriation of glory, this usurpation.

Only Father Delorme[4] dared to denounce this kidnapping of a legacy, and the control of certain Jewish groups over anti-racist activism; but Bernard-Henri Lévy had him shut up, shamelessly exploiting Christian guilt over the extermination of the Jews during the Second World War. Terrorized, the representative of the Church became silent. The “Arabs”[5] withdrew from the game, considering they had been swindled by the “Heebs,”[6] always suspected of being more skillful and of being favored by the media. . . . [SOS Racisme’s] little yellow hand was put on the front cover of the Nouvel Observateur [the leading center-left magazine, significantly Jewish-run].

This yellow hand was the advertising creation of the spin-doctor Christian Michel; it recalled at once the yellow star which Jews had to carry in the occupied zone and the hand of Fatima, the Islamic good luck charm; it emphasized this endlessly recalled continuity between the persecution of the Jews during the Second World War and xenophobic hostility against Maghrebis during the 70s and 80s. Memories of the Occupation and anti-Arab race-riots[7] are mixed in a great historical and intellectual confusion, with deadly propagandistic effectiveness. The Jewish far-left, from the Trotskyite movements to the UEJF,[8] was at the reins. It performed a double political and ideological hold-up,[9] anticipating and precipitating a change of position in French Judaism. Ordinary Frenchmen of Jewish confession were trapped by the maneuver. The leaders of the UEJF and SOS Racisme (they were the same) refused to distinguish between the French Israelite and the Arab foreigner, uniting them together in the same victims’ position and the same hostility towards the necessarily racist and xenophobic ethnic French.[10] They thus “de-Frenchified” French Jews, destroying two centuries’ work of assimilation.

The majority of French Jews, blinded by the obsessive memory of the Occupation, compassion for victims, the seductive discourse of otherness inspired by Levinas,[11] the Jewish tradition of hospitality (forgetting that then the stranger is but a “temporary guest”), the nostalgia of the Sephardis for “life over there” [in North Africa], Ashkenazis’ growing identification with [Muslim] Maghrebi immigrants even though the former had become French notables,[12] let themselves be led on this path of “de-Frenchification.” On the front page of the first issue of the magazine Globe, a pro-Mitterrand anti-racist monthly founded by [Sephardic journalist] Georges-Marc Benhamou, financially supported by Pierre Bergé and Bernard-Henri Lévy, we could read as a declaration of faith: “Of course, we are resolutely cosmopolitan. Of course, everything that is of the soil, the beret, the bourrée,[13] Breton bagpipes, in short petty-French or chauvinistic, is foreign or even odious to us.”

This operation was not accomplished without reticence or reservations. Israelite notables excoriated in private against these youngsters who “wanted to Arabize[14] French Jews.” With the release of Roger Hanin’s film Hell Train,[15] the Tribune juive’s columnist wrote on January 11, 1985: “From this anecdotal racist event committed by three losers,[16] Roger Hanin has put together a film which tries to draw a vast moral lesson implicating all of deep France. . . . [17] Roger Hanin assures us that, as an Algerian Jew, he was taught from childhood to love the Arabs. Apparently, he was not taught to love the French.” . . .

SOS Racisme’s sponsors discovered the joys of easy money; the [yellow hand] badges sold like hot cakes; suitcases of cash from the Élysée were mixed with bundles of “Pascals”[18] distributed by Pierre Bergé, the wealthy president of the Yves Saint Laurent designer house. Then, the machine was formalized, professionalized; SOS Racisme became a formidable machine for snatching up subsidies from ministries and local government, in order to continue the political fight, and incidentally allowing their august leaders to live it large.

During the euphoria of the 1980s, SOS Racisme’s leaders thought they would replace the [traditional] flagships of anti-racism, the LICRA[19] and the MRAP.[20] They would be disillusioned. Internal divisions surrounding the veil affair of Creil in 1989[21] or on the first Gulf war of 1990, the persistent hostility of young urban Arabs towards the “Heebs,” their heated disagreements over the Middle Eastern conflict, and not forgetting the censure of the Court of Auditors which denounced their spendthrift management, forced SOS Racisme’s leaders to fall back on their “core profession”: the endless pursuit of subsidies.

Without any mass membership or any real presence ‘on the ground,’ they deployed their media activism, using the incomparable Trotskyite know-how in manipulating minds, becoming new inquisitors of the religion of anti-racism, preaching and catechizing (on television) and excommunicating, privatizing the judicial apparatus to their benefit, like new Torquemadas. In the name of the Republic, and with its sacrosanct principles held up as a shining banner, they had sapped the foundations of the French nation: secularism and assimilation. As was said during their activist youth in the 1970s: “Nice digging, mole!”[22] Their Trotskyite mentors could be proud of them.

Notes:

[1] I.e., local electoral alliances between the FN and the center-right RPR party. 
[2]Jean-Marie Le Pen’s term for the gas chambers, considering historians should be freely allowed to study the Holocaust.
[3]Officially the “March for Equality and Against Racism,” which the previous year had been Maghrebis’ largest ever demonstration in France, voicing their discontent and their solidarity with foreign co-ethnics. The most concrete demands were foreigners’ right to vote and the creation of ten-year residency card.
[4]Christian Delorme, a Catholic prelate prominent in interfaith dialogue.
[5]“Beurs,” backslang (verlan) from “Arabe.”
[6]Feujs,” backslang for “Juif,” officially considered more offensive than “Beur.”
[7]Ratonnades.” roughly translated as “rat hunt.”
[8]Union of Jewish Students of France, the main Jewish students’ union, actually a high-level, highly litigious ethnic lobby.
[9]In English in the text.
[10]Français de souche.
[11]Emmanuel Levinas, a Franco-Jewish intellectual born in Lithuania.
[12]I.e. noteworthy figures, generally in upper-middle class professions such as lawyers, accountants, doctors, public officials, educators, and so on.
[13]Traditional French music and dance.
[14]Bougnouliser,” a highly deprecating term.
[15]Train  d’enfer.
[16]Three White candidates to the French Foreign Legion had attacked and killed a young Algerian during a drunken escapade.
[17]Brackets in the text.
[18]The name of the 500-franc bill, the largest denomination, featuring Blaise Pascal.
[19]The League Against Anti-Semitism and Racism, a much more explicitly Jewish pseudo-anti-racist group. See Guillaume Durocher, “The Culture of Critique in France: A Review of Anne Kling’s La France LICRAtisée and Le CRIF,” in press.
[20]The Mouvement against Racism and for the Friendship of Peoples, a more ecumenical body, where both Jews and people of color are prominent.
[21]A controversy over the exclusion of three Muslim girls from a high school due their headscarves.
[22]Bien creusé, la taupe !”, i.e. entryism.

Trenton NJ Has Haitian Levels of Corruption -- There’s a Reason for That

via VDARE

Trenton Mayor, now inmate, Tony Mack,
being sworn in by soon-to-be-inmate,
Judge Lamarre-Sumners
As America is unwillingly transformed into a Third World society, what VDARE.com calls the Minority Occupation Government is becoming more common in cities and states throughout the country. The minority-majority city of Trenton, capital of the state of New Jersey (and one-time capital of the US), is a case study: former municipal Judge Renee Lamarre-Sumners exemplifies the kind of corruption, naked self-interest, and cynical exploitation of multiculturalism likely to be the new standard.

A majority black city, Trenton features the kind of racialized one-party rule all too common in American cities, in which a series of often corrupt African-American politicians use the institutions of government like their own private piggy bank. The city is also home to a “hugging drug court judge” releasing non-white drug offenders and it is a “sanctuary city” that offers ID’s to illegal aliens [New Jersey Cities Give Illegal Immigrants ID’s, Judicial Watch, May 17, 2010].

In effect, like so many other post-American communities, the state capital is a multicultural kleptocracy, dominated by racial-grievance mongering and far-Left policies appealing to resentment against whites.

The recent administrator of this demographic disaster was former Trenton Mayor Tony Mack. But Mack’s tenure ended in disgrace when he was arrested with his brother and an associate on corruption charges in 2012. Before his fall, however, Mack had insisted on making Lamarre-Sumners a city municipal judge, telling a white opponent on the Trenton city council: “I want her made” [Trenton council member says extortion allegations against lawyer are not surprising, by Isaac Avilucea, The Trentonian, April 14, 2015]. Lamarre-Sumners was eventually confirmed with only one dissenting vote.

Needless to say, Lamarre-Sumners was remarkably unqualified for such a prestigious post, and even unqualified to be a standard ambulance chaser. She had not paid her law license renewal fees, had IRS liens on her home, and had a warrant out for her arrest. She had also been repeatedly placed on a list of attorneys ineligible to practice law in the state of New Jersey.

After questions were raised about her past and credentials, Lamarre-Sumners refused to take a background check and eventually resigned in order to “shut everybody up” [Top NJ Court: Trenton Judge Renee Lamarre Sumners ordered off city bench, by L.A. Parker and Paul Mickle, The Trentonian, November 8, 2010].

Indeed, in 2010 Lamarre-Sumners managed to portray herself as the victim. As she put it:
“I don’t think that I was given a fair shake. You guys know that I did a good job as an attorney and prosecutor. Yes, I had a warrant, but that was a civil case that I resolved. We are all human. We all make mistakes. The mistakes got corrected.”
But that was only the beginning of her “mistakes.” Lamarre-Sumners continued to practice law in Trenton. And in March of this year she was arrested on charges of extortion for trying to defraud four illegal immigration clients who were afraid of being deported.

According to a criminal complaint filed in the United States District Court, Lamarre-Sumners presented clients with forged correspondence from the United States Department of Labor which said they would face severe legal penalties unless Lamarre-Sumners could get them off the hook. Frightened clients dutifully presented checks to the disgraced judge, who then pocketed the cash.

In late April 2015, Lamarre-Sumners accepted a plea deal (which victims slammed as far too lenient). Despite owing money to various creditors, her record of fiscal irresponsibility, and seemingly still in serious financial trouble, Lamarre-Sumners is somehow free on a $100,000 unsecured bail. She also has retained a high-profile lawyer, Jerome Ballarotto as her attorney.

Lamarre-Sumners will be sentenced on August 19th in federal court, but under the terms of her deal, state prosecutors cannot ask for more than 18 months in federal prison. If she had been indicted without accepting a plea deal, she might have been facing as much as 20 years.

Furthermore, although Lamarre-Sumners must repay $15,050 as restitution to her victims, this is less than what the victims gave her. And the money that victims paid to various attorneys to try to recoup their losses is also not stated in the agreement [Former Trenton judge charged with extortion accepts plea deal, by Isaac Avilucea, The Trentonian, April 30, 2015].

It appears that this is an actual case of immigrants being brutally and cynically victimized—in this case, by a Democratic “woman of color.”

Of course, the biggest mistake these victims made was assuming that the federal government was interested in enforcing immigration laws. Lamarre-Sumners exploited the “anarcho-tyranny” of our immigration system by exploiting illegals’ personal fears for her own selfish gain.

Needless to say, although no-one argues these “undocumented workers” are in the country legally, there appears to be no talk of actually deporting them. And as VDARE.com has reported before, any victim of a crime could apply for legal status. In that sense, perhaps Lamarre-Sumners did them a favor.

It is important to remember that there is nothing unusual about this. Trenton remains a majority black city with a one-party system. This entire sad episode has done nothing to challenge Democratic domination or the rule of a seemingly permanent political machine in the city. And as (white) South Ward Councilman George Muschal told The Trentonian’s Avilucea in his April 14 interview cited above, the news about Lamarre-Sumners’s arrest took a long time to get out. Wondering whether people in the legal profession covered for her, Muschal mused: “Just like the police take care of their own, the county likes to take care of their own.”

But it’s not the “county.” It’s a political system that regards minority takeover of city governments as inherently a good thing, regardless of whether corruption increases or the quality of service collapses.

Lamarre-Sumners got where she did because of her racial background and political connections. In Third World America, that was more than sufficient to compensate for her total lack of professional and personal qualifications.

As a final note, Judge Lamarre-Sumners was, until recently, listed on the site of the National Association of Haitian Professionals. The post has since been removed, but it once described her as:
First generation American, Judge Renee LaMarre-Sumners makes her home in the Greater Trenton area. A talented professional who capitalizes on performance in a number of legal roles in private, corporate and government sectors as it relates to diversity and equality issues and initiatives. Judge LaMarre-Sumners graduated with a BS in Political Science and History from Manhattanville College. She then completed her MBA at Fairleigh Dickinson University and followed up with a juris doctorate from Touro Law School. Judge LaMarre Sumners believes in the power of education. She began her career as a municipal prosecutor in 2003, prosecuting in most of the greater Trenton municipalities and was appointed municipal court judge in June 2010.
Her strong leadership, communications, technical and project management skills result in consistent high-profile successes that enhance the perception and reputation of the Haitian community Judge LaMarre-Sumners continues to promote the Haitian community and education both to them and about them. Her goal is to foster positive thought and respect for the Haitians in America.
[Program for the NAHP 2012 Symposium, PDF, (Google Cache link)]
Emphases added. And that’s just the problem. When people are appointed to political office so as to create “positive thought and respect” for privileged minority groups because of their experience with “diversity and equality issues,” government competence is no longer a priority.

Immigration is the key factor driving this process. It gives us ever more “first generation Americans” like Lamarre-Sumners who bring their Third World standards of governance and financial schemes here.

And as immigration continues, government and society in the United States will increasingly resemble the dysfunctional failed states that our vibrant “fellow Americans” just fled.

The only difference is that we members of the historic American nation have nowhere else to go.

The Era of Pretense

via The Archdruid Report

I've mentioned in previous posts here on The Archdruid Report the educational value of the comments I receive from readers in the wake of each week’s essay. My post two weeks ago on the death of the internet was unusually productive along those lines.  One of the comments I got in response to that post gave me the theme for last week’s essay, but there was at least one other comment calling for the same treatment. Like the one that sparked last week’s post, it appeared on one of the many other internet forums on which The Archdruid Report, and it unintentionally pointed up a common and crucial failure of imagination that shapes, or rather misshapes, the conventional wisdom about our future.
Curiously enough, the point that set off the commenter in question was the same one that incensed the author of the denunciation mentioned in last week’s post: my suggestion in passing that fifty years from now, most Americans may not have access to electricity or running water. The commenter pointed out angrily that I’d claimed that the twilight of industrial civilization would be a ragged arc of decline over one to three centuries. Now, he claimed, I was saying that it was going to take place in the next fifty years, and this apparently convinced him that everything I said ought to be dismissed out of hand.
I run into this sort of confusion all the time. If I suggest that the decline and fall of a civilization usually takes several centuries, I get accused of inconsistency if I then note that one of the sharper downturns included in that process may be imminent.  If I point out that the United States is likely within a decade or two of serious economic and political turmoil, driven partly by the implosion of its faltering global hegemony and partly by a massive crisis of legitimacy that’s all but dissolved the tacit contract between the existing order of US society and the masses who passively support it, I get accused once again of inconsistency if I then say that whatever comes out the far side of that crisis—whether it’s a battered and bruised United States or a patchwork of successor states—will then face a couple of centuries of further decline and disintegration before the deindustrial dark age bottoms out.
Now of course there’s nothing inconsistent about any of these statements. The decline and fall of a civilization isn’t a single event, or even a single linear process; it’s a complex fractal reality composed of many different events on many different scales in space and time. If it takes one to three centuries, as usual, those centuries are going to be taken up by an uneven drumbeat of wars, crises, natural disasters, and assorted breakdowns on a variety of time frames with an assortment of local, regional, national, or global effects. The collapse of US global hegemony is one of those events; the unraveling of the economic and technological framework that currently provides most Americans with electricity and running water is another, but neither of those is anything like the whole picture.
It’s probably also necessary to point out that any of my readers who think that being deprived of electricity and running water is the most drastic kind of collapse imaginable have, as the saying goes, another think coming. Right now, in our oh-so-modern world, there are billions of people who get by without regular access to electricity and running water, and most of them aren’t living under dark age conditions. A century and a half ago, when railroads, telegraphs, steamships, and mechanical printing presses were driving one of history’s great transformations of transport and information technology, next to nobody had electricity or running water in their homes. The technologies of 1865 are not dark age technologies; in fact, the gap between 1865 technologies and dark age technologies is considerably greater, by most metrics, than the gap between 1865 technologies and the ones we use today.
Furthermore, whether or not Americans have access to running water and electricity may not have as much to say about the future of industrial society everywhere in the world as the conventional wisdom would suggest.  I know that some of my American readers will be shocked out of their socks to hear this, but the United States is not the whole world. It’s not even the center of the world. If the United States implodes over the next two decades, leaving behind a series of bankrupt failed states to squabble over its territory and the little that remains of its once-lavish resource base, that process will be a great source of gaudy and gruesome stories for the news media of the world’s other continents, but it won’t affect the lives of the readers of those stories much more than equivalent events in Africa and the Middle East affect the lives of Americans today.
As it happens, over the next one to three centuries, the benefits of industrial civilization are going to go away for everyone. (The costs will be around a good deal longer—in the case of the nuclear wastes we’re so casually heaping up for our descendants, a good quarter of a million years, but those and their effects are rather more localized than some of today’s apocalyptic rhetoric likes to suggest.) The reasoning here is straightforward. White’s Law, one of the fundamental principles of human ecology, states that economic development is a function of energy per capita; the immense treasure trove of concentrated energy embodied in fossil fuels, and that alone, made possible the sky-high levels of energy per capita that gave the world’s industrial nations their brief era of exuberance; as fossil fuels deplete, and remaining reserves require higher and higher energy inputs to extract, the levels of energy per capita the industrial nations are used to having will go away forever.
It’s important to be clear about this. Fossil fuels aren’t simply one energy source among others; in terms of concentration, usefulness, and fungibility—that is, the ability to be turned into any other form of energy that might be required—they’re in a category all by themselves. Repeated claims that fossil fuels can be replaced with nuclear power, renewable energy resources, or what have you sound very good on paper, but every attempt to put those claims to the test so far has either gone belly up in short order, or become a classic subsidy dumpster surviving purely on a diet of government funds and mandates.
Three centuries ago, the earth’s fossil fuel reserves were the largest single deposit of concentrated energy in this part of the universe; now we’ve burnt through nearly all the easily accessible reserves, and we’re scrambling to keep the tottering edifice of industrial society going by burning through the dregs that remain. As those run out, the remaining energy resources—almost all of them renewables—will certainly sustain a variety of human societies, and some of those will be able to achieve a fairly high level of complexity and maintain some kinds of advanced technologies. The kind of absurd extravagance that passes for a normal standard of living among the more privileged inmates of the industrial nations is another matter, and as the fossil fuel age sunsets out, it will end forever.
The fractal trajectory of decline and fall mentioned earlier in this post is simply the way this equation works out on the day-to-day scale of ordinary history. Still, those of us who happen to be living through a part of that trajectory might reasonably be curious about how it’s likely to unfold in our lifetimes. I’ve discussed in a previous series of posts, and in my book Decline and Fall: The End of Empire and the Future of Democracy in 21st Century America, how the end of US global hegemony is likely to unfold, but as already noted, that’s only a small portion of the broader picture. Is a broader view possible?
Fortunately history, the core resource I’ve been using to try to make sense of our future, has plenty to say about the broad patterns that unfold when civilizations decline and fall. Now of course I know all I have to do is mention that history might be relevant to our present predicament, and a vast chorus of voices across the North American continent and around the world will bellow at rooftop volume, “But it’s different this time!” With apologies to my regular readers, who’ve heard this before, it’s probably necessary to confront that weary thoughtstopper again before we proceed. 
As I’ve noted before, claims that it’s different this time are right where it doesn’t matter and wrong where it counts.  Predictions made on the basis of history—and not just by me—have consistently predicted events over the last decade or so far more accurately than predictions based on the assumption that history doesn’t matter. How many times, dear reader, have you heard someone insist that industrial civilization is going to crash to ruin in the next six months, and then watched those six months roll merrily by without any sign of the predicted crash? For that matter, how many times have you heard someone insist that this or that policy that’s never worked any other time that it’s been tried, or this or that piece of technological vaporware that’s been the subject of failed promises for decades, will inevitably put industrial society back on its alleged trajectory to the stars—and how many times has the policy or the vaporware been quietly shelved, and something else promoted using the identical rhetoric, when it turned out not to perform as advertised?
It’s been a source of wry amusement to me to watch the same weary, dreary, repeatedly failed claims of imminent apocalypse and inevitable progress being rehashed year after year, varying only in the fine details of the cataclysm du jour and the techno-savior du jour, while the future nobody wants to talk about is busily taking shape around us. Decline and fall isn’t something that will happen sometime in the conveniently distant future; it’s happening right now in the United States and around the world. The amusement, though, is tempered with a sense of familiarity, because the period in which decline is under way but nobody wants to admit that fact is one of the recurring features of the history of decline.
There are, very generally speaking, five broad phases in the decline and fall of a civilization. I know it’s customary in historical literature to find nice dull labels for such things, but I’m in a contrary mood as I write this, so I’ll give them unfashionably colorful names: the eras of pretense, impact, response, breakdown, and dissolution. Each of these is complex enough that it’ll need a discussion of its own; this week, we’ll talk about the era of pretense, which is the one we’re in right now.
Eras of pretense are by no means limited to the decline and fall of civilizations. They occur whenever political, economic, or social arrangements no longer work, but the immediate costs of admitting that those arrangements don’t work loom considerably larger in the collective imagination than the future costs of leaving those arrangements in place. It’s a curious but consistent wrinkle of human psychology that this happens even if those future costs soar right off the scale of frightfulness and lethality; if the people who would have to pay the immediate costs don’t want to do so, in fact, they will reliably and cheerfully pursue policies that lead straight to their own total bankruptcy or violent extermination, and never let themselves notice where they’re headed.
Speculative bubbles are a great setting in which to watch eras of pretense in full flower. In the late phases of a bubble, when it’s clear to anyone who has two spare neurons to rub together that the boom du jour is cobbled together of equal parts delusion and chicanery, the people who are most likely to lose their shirts in the crash are the first to insist at the top of their lungs that the bubble isn’t a bubble and their investments are guaranteed to keep on increasing in value forever. Those of my readers who got the chance to watch some of their acquaintances go broke in the real estate bust of 2008-9, as I did, will have heard this sort of self-deception at full roar; those who missed the opportunity can make up for the omission by checking out the ongoing torrent of claims that the soon-to-be-late fracking bubble is really a massive energy revolution that will make America wealthy and strong again.
The history of revolutions offers another helpful glimpse at eras of pretense. France in the decades before 1789, to cite a conveniently well-documented example, was full of people who had every reason to realize that the current state of affairs was hopelessly unsustainable and would have to change. The things about French politics and economics that had to change, though, were precisely those things that the French monarchy and aristocracy were unwilling to change, because any such reforms would have cost them privileges they’d had since time out of mind and were unwilling to relinquish.
Louis XIV, who finished up his long and troubled reign a supreme realist, is said to have muttered “Après moi, le déluge”—“Once I’m gone, this sucker’s going down” may not be a literal translation, but it catches the flavor of the utterance—but that degree of clarity was rare in his generation, and all but absent in those of his increasingly feckless successors. Thus the courtiers and aristocrats of the Old Regime amused themselves at the nation’s expense, dabbled in avant-garde thought, and kept their eyes tightly closed to the consequences of their evasions of looming reality, while the last opportunities to excuse themselves from a one-way trip to visit the guillotine and spare France the cataclysms of the Terror and the Napoleonic wars slipped silently away.
That’s the bitter irony of eras of pretense. Under most circumstances, they’re the last period when it would be possible to do anything constructive on the large scale about the crisis looming immediately ahead, but the mass evasion of reality that frames the collective thinking of the time stands squarely in the way of any such constructive action. In the era of pretense before a speculative bust, people who could have quietly cashed in their positions and pocketed their gains double down on their investments, and guarantee that they’ll be ruined once the market stops being liquid. In the era of pretense before a revolution, in the same way, those people and classes that have the most to lose reliably take exactly those actions that ensure that they will in fact lose everything. If history has a sense of humor, this is one of the places that it appears in its most savage form.
The same points are true, in turn, of the eras of pretense that precede the downfall of a civilization. In a good many cases, where too few original sources survive, the age of pretense has to be inferred from archeological remains. We don’t know what motives inspired the ancient Mayans to build their biggest pyramids in the years immediately before the Terminal Classic period toppled over into a savage political and demographic collapse, but it’s hard to imagine any such project being set in motion without the usual evasions of an era of pretense being involved  Where detailed records of dead civilizations survive, though, the sort of rhetorical handwaving common to bubbles before the bust and decaying regimes on the brink of revolution shows up with knobs on. Thus the panegyrics of the Roman imperial court waxed ever more lyrical and bombastic about Rome’s invincibility and her civilizing mission to the nations as the Empire stumbled deeper into its terminal crisis, echoing any number of other court poets in any number of civilizations in their final hours.
For that matter, a glance through classical Rome’s literary remains turns up the remarkable fact that those of her essayists and philosophers who expressed worries about her survival wrote, almost without exception, during the Republic and the early Empire; the closer the fall of Rome actually came, the more certainty Roman authors expressed that the Empire was eternal and the latest round of troubles was just one more temporary bump on the road to peace and prosperity. It took the outsider’s vision of Augustine of Hippo to proclaim that Rome really was falling—and even that could only be heard once the Visigoths sacked Rome and the era of pretense gave way to the age of impact.
The present case is simply one more example to add to an already lengthy list. In the last years of the nineteenth century, it was common for politicians, pundits, and mass media in the United States, the British empire, and other industrial nations to discuss the possibility that the advanced civilization of the time might be headed for the common fate of nations in due time. The intellectual history of the twentieth century is, among other things, a chronicle of how that discussion was shoved to the margins of our collective discourse, just as the ecological history of the same century is among other things a chronicle of how the worries of the previous era became the realities of the one we’re in today. The closer we’ve moved toward the era of impact, that is, the more unacceptable it has become for anyone in public life to point out that the problems of the age are not just superficial.
Listen to the pablum that passes for political discussion in Washington DC or the mainstream US media these days, or the even more vacuous noises being made by party flacks as the country stumbles wearily toward yet another presidential election. That the American dream of upward mobility has become an American nightmare of accelerating impoverishment outside the narrowing circle of the kleptocratic rich, that corruption and casual disregard for the rule of law are commonplace in political institutions from local to Federal levels, that our medical industry charges more than any other nation’s and still provides the worst health care in the industrial world, that our schools no longer teach anything but contempt for learning, that the national infrastructure and built environment are plunging toward Third World conditions at an ever-quickening pace, that a brutal and feckless foreign policy embraced by both major parties is alienating our allies while forcing our enemies to set aside their mutual rivalries and make common cause against us: these are among the issues that matter, but they’re not the issues you’ll hear discussed as the latest gaggle of carefully airbrushed candidates go through their carefully scripted elect-me routines on their way to the 2016 election.
If history teaches anything, though, it’s that eras of pretense eventually give way to eras of impact. That doesn’t mean that the pretense will go away—long after Alaric the Visigoth sacked Rome, for example, there were still plenty of rhetors trotting out the same tired clichés about Roman invincibility—but it does mean that a significant number of people will stop finding the pretense relevant to their own lives. How that happens in other historical examples, and how it might happen in our own time, will be the theme of next week’s post.

Troll Activism

via Radix

Getting an Identitarian message out is tough—especially when most of our White peers gush over harebrained acts like volunteering in Africa to help the hearing-impaired.

To overcome the derision and knee-jerk revulsion toward our ideas, we have to use tactics that break out of the box—tactics that may shock but cost little to accomplish.

Last week, there were two great examples of pro-White trolling that ignited the Internet.

The most famous example, of course, were weev’s promoted tweets. Weev is the nom de guerre of Andrew Auernheimer, a famous hacker who has now dedicated himself to doing his part to save the White race. So he decided to exploit a loophole in Twitter’s ad console that allowed him to post benign messages warning about the danger White people find themselves in.

Here’s the language:
Whites need to stand up for one another and defend ourselves from violence and discrimination. Our race is dying.
And the more trolly:
White pride, world wide. Do you know the 14 words?
While these messages shouldn’t be too offensive for most reasonable people, weev decided to target these tweets to the people who would be the most outraged by pro-White messages: rabid leftists.

And outraged they became. A firestorm of anger followed on Twitter and several media outlets wrote up denunciations of both weev’s message and Twitter’s lack of advertising standards. He essentially earned free media and attention for his message at the cost of only a “few pennies” to purchase the ads. Naturally, it also caused him to be banned from using Twitter’s ad platform for promoting “hate speech,” but that doesn’t preclude others from following in his path and tailoring similar tweets for the same mission. . .which several other trolls decided to do.

So it was an all-around success that demonstrated an unorthodox method for getting our message out there. . .all at the cost of a few dimes.

And that wasn’t the only bit of internet troll activism that was committed last week. The University of California-Los Angeles was beset with a real crisis when an Asian student was caught scrolling an anti-immigrant, pro-European message on a flyer supporting Africans flooding into the continent. An article published by the school paper reported that the campus police are view the act of free speech as a “hate crime” and police spokeswoman Nancy Greenfield vowed to hunt down the preppy little Asian who did it.

Unfortunately for the Daily Bruin, this story was picked up by The Right Stuff guys and they nuked the comments section—dropping hilarious truth bombs all around.

Here’s a few examples:
He know that after the whites gone they comin after his people. How much you wanna bet this kid Japanese. He know that his people trying to hold the line against the whole damn international system. Fight on little tiger.
Not wanting the peoples of Europe to be bred out of existence, and their economies crushed by an endless torrent of uneducated unskilled immigrants is hate speech? >Nancy GREENSTEIN ... I should have known ...
Somalians have contributed greatly to the field of political science and humanitarian studies. Novel concepts like Anarcho-Islamism, Paleo-Libertarianism and conflict resolution strategies have emerged from this unique culture and its way of interpreting the world around it. We're pretty blinded here in the West by our white supremacist Western Canon way of thinking that emphasizes property rights and social stability.
Apology accepted. Btw, those Muslims are so spiritual, they are really in touch wit the earth - so authentic!
Of course this greatly upset the curators of the Daily Bruin and they shut down the comments section for the “offensive nature of discussion around this article” as they probably figured they couldn’t delete every single message—that’d be too much work I suppose.

Both weev’s Twitter ads and the hijacking of the Daily Bruin’s comment section shows Identitarian-minded folks breaking through the walls of mandated discourse and spreading our message to many who are unaware our ideas exist. Let’s hope for more troll activism in the future.