Jul 21, 2015

Remembering Beryl Cheetham

via Counter-Currents

Beryl Cheetham (center) with Diana Hughes (left)
and Savitri Devi, after the 1962 Cotswolds Camp
I was deeply saddened to hear that my friend Beryl Cheetham died in a nursing home in Erding, Germany, on June 30th. I knew Beryl since 2000, when I began research on Savitri Devi with the aim of writing a new biography. Beryl knew Savitri from 1961 to 1982, and she had a sense of responsibility to history. She kept all of her correspondence, many volumes of photographs, and files of magazines and clippings.

Beryl was enthusiastic about my project, and very generously shared her papers, photos, and contacts with a far-flung network of friends and comrades. Her help was absolutely crucial. More than 90% of my research and subsequent discoveries would not have happened without her.

I visited her in Erding in 2001, 2003, and 2006. We usually talked monthly, exchanged letters and gifts on our birthdays and the Winter Solstice, and talked about meeting again in Europe. The bitter financial struggle to start Counter-Currents made that impossible for some years, but since last Fall, I had been able to travel in Europe again, and I was hoping to finally visit her this year.

I had not spoken to Beryl for several months. She last called to tell me she was going into the hospital the next day to have surgery for bladder cancer. She did not have a number where I could reach her at the hospital or rehab center she would go to after her hospital stay, so I was hoping she would call me once she got settled. I called her home from time to time, hoping to find her there. Today, when the phone call did not go through at all, I feared the worst and found an announcement online.

I will write a fuller remembrance of Beryl when I have time to collect my thoughts. I am posting this brief announcement simply because I would like her friends to contact me. I want to know if any sort of memorial for her is being planned. She also wanted to make sure that her politically important books, papers, and photographs are preserved.

Beryl was the center of a network of individuals, and now that she is gone, I have no easy way to contact the many people I met through her. She did give me contact information for some of them, but my file of correspondence with her is in storage thousands of miles from my present location. So, if anyone can put me in touch with the executor of her will, or Alex in England (we met once at The London Forum), or Arthur M., or Hazel and Manfred T., please contact me at editor@counter-currents.com. I would be most grateful for any news and assistance.

Greg Johnson

Reclaim Australia: Communists, You’ll Always Lose in Melbourne

via Nationalist Alternative

I.

For overseas readers, I’ll give an exposition here of what the Reclaim Australia rallies are about. The first Reclaim rally took place in April 2015 in major cities (including Melbourne and Sydney) across Australia, and like many social protest movements in this decade, were organised on social media. The rallies drew in a wide-cross section of Australians – many from nationalist political groups and factions, many not affiliated with any political party or organisation at all; the elderly, the young, the working and middle classes, the politically active and the politically inactive all numbered among the attendees. The rallies were dedicated to two ideas: patriotism and anti-Islam. The first rallies – especially in Melbourne – saw unprecedented violence from Trotskyite communists, who abused, spat on and physically assaulted attendees. The communists in Melbourne formed a blockade around the central section of the rally while the Victorian police, outnumbered by both the communists and the Reclaim attendees, desperately tried to keep control.

1437196467715


After the first rally, a faction within the Reclaim movement – the United Patriots Front (UPF) – emerged – and held a demonstration in Richmond in May 2015 against communists in the Socialist Party of Australia (SPA) in the Richmond City Council. On Saturday July the 18th Reclaim held another rally – one just for Melbourne (because of the sheer size of the Trotskyite opposition there); on Sunday, July the 19th, Reclaim rallies are being held at other cities across Australia, including Sydney and Adelaide. Various nationalist and patriotic groups – such as Reclaim Australia, Rise Up Australia, the UPF, Nationalist Alternative, the Australian Defence League, among others – attended.

The Melbourne rally took place in a calm and secure environment. We saw some sporadic violence from the communists, who employ a roving pack of five or six men (the ‘basher gang’ as I call them) who target isolated members of Reclaim; they surround them and assault them. As the Sydney Reclaim members (who had come down especially for the Melbourne rally on the Saturday) headed back to Sydney in the evening, the ‘basher gang’ throw a wine bottle at the windscreen of their bus. A Reclaim member who stepped out of the door to confront the basher gang was assaulted by them and knocked unconscious; the other Reclaim members swarmed out, overpowered the bashers, who ran away, and called for an ambulance for their injured comrade.

Hopefully the basher gang will be identified by the police, arrested, prosecuted and imprisoned. But we shouldn’t underestimate the violence and immorality of the communist Left.

As stated, the actual rally went ahead in peace and quiet. But the communists are making the absurd claim that they prevented the rally from going ahead and that they won a ‘victory’. In an report in the Melbourne Age newspaper, ‘Police condemn violence as protesters clash at Parliament House’, we find:
No Room For Racism rally speaker Ezekiel Ox claimed victory, shouting: “make some noise because it is three-nil against the racists in Melbourne.”
Mr Ox said a number of tactics were successfully used to stop the Reclaim Australia and United Patriots’ Front rallies.

The group then did a “victory march” down to Exhibition Street and then back to Bourke Street.

One has to ask: what tactics were ‘successfully used to stop the Reclaim Australia and United Patriots’ Front rallies’? Yesterday’s rally went ahead. As for ‘victory marches’, well, any group can march back up and down Exhibition Street and Bourke Street.
In the Herald-Sun report, ‘Reclaim Australia rally: Anti-racism and anti-Islam groups clash in Spring St’, Stephen Jolly, the communist SPA councillor in Richmond, made extraordinary comments:
Socialist Yarra councillor and rally organiser Stephen Jolly said he was delighted with the strong turnout, claiming his side outnumbered the right wing by about 10-1.
“The idea that we were going to let these guys come into Melbourne and spread their hate was never going to happen,” Cr Jolly said.
“The only violence that occurred took place when some of their people walked through our line and started acting provocatively.
“We didn’t want a fistfight with them, we just wanted to clear them off our streets.
“I reckon they will be going home feeling pretty demoralised tonight.”
Jolly stated before the rally that the communist counter-protestors would number 5000; the Fairfax media (which seems to sympathise with the communists) put the number of communists at a thousand. I myself estimate that they numbered 200 to 300 – the same number of communists who attended the Richmond rally in May. The BBC (surprisingly enough) report, ‘Melbourne clashes as nationalists and anti-racist groups rally’, gave an accurate tally of the communist numbers.

The communists are deluding themselves if they believe that they ‘stopped’, ‘shut down’, the rally. The rally went ahead. You can see for yourself, because footage (nearly one and a half hour’s worth) is available on the Nationalist Alternative You Tube channel:

Jolly and Ox are channelling Groucho Marx, who, when trying to pull a fast one over someone, said ‘Who are going to believe – me or your lying eyes?’. Here are the annotations for the YouTube clip:

Reclaim Australia rally, Melbourne, 18th July 2015
  • 0:00 Fiery speech by Blair before the march
  • 1:13 We march! Towards parliament, and pick up reinforcements along the way
  • 12:50 Triumphant arrival at the Reclaim rally
  • 15:42 ‘Waltzing Matilda’ is played at front of parliament
  • 22:35 Speech by Tom
  • 27:30 Speech by Blair
  • 35:06 Speech by Shermon
  • 39:06 Announcement by Blair
  • 42:02 Speech by Danny Nallia
  • 46:03 Some closing comments from Blair
  • 47:39 Speech by Ralph on conditions in Lakemba
  • 53:56 National anthem ‘Advance Australia Fair’ is sung
  • 55:01 Speeches at rally come to an end; we socialise and chat
  • 1:06:45 Shouting at commies through a megaphone
  • 1:09:28 A chat with Blair: ‘The Left lost – they couldn’t shut down the rally’
  • 1:12:05 More shouting at commies
  • 1:12:55 Blair and Shermon make some filmed comments for Facebook
  • 1:17:28 We sing ‘You’ll always lose in Melbourne’ at the commies
  • 1:19:00 Laughing and joking at the Gordon Reserve
  • 1:22:20 Some communists attempt to approach; we chase them off
Finally, look at the photo at the beginning of the article: it shows the Reclaim celebration after party at a nearby pub. Do these look like they’ll being going home ‘demoralised’?

But take a look at the below photos. The communists there don’t seem to be in a state of high spirits, and in fact, they probably did go home quite demoralised that evening:

348896-5f95866e-2d20-11e5-8333-417e4c2de3cb

11028361_137420969925697_3385511208698879031_n


881037-10c0e1d2-2cf3-11e5-a522-4b58038690a7


1437238311392


880672-d8a10826-2cf3-11e5-a522-4b58038690a7


349883-d8c12c3c-2d20-11e5-8333-417e4c2de3cb


185389-367ac428-2cf9-11e5-a522-4b58038690a7



I think that the Trotskyite leadership is exhibiting all the signs of a progressive mental deterioration – a descent into full-blown self-delusion of the Jim Jones People’s Temple variety. But the communist groups (especially the Trotskyite) have always resembled cults. They live in a bubble universe into which reality can’t be allowed to penetrate.

II.

I’ll now give a blow by blow description of what happened on the day of the rally.
I turned up to prearranged meeting point in Carlton around 10.30. The UPF and other groups were to form up there and go in to the rally at around 1 pm. Unfortunately, the Reclaim contingent started early and turned up at Spring Street at 11. It was at this point – when Reclaim numbered only a few – that most of the violence between the communists and Reclaim occurred. The communists tried to break through the police cordon and were pepper-sprayed, but managed to pick off one or two isolated individuals and assault them. One Reclaim member was stabbed with a pen, and five arrests were made. While my contingent were still assembling at the park, we saw reports on social media – via our smart phones – of the carnage taking place only a few blocks away. Being few at number, and having to wait for reinforcements, we couldn’t move down there to help them.

I found the wait agonising; I felt like a coiled spring. The others felt it too. I could compare it to a soldier’s psychosis which occurs in hours before a battle is about to start – the waiting was unbearable.

Finally we got ready to jump off. Flags were unfurled, banners and signs taken out, and we moved into formation. Blair gave a speech – a ‘rev ‘em up’ speech before we set out.

The march took about ten minutes. We collected some reinforcements along the way: some stragglers who were coming late to the rally. We barked at them, ‘Line up!’ and they joined in. Cars tooted their horns in support…

The police officers walking alongside us seemed to be in a state of excitement. I took the impression that we were about to plunge into a maelstrom – a sea of communist counter-demonstrators who would attempt to break the police lines and attack us.
That wasn’t the case. When we marched through Spring Street and in front of parliament, an eerie silence reigned. The tops of Spring and Bourke Streets had been closed down, fenced off; they seemed as empty as a desert. Without crowds in front of it, the austere, neoclassical beauty of the parliament building – which resembled the Reichstag in WWII Germany – made itself felt.

The Reclaim rally was in full swing when we reached them. Once they saw my contingent, and the sea of Australian flags, they whooped and cheered. It was as though we were cavalry rescuing a besieged fortress. But, after arriving, I felt somewhat deflated and confused. The expected clash with the communists – like two opposing rugby teams colliding at the opening of a match – didn’t arise. The communists seemed so far away that they may as well have been on Mars. We could hear them at a distance, but they didn’t overpower with us through noise as they did during previous rallies. One great advantage we possessed were speakers mounted on the back of trucks; these allowed us to ‘out-noise’ the communists.

The Rise Up Australia and Reclaim contingent were finishing off their speeches when we arrived, and played a recording of Slim Dusty performing ‘Waltzing Matilda’. The sound of this must have enraged the Left, who had nothing in response to it except their nihilistic chants and slogans. (It can’t be emphasised enough how much the communists hate Australia). Tom, Blair, Shermon, Danny Nallia and others went on to give some terrific speeches, and, at the end, we sang the Australian national anthem, ‘Advance Australia Fair’ (more fuel to the fire for the Left).

After the close of the rally, we socialised and hanged around for about half an hour, in front of Parliament House, before heading off. A few wags chanted the jeering communist slogan, ‘You’ll always lose in Melbourne – f**k off!’ at the communists, because, in our view, the communists had lost.

As we headed back to Carlton, I felt somewhat twitchy and nervous – as any soldier does after a battle. At the head of 150 people, and carrying my equipment, I felt like some sergeant leading a company of men back from the battlefield, with my machine gun on my shoulder and on the lookout for the enemy, who may be lurking in a patch of bush, up a tree, anywhere… At one point we became convinced that we were being followed – but any communist would have been suicidal to follow us. Finally, we arrived at a bar and restaurant and drank and socialised for hours. Whereas before I had felt ‘coiled like a spring’, now I unwound and became talkative and sociable. I saw many new faces, and some old ones, who remembered me from Nationalist Alternative events from years before. One of the extraordinary things achieved by the Reclaim rallies was the bringing out of the woodwork many of the activists of the Far Right and nationalist movement, who had been lurking on the Internet for years (as opposed to getting out on the street and demonstrating). A real feeling of comradeship existed at that restaurant that evening.

III.

Here I want to explore the strategy of both the Far Left and Right at these rallies.
I’ve gone into detail in previous articles as to why the communists use violence and coercion against Far Right and nationalist movements, and why they encourage their members to commit criminal acts – I won’t repeat myself here. Suffice to say, the Trotskyite communists, following the precepts of Lenin in State and Revolution (1917) want to ‘smash the state’ in a full-blown frontal assault; ‘smashing’ entails violent confrontations with the police and assaults – verbal and physical – on the ideals of liberal democratic state itself. Liberalism guarantees freedom of speech, assembly, association; it enshrines these rights in a constitution. The liberal state uses its monopoly on violence and coercion to enforce those rights. But if the communists act as a state within a state, and declare that they decide who gets to march and who doesn’t, then they are challenging the state’s monopoly directly; they are also attacking liberalism by denying weak and vulnerable political groupings (such as the nationalists and patriots) their rights.

But are the communist tactics working? If you, as a political group, want to challenge the state directly – and one means of this is by fomenting anarchistic violence – you’d best be strong. But the communists, especially when going up against Melbourne and Sydney’s finest, have shown themselves to be weak. They don’t possess the numbers and the strength to overwhelm the protective cordons around the Reclaim rallies. The police weapons – such as pepper spray – proved to be devastating to the communists (in fact, the pepper spray was nearly as devastating as a flame thrower). Police tactics at the Melbourne rally showed themselves to be more effective this time around than at previous rallies, and for certain, the police in Victoria would have communicated those techniques to the police of New South Wales. Going up against the state in a head-on collision, then, doesn’t work for the commies any more.

The communists, then, should discontinue their ‘contrived riot’ tactics. To explain the ‘contrived riot’, I’ll quote from Philip Selznick’s classic work of sociology, The Organizational Weapon: A Study of Bolshevik Strategy and Tactics (1952). Here he describes the riot tactics (deployed, ironically, by the pro-Soviet Left against the Trotskyite or non-communist Left):
The communists have been willing to use contrived riots to deny the right of opposition groups to meet. This is not simply a matter of antifascist activity, but of attempts to intimidate other left-wing organizations. Thus in the early days of the Trotskyist movement in the United States, the official communists attempted to break up the gatherings of this new and threatening tendency, long before Trotsky was denounced as a “fascist.” A large socialist meeting at Madison Square Garden was turned into a riot by the communists in February, 1934. And as late as 1944 the communists attempted to disrupt a pacifist meeting, addressed by a socialist leader and held under Quaker auspices. Activities of this sort have been episodic, apart from direct bids for state power, but they indicate the willingness of the party to attempt to eliminate oppositionist elements by any means, including direct efforts to deny them the streets.
‘Deny them the streets’ – that’s exactly what the communists have been trying to do to Reclaim this year, and to the Far Right in Australia for the past forty years.
As well as ‘contrived riots’, the communists make use of ‘selective bashings’. They’ll pick off a vulnerable person and subject them to a beating. Again, they’ve been doing this at least since the 1920s and 1930s. They engage in these calculated acts of political terror so as to dissuade (to put it mildly) the targeted recipients of these bashings from participating in political life (or to ensure that the individual makes a decision in their favour – i.e., to vote the ‘right way’ in an upcoming union election). I think that these terror tactics backfire, and usually they make the individual – if he’s made of stern stuff – even more determined to oppose the communists. In any case, the communist won’t be able to avail themselves once their ‘basher gangs’ are put out of business by the police and once the patriots and nationalists take steps to ensure the security of their comrades at these rallies. (I would make it an iron rule that nationalists must always, always show up to meetings as part of a strong group and never, never travel alone).

1437207268803Finally, I would suggest that the alliance between Islam and Trotskyite communism has been shown to be a mistake. Ironically, the day before the Melbourne rally, a Muslim terrorist attack took place in Chattanooga, Tennessee (the perpetrator texted a friend a verse from Koran just before the attack). I myself predicted that something like this would happen on the Friday before the rally, as Muslim terrorists show a propensity to carry out their attacks on Fridays. I think, by 2015, even the most ill-informed Westerner knows that an association exists between the doctrine of Muhammad (as contained in the Koran, the Sira and the Hadith) and intolerance, oppression, violence – values which are not commensurate with Western values or that matter any non-Muslim’s values. By throwing their lot in with Islam, the unsavoury aspects of the doctrine and the practice will rub off on the Left; the average Australian, the average worker, will ask himself what the devil the commies are doing by associating with Islam. Now, it’s quite true that the Trotskyites don’t give a damn for public opinion, and they don’t care for the opinion of the Australian working-classes – in fact, they despise the working-class. All the same, they aren’t doing themselves any favours. They want to portray themselves to the media as the ‘good guys’ who are taking a stand against intolerance, cruelty, etc. But one will ask, quite naturally, if that’s the case, why are they associating with Islam? (Added to that, I think, after this weekend, that the average Australian views the communists themselves as being a violent and intolerant group, which they are).

It would be in the interests of the communists in this country, and the Left as a whole, if the Trotskyites were to ditch their old 1930s-style terror tactics and their new association with Islam. But communists can’t change. As stated before, they live in a bubble universe. I think Jolly and the other communist leaders made their outlandish proclamations of ‘victory’ with one eye on the rank and file of their respective groups; that is, they wanted to keep their spirits up and cheer them on. Communism doesn’t work, nobody in Australia wants it, nobody even in Russia and China wants it; but the Trotskyite cults and grouplets, in order to survive, must pretend that communism is still viable and furthermore that their tactics are working.

Finally, it should be pointed out that the old ‘anti-fascist’ tactics – as pioneered by Trotskyite front groups such as the Anti-Nazi League and Unite Against Fascism – are becoming outmoded as well. The militant Left would make it a practice of taking photographs of nationalists and seeking to obtain their personal details, and then put pressure on their employers to get them fired. But, with the age of social media, nationalists politics in Australia has developed a new transparency – more and more of the leadership, such as Shermon and Blair, are willing to show their faces and use their names. What’s more, too many people are coming to these rallies for the ‘anti-fascists’ to keep track of; the ‘anti-fascists’ aren’t dealing with cults and cliques, small in number, any more.

When watching a news report of the rally in Sydney, the mincing, effeminate spokesman for the Sydney communists declared to the camera that the Reclaimers were all ‘Neo-Nazis and fascists’. The camera then panned across the massed Reclaim crowd – most of them ‘mums and dads’ wearing or waving the Australia flag. (It appeared to be a sea of red, white and blue). As time goes on, the communists will find it harder to maintain that Reclaim is neo-Nazi, fascist, racist, etc. It will become apparent to all that the communists are labouring under the delusion that Australia itself is ‘fascist’, ‘racist’, ‘Nazi’ – Slim Dusty himself was a ‘racist’ and a ‘Nazi’.

It’s at this point that I’ll explain the strategy of the nationalist movement (or that side of the movement which is co-operating and working with Reclaim). We are in the process of building a united front which includes all the nationalist groups and organisations, and welcomes all individual nationalist activists. It doesn’t matter if the person comes from Rise Up Australia, Reclaim, UPF, PDLA, UAF, ADL, Nationalist Alternative, Australia First, Australian Protectionists, Q Society…; he may be a free agent unaffiliated with any group. What matters is that he attends the rallies, obeys the rules (including the dress code) and becomes part of the movement (and this shall be a movement, not a party). The likes of Danny Nallia and Shermon shall be the leaders, and Islam will remain the focus. But long-time, experienced and ideologically-indoctrinated Far Right activists (many who have been struggling for over a decade) shall form the nucleus. They shan’t seek to impose their views on others, and what’s more, at every opportunity they will (quite literally) wrap themselves in the flag and behave as aficionados of Slim Dusty / Cronulla Australian patriotism. This is despite the fact that many of their core ideological principles come from 20th century Europe and America.

Now a certain type of nationalist – who I call the ‘political pedant’ – may object. ‘You are not willing to acknowledge x problem, or y creed. I believe that y or x is the most important thing in the world, while the vast mass of Reclaimers don’t; therefore, I won’t have anything to do with them and I won’t come to your rallies’. I grant that there is a time for sectarian nit-picking and hair-splitting, but now is not the time. I say to the political pedants: do you prefer to participate in a political movement, composed of your fellow Australians, or do you want to remain a party of one person, that is, yourself? How do you expect to get traction for your views by alienating others?

At the moment, the Reclaim ideology consists of little bits and pieces: Aussie patriotism, anti-Islam, a little Zionism here and there… Over time, a division shall emerge in Reclaim between (what I refer to obliquely) the Europeans and the non-Europeans, that is, between the devotees of certain European ideas of the last century and those who are not (and who may even be militantly opposed to them). This division shall come to resemble the split between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. But, to repeat, we find ourselves a long way away – perhaps years, perhaps decades – from when the line is drawn in the sand and the split becomes readily apparent. At the moment, the ‘Europeans’ find themselves in a weak position. For a long time, we must be prepared to conceal our true ideological leanings behind Aussie nationalist camouflage. In the same way, the communists conceal their Marxist-Leninism from the media and portray themselves as simple humanists and ‘socialists’.

We know that, when PEGIDA – the short-lived anti-Islam German populist movement which started in Dresden – first appeared, many hardcore German nationalists joined; they clearly didn’t belong to the East German ‘mums and dads’ segment of society that PEGIDA aimed at appealing to. But they joined with the intention of steering PEGIDA in a more radical direction. They understood that, for years, the post-war German nationalist has been failing, and failing miserably, and that German nationalism simply hadn’t caught on, at least not to the extent that PEGIDA did. They held high hopes for PEGIDA (but regrettably, PEGIDA fell apart fairly quickly, like so many mass movements).

I think that we ‘hardcores’ find ourselves in the same place as those German nationalists who signed up with PEGIDA. Mass movements – especially those on the Far Right – could be compared to fast running trains which only run through our neck of the woods every now and then; it behoves us to jump on board when one does appear. We don’t control the destination, and we’re certainly not the ones driving the train; but, over a course of time, through our faithful service, we shall succeed in gaining some influence with the driver and steering the movement in the right direction. That’s our task.

National Capitalism – A Third Alternative?

via Occident Invicta

We on the Alternative Right share a peculiar aversion of economics. We seldom discuss it, preferring instead to focus our energies on matters pertaining to culture and politics. Nevertheless, Bay Area Guy and I have long maintained that social and cultural stability are not sustainable without economic prosperity. Neo-Liberalism (global capitalism) and Communism have one thing in common –  they are both essentially internationalist ideologies. Neither Communists nor Neo Liberals possess one iota of loyalty to their nations. Where we see nations, Neo-Libs see markets. Where we see people, they see labour pools.

Plutocrats like the Fords and Rockefellers funded feminism throughout the 70s  in an attempt to flood the market with female workers and kill wages. Plutocratic Capitalists push for mass immigration to saturate the market with cheap labour and literally expand their markets by importing potential customers (immigrants). This strategy is effective in the short term since the economies of the U.S and Canada are largely services (tertiary sectors) dominated.

Socialism and Communism in general are terrible systems and there is nothing I can add to the subject that hasn’t already been said before a countless number of times. While there are some benefits to having a welfare state in a homogenous population, such benefits are lost when the welfare state is applied to a multicultural environment. Multicultural environments are divisive by nature and welfare benefits are useful to induce certain groups (immigrants/women) into a state of dependance on the state, to be deployed against the hated white majority.

Welfare benefits, however, also make an effective tool for totalitarian control. The UAE has one of the most generous welfare systems in the world. Granted, the UAE is technically a diverse society (on account of its expat population) nevertheless the benefits apply exclusively to Emirati nationals. Emirati dissidents that vocalize their discontent with government totalitarianism would find their benefits lifeline abruptly cut off. No more government housing and no more subsidized groceries and gas.

Enter National Capitalism

National Capitalism is a term that I’ve borrowed from Alex Wallenwein, but one which I define somewhat differently. I believe that the purpose of Capitalism is to benefit society and nation. That is certainly the model Adam Smith had in mind when he opposed the unholy alliance between monarchy and powerful merchant interests. Capitalism as Smith saw it was merely an economic extension of classical liberalism. It was the economic equivalent of prioritizing individual autonomy, but within an economic context. Smith never imagined that capitalists would become the new merchant class and once again use the cover of the state to pursue their selfish and destructive interests.

The idea behind National Capitalism is to retain the traditional qualities of Capitalism (concentration of the factors of production in the private sector) but without the obsession with deregulation. The goal of national capitalism is to instill in young entrepreneurs a strong and healthy dose of nationalism so that they create businesses that benefit their nations as well as themselves. When I worked as a marketing executive for a local Saskatoon company a couple of years ago, I was tasked with sourcing a set of promotional items for a summer marketing campaign. I complied a list of certain Vancouver companies that I thought offered competitive pricing. My boss, however, politely discarded the list and asked me to source the goods from China instead. A healthy dose of nationalism ensures that a nation’s wealth multiplies and remains in the nation.

One way of doing this is to pay employees a fair wage. Henry Ford paid his employees a highly competitive wage of $5 per day (for the time). These wages not only kept his employees happy, they also enabled his employees to afford his products. The multiplication and retention of wealth within a nation; National Capitalism at its finest.

Companies could also focus on sourcing their production materials locally. This might undoubtedly increase the cost of goods sold, however, it also potentially limits imports and thus reduces the nation’s balance of trade deficit. North American companies may also take a lesson from the Japanese and build lasting relationships with their suppliers and other companies involved with their products and services. The Japanese call this high trust business convention “Keiretsu” and it a uniquely Japanese way of conducting business.

Let us hypothetically assume that a perfume maker has their fragrance contract manufactured from a local business and purchases bottles from another local business. These 3 businesses would then form a close bond by purchasing stock in each others companies. The perfume maker would purchase stock in the fragrance and the bottle manufacturer’s companies and the other 2 would do so likewise. The idea is that either all of them succeed, or none of them do. This is in stark contrast to the way in which American businesses dominate their suppliers into submission.

The Japanese co-operate domestically and compete internationally. They pay their workers decent wages and genuinely care about their customers. What makes the Japanese business outlook so different from the American one? The answer: Nationalism. The Japanese possess a healthy sense of nationalism and are willing to make genuine sacrifices for their nation. Westerners (North Americans in particular) are slaves to profit and care for nothing else. American conservatives (especially Republican traitors) care only about conserving profits and not values and culture. Capitalism is a fine engine for economic growth, but without a healthy sense of nationalism, it is no better than Communism – a small plutocratic elite that overwhelmingly controls the distribution of resources in society.

National Capitalism should also focus on re-orienting our economies towards a manufacturing base. It’s customary to teach first year students of business administration that economies progress from agriculture to manufacturing, and finally, the most advanced stage – Services. I think this simplistic model is a load of nonsense as I tend to be biased in favour of manufacturing. Manufacturing tends to be more labour intensive (although not always) and thus creates jobs. It also produces tangible articles that can be exported thereby possessing the potential to positively impact balance of trade. Manufacturing by its very nature also helps shield a society from the pernicious effects of Cultural Marxism. An economy that produces welders and fabricators will necessarily produce fewer liberal arts and women’s studies majors. An economy that demands technical skills will have no use for Marxist academics and feminists.

This post leaves many questions unanswered and is by no means a manifesto. The purpose of this post is to stimulate discussion on a subject that many do not know how to address. The working definition of Capitalism has become imperceptibly warped over the decades to refer to a system that prioritizes self interest at the expense of everything else; nation included. The East Asians don’t subscribe to this definition of Capitalism and that is why they are beating us.

Jewish Baby Boom: The Coming Gazafication of Europe

via TradYouth

“There was a time in my 20s when everything I learned about the history of racism made me hate myself, my Whiteness, my ancestors… and my descendants,” squawked Ali Michael’s Huffpo act of contrition. “I remember deciding that I couldn’t have biological children because I didn’t want to propagate my privilege biologically.” Ali was writing in defense of Rachel Dolezal, and to encourage the creators and maintainers of Western civilization to forgo reproduction by pretending to be one of us. “If I was going to pass on my privilege, I wanted to pass it on to someone who doesn’t have racial privilege; so I planned to adopt” she followed with anguish.

But there’s a big difference between Jewish Ali Michael and Aryan Rachel Dolezal. Rachel fully distanced herself from her folk and took Ali’s advice to heart by partaking in transracial asexual reproduction (since mulatto kids never seem to have a father). The evils of white privilege embodied by the Dolezal line ended with Rachel, as she turned the race “binary” on its head and ensured she would have no part in producing a child who by his 13th birthday would receive a Red Ryder BB gun and an official Unarmed-Black-Man Hunting License from the Learned Elders of the White Male Power Structure.

But Ali Michael’s “From one white to another, ‘we’ should all hate ourselves and you should feel guilty if you have kids” advice on racial reconciliation doesn’t seem to bode well with her personal life. An important political lesson all host people have learned is that whenever a Jew’s lips are moving, words are fusing together to construct a big, and usually deadly, lie.

Jewess Ali Michael and her Family
Jewess Ali Michael and her Family
Not only is Ali Michael not actually a part of the Western community (instead its historical Jewish antithesis), she also has two biological children (higher than the birth rate of the average couple of virtually every Euro-majority nation) with a fellow Jew, Michael Ramberg.

If Ali’s forked tongue wasn’t infuriating enough, her husband is very much in tune with their truly racist and genocidal culture. He is the head Rabbi and director of the ethnocentric Zionist Hillel organization on the campus of Ursinus College. Her children are raised in a home where the epitome of bigotry, the Talmud, is the head of household’s literal craft.

Both Michael and Ramberg are parents who share race and culture, yet here is Ali, using her media post granted by Jewish (not White!) privilege, to make white Gentiles feel guilty about practicing their human right to reproduce. Even her dissertation on the way to becoming a “Race Consultant” reveals this inner bias by shoveling superlatives on a colleague who yaps on about the superiority of “Jewish Identity” in public school classrooms.

This isn’t a question of cognitive dissonance, as some have theorized. It’s not misguided idealism from the notoriously materialistic tribe. This is Jews when they’re 2%, and don’t have the numbers to treat us like the people of Gaza. This is the passive-aggressive ideological violence that misuses modern technology, weaponizes concentrated capital, and employs blackmail and guilt to convince and compel targets of Jewish venom to gradually thin themselves out.

That is, until Ali and friends figure out the logistics on how to do us like they did the women and children of Cyprus and Cyrene in the Kitos War.

Jewish Baby Boom…Middle East Baby Bust

It seems odd that the global Jewish population is growing at its current immense pace, especially as global trends favor decline in birth rates (including in the third world). It should also be noted that the Jewish population has traditionally been heavily undercounted, so official figures may not quite capture the scope of this demographic rise.

Henry Ford’s researchers dedicated a whole chapter to this question in The International Jew, where they noted that the Jewish population in America was purposely obfuscated in national population counts by using trickery and exploiting technicalities (such as facetiously claiming “Jewish” was a religion, rather than a people, when dealing with Gentile authorities). The reason for this was two-fold: to ease Nativist concerns, as well as to throw off the scent of those looking suspiciously at Woodrow Wilson’s very Jewish political circle. From Wilson on, the traditionally isolationist United States was tranformed into a hated global empire, and its native citizens weren’t happy about the new epoch of permanent costly and deadly adventurism abroad.

In contemporary times the Jewish population worldwide continues to be undercounted by agencies for unknown reasons. One hypothesis could be that this is done to hide discrepancies in the “6 million” atrocity propaganda against the Germans, after the bulk of these 6 million sprung back to life and moved to America and Israel to live happily ever after.

The Jew Donald Kimelman’s Pew Research Center (which deals with a mostly Gentile audience) continued this dishonest habit by promulgating last April (in Jew-for-Gentile media) that Jews would have to wait until the year 2050 to become a paltry 16.1 million worldwide. This figure was recently blown out of the water by the Israeli government commissioned Jewish People Policy Institute, which reported that Jews have already reached this milestone and are currently 16.5 million of the world’s population. An expanded estimate, dealing with individuals who qualify for Israeli citizenship under the country’s race laws, tallies the current Jewish population up to 18.5 million.

While not common knowledge, the Jewish population of Israel has the highest birth rate in the industrialized world, and one of the highest even in the socially conservative, fertile Middle East. At 3.04 children per couple (6.5 for religious Jews), only Yemen, Syria, Jordan and Iraq have a higher birth rate.

What is interesting is that three of these four Arab nations are mired in civil wars that are taking the lives of hundreds of thousands–and in the case of Iraq, millions–of children and young men. The chaos that has erupted in these countries naturally has reduced the population and the birth rate, and Israel is quickly catching up. The catalysts for these wars and deaths, especially in the case of Iraq and Syria, originate with the Zionist controlled United States government, as well Israel itself.

Stability in this region, safe to say, is bad for Jewish interests. Saddam Hussein’s modern and secular Ba’athist socialist project dramatically increased the living standards of Iraqis, reconciled violent tensions between Shia and Sunni, and significantly reduced infant mortality, which by the nineties culminated in Iraq becoming a regional superpower that had the weapons and the men to challenge the oppressive geographical hegemony of the corrupt Arab Gulf States and Israel.

It would be irresponsible to stake the claim, without hard evidence, that Jewish power brokers are purposely creating conditions and conflicts with the sole intent of drastically reducing the birth rate and youth population of countries they see as current or future geopolitical competitors. But the US government’s abusive utilization of the United Nations to compel the world to stop trading food, medicine, and building materials to Iraq after the wanton destruction they endured during the Gulf War–a foreign policy decision that has evoked much curiosity– directly caused the death of 500,000 children under the age of five, and scores of others. Private groups that tried to help relieve this humanitarian crisis even in the most minute ways were punished to the utmost extent of the law by the petty Jews staffing Clinton’s cabinet.

The Jewish Madeline Albright’s chilling response to an inquiry about this man-made famine is at least something to ponder:


In occupied Palestine, where the Israeli government has utilized a variety of avenues to cull the population, the birth rate has plummeted amidst Iraq-style sanctions and perpetual terrorism meant to violently encourage Palestinians to emigrate to Europe and have fewer children. Palestinian fertility has for decades been a subject of neurotic Jewish study, which is mind blowing when one looks at the raw, cynical joy with which they celebrate America’s dwindling white population.

The Israeli military’s doctrine of bombing schools, private residences, refugee centers, and hospitals, with thousands of dead children appearing in the rubble, is done to demoralize the population into submission–as happened with Dresden–but may also be an instrument to slowly put to rest fears of losing Jewish demographic hegemony. Aside from the vastly disproportionate number of small children killed in the 2014 summer attempted invasion of Gaza that prompted worldwide outrage, the siege of Rafah’s hospital and maternity clinic, under attack as doctors and nurses attempted to protect newborn babies seeing light surrounded by scores of stacked corpses, was very symbolic, and led to pleas for mercy by the overwhelmed ministry of health that the United Nations ignored.

In secular Fatah’s West Bank, the birth rate has fallen in conjunction with high emigration rates. In comparison, Jewish colonists moving into West Bank settlements have an astonishing 5 to 7.7 children per family versus the indigenous Palestinian birth rate of 3. Only a fool would say this inverse correlation is a mere coincidence.

Jews Socially Engineer Low White Birth Rate, While Ensuring Their Own Fertility

Those who claim the duality between Jewish “liberalism” in countries that aren’t theirs and fanatical racial supremacism in Israel is derived from cognitive dissonance do not understand them. The extensive retarding effect on Western civilization promulgated by Jewish “intellectuals” versus the borderline neurotic steps to ensure prime conditions for Jewish fertility is not a coincidence.

While proponents of “white suicide” theory have a grain of truth to their claims, the fact of the matter is that most of the economic and social conditions hurting our ability to have families are often exclusively Jewish in origin. The problem of “white suicide” would not exist if Jewish money and nepotism was historically curbed rather than nurtured by primarily liberal Anglo-Saxon (USA and Britain) governments since the times of Cromwell.

The Jewish diaspora, to one degree or another, overwhelmingly supports Israel as a racial state. And Yale’s David B. Davis, in his book In The Image of God (2001) , brags that 76% of America’s most influential intellectuals molding domestic and foreign policy were already Jewish by 1974 (pg. 54). As our elites and social engineers, Jews have earned at least 76% of the blame.

The predominately Jewish role in forcing through or promoting misanthropic, unnatural, and anti-family causes like feminism, neo-liberalism, no-fault divorce, “free love”, abortion, open borders immigration, miscegenation, etc. has been well documented elsewhere. I will focus on how radically different policy in Israel is, in contrast with the vast majority of Jewish individuals (like Ali Michael) and groups fomenting our destruction:

1. No Fault Divorce

The extraordinarily high divorce rate in the West is initiated overwhelmingly by bored women who are provided with generous incentives to destroy their family through socially sanctioned hypergamy. This institution is considered by men to be a massive con when weighing the prospect, or investment, of commitment. In Israel, Jewish men (secular or religious) do not have to worry. The only way a woman can be granted a divorce (or get married) is through a religious court overseen by Rabbis, and only after proving extreme abuse.

While Jews proudly proclaim that the concept of no-fault divorce they champion in our countries is rooted in Judaism, in the Israeli legal system women are only granted such an arbitrary separation after receiving express written consent from their husbands. Is it any wonder that Israel has one of the lowest divorce rates (Rebecca Torstick, Culture and Customs of Israel; pg 131) in the entire “Western” [sic] world?

2. Abortion

If there is one cause organized Jewry in the West has a consensus on, it’s the murder of the Gentile unborn. 14 of 28 religious organizations in the “Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice” are Jewish, including the “Women’s League for Conservative Judaism” and Israel-based women’s organization NA’AMAT. It’s worth it to mention that in the 1970‘s, NA’AMAT blew feminist minds by opposing Knesset member Marcia Freedman’s attempt to transplant Roe v. Wade verbatim, which they fanatically endorse in America, to the Jewish state.

In Jewish law, fetuses are not considered human, and abortion is not forbidden. In Israel, legal qualifications in practice only allow women to terminate their pregnancies when their life is threatened, their child has a severe genetic defect, they have conceived through sexual assault or incest, or they are either minors or over forty.

The most drastic difference between Israeli abortion policy and the West, however, is that each woman seeking this service must go before a special committee composed of doctors and social workers to make a case for why she wants to get an abortion. While the strictness of each committee varies, this additional hoop and lack of anonymity has made Jewish women reluctant compared to their Western counterparts. It goes without saying that if a law requiring a bureaucratic cross-examination for an abortion was passed in a white country, organized Jewry would be all over it like a dime bouncing off the floor of a Brooklyn Synagogue.

What is interesting is that Israel’s passive discouragement of abortion isn’t rooted in any moral or religious tradition. According to a New York Times editorial on the matter, it is an emotionally detached and pragmatic socio-political act intended to expand the Jewish race:
“Terminating pregnancies is considered counterintuitive to Zionism, which requires a booming Jewish birthrate to buttress the nationalist claim on the land. The main impetus for legalizing abortion was concern about women’s health and the socioeconomic circumstances of large, poor families, particularly following the wave of Jewish immigration from the Middle East and North Africa. Reproductive autonomy for women was not an integral part of the legislators’ considerations.
Religious fundamentalists in Israel aren’t particularly vocal on the issue. Efrat, the major anti-abortion group in Israel, was founded in 1962 by a Holocaust survivor and originally called the Association for the Encouragement of the Increase in the Birthrate Among the Jewish People.”

3. Economics

Libertarian and conservative Israel-apologists have selective memory when it comes to talking about the Zionist country that organizes wealth in a socialist fashion. Israel’s public health system is easily one of the most meticulous and generous programs of its kind in the world, and 93.5% of land is owned and allocated by the state (which confiscates Arab property in regions such as Galilee, and redistributes it through lease to Jewish settlers).

Economic planning in Israel posits the state as the guardian of the racial collective, and is tailored to stimulate birth rates and provide financial incentives to large families. The Jewish state is more or less a parasitic, Talmudic, and bastardized version of National Socialism, but sorely lacking in Hitler’s ethical Weltanschauung: self-reliance and nationalism for all races.

Israel produces few things of note and spends a higher percentage of its GNP on its military than North Korea, yet, their economy is largely free of international finance assaults, and thus the Jewish people are entitled to a menu of pro-natalist benefits most people in the West can only dream of. Nations like Sweden have similar social policies, but the major difference is that Sweden’s welfare state disproportionately benefits its large non-white population, while Israel has devised a number of tricks to make it difficult for its indigenous Arab citizens to apply.

The national “Fund for Encouraging Birth” (aimed solely at Jews, which would ignite a firestorm from the same people if paralleled in a white country on these terms), gives expecting young families interest-free loans to purchase housing, a valuable commodity more and more Americans, especially those of us in our prime breeding years (18-35) have reduced access to. The fruits of the system aiding in home ownership (and thus nests to start a family) are seen today, with 70% of Israelis being the proprietors of the roof over their heads (OECD Economic Surveys: Israel 2011) vs 42% of Germans, 55% of Frenchmen, and 68% of Americans.

Countries like Spain and Slovenia have somewhat higher rates of home ownership than Israel, but these are mostly inherited dwellings from long gone policies enacted under communism or Francisco Franco’s government. Nonetheless, the fairly young Jewish state is one of the OECD’s leaders in this regard.

Other programs, such as the Law For Family Blessed with Children, attach additional carrots on sticks for especially fertile Jewish couples. The Veteran’s Family Allowance Scheme, established in 1970, significantly multiplies the existing universal monthly child subsidies provided (which increase substantially after the 4th child) for individuals that serve to any extent in the armed forces. The last policy was created to give Jews an additional leg up against Palestinians, since the vast majority of Israelis are legally compelled to serve in some branch of the IDF, while Arabs are forbidden from joining.

Lastly, the Israeli state has sought to artificially engineer a high birth rate by providing the latest in in vitro fertilization, no questions asked, and at no personal cost. Israel has at this point clinched its position as world leader in IVF births through this public service, while at the same time the Israeli health care system does not provide assistance for contraception. Of course, in America, Zionist organizations united as one to try and force the “Hobby Lobby” chain to provide free contraception to its majority white staff across the country. But mysteriously, in the state that enjoys their true allegiance, sperms meet eggs, eggs are laid in nests, and little chicklets are fed, clothed, educated, and martially trained by the racial commune as one.

Ayn Rand’s individualist acid may have corroded the brains of goy conservatives, but she lavishes praise onto John Galt-berg when he pays Israel’s 50% capital gains tax on his corporate profits:


Europe in 2250 (If the Jews are not stopped)

Western people are pretty much reproducing at below replacement level, and the economic and social factors that have coalesced to slowly sterilize us are largely Jewish in origin. Jews have long surpassed us in the baby war, and the agony of racial decline is painful enough on its own merit. I bet the prospect of Europe’s children becoming Gazans in a few generations may have never crossed your mind, …but it plays in neurotic reruns in theirs.

This emerging dynamic can already be seen in the thinly veiled hypotheticals of Jewish policy-making think tanks. The highly influential Jewish intellectual, David P. Goldman, licks his lips with allusions to the “prospects” of a future Jewish population with more military age men than fragmented and weak Europe’s largest nations. In an entry for The Jewish Policy Center titled “Israel’s Demographic Miracle”, Goldman wrote of the possibilities as follows:
“An Israeli fertility rate of nearly 3 births per woman exceeds the industrial nations’ norm by such a wide margin that Israel—assuming that fertility remains unchanged—will have a larger population than Poland by 2085. Poland’s median age, moreover, will be 57, an outcome impossible for the Polish state to manage (because the majority of Poles in that case would be elderly dependents), while Israel’s median age will be only 32. Even more remarkable is that Israel will have more young people than Italy or Spain and as many as Germany by the end of the century if fertility remains unchanged. A century and a half after the Holocaust, that is, the Jewish State will have more military-age men, and will be able to field a larger land army, than Germany.”
The specific singling out of Poland, Germany, Italy, and Spain in this comparison is interesting. Goldman’s prediction could also apply to more visible world powers than Poland, such as the United Kingdom and France, but he consciously omitted them as his winked-at implications would not have made sense by mentioning two historical cats-paws of world Jewry. In Spain, Jews squirm with anger when they speak of their expulsion after the Reconquista; a reaction to their central role as white slavers under the Moors. In Poland, the nation that had accepted a massive wave of Jewish emigres with open arms and unprecedented tolerance (illustrated by the Magdeburg Law), “mysteriously” turned against the largest Jewish population in Europe.

The zenith comes with Goldman’s use of the inflammatory “Holocaust” blood libel while bragging about the ability for a future racial Jewish state to field a larger army than the Germans only requires a little bit of reading between the lines. While most “Holocaust survivors” know that the gas chambers are at best, a folk legend, and at worse, a lie–the collective Jewish memory continues to despise Germans in accordance with Talmudic law. The German revolution forcefully removed Jews from the most important sectors of national life (finance, academia, media) and only years later united the world against the globalization they needed to retain their dominion. To Jews, this alone is enough to warrant their genocide, even though the original National Socialists are all dead and buried.

Imagine Europe in 2250, where only 20% of the population is European, and the rest of the country is an incoherent multicultural mess. The possibilities for Israel employing a Middle East-style “divide and conquer” strategy that fans contradictions that are racial, and thus more substantial, than what we see in the sectarianism of the Arab world today, are not far fetched. Amidst the chaos, a global Jewish population of hundreds of millions could once and for all emerge from the shadows and physically execute the threats they candidly fling in our direction with obscure and contradictory little footnotes to avoid alert. Except they won’t need to hide behind pseudo-science qualifiers like “white privilege”, nor the unsophisticated thuggery of the non-whites they incite against us.

This isn’t a paranoid “what if.” This is something Jews openly muse about, so just imagine what they talk about when they’re in private amongst themselves having drinks. I’m not quoting the Protocols of Zion, Daniel D. Perlmutter wrote about this in a hair-raising editorial for the Los Angeles Times:
“Israel has been building nuclear weapons for 30 years. The Jews understand what passive and powerless acceptance of doom has meant for them in the past, and they have ensured against it. Masada was not an example to follow—it hurt the Romans not a whit, but Samson in Gaza? What would serve the Jew-hating world better in repayment for thousands of years of massacres but a Nuclear Winter. Or invite all those tut-tutting European statesmen and peace activists to join us in the ovens? For the first time in history, a people facing extermination while the world either cackles or looks away—unlike the Armenians, Tibetans, World War II European Jews, or Rwandans—have the power to destroy the world. The ultimate justice?”
The Jew Martin Van Creveld reiterated this sentiment, by promising the world nuclear holocaust if Israel were to be overthrown by the Second Intifada:
“We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: “Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.” I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.”
Just imagine if these Jews had the means to back up their insolent mouths with tanks and an air force to fly over our grandchildren or great grandchildren in a future majority mulatto, balkanized Europe with no ability to retaliate. These aren’t random lunatics; these are influential Jewish intellectuals and policy makers making these remarks.

If you’re not politically active, it’s urgent you start now before it’s too late.

Jews Promote Homosexual Marriage in America but Outlaw it in Israel

via The New Observer

All official Jewish groups and organizations in America have welcomed the Supreme Court’s ruling that homosexual marriage is legal throughout the country—but these same Jewish organizations also all back Israel, which has outlawed homosexual marriage completely.

According to an article in the Times of Israel, the American Jewish Committee (AJC) celebrated the recent Supreme Court ruling extending marriage rights to homosexuals throughout the United States with a Twitter message which read:
“For 109 years AJC has stood for liberty and human rights. Today is a happy day for that proud tradition ?#LoveWins.” It was punctuated with a heart emoticon splashed orange, yellow, green blue and purple—the colors appropriated by the homosexual lobby.
The Times of Israel continued:
The contrast between an organization founded at the launch of the last century celebrating the rights embraced by Americans only at the launch of this one was emblematic of the glee with which much of the Jewish establishment reacted to the ruling.
The Anti-Defamation League, in its own tweet, left out its age (102) but also got in the hashtag, #LoveWins, and that funny little heart.
Thirteen Jewish groups, among them organizations representing the Reform, Reconstructionist and Conservative streams, were among the 25 joining the amicus brief the ADL filed in Obergefell v. Hodges.
The preeminence of Jewish groups among those backing the litigants was not a surprise. In recent decades, much of the Jewish establishment has embraced gay marriage as a right equivalent to the others it has advocated, including racial equality, religious freedoms and rights for women.
Multiple groups, in their statements, cited the passage in Genesis that states humans were created “in the image of God,” which has for decades been used by Jewish civil rights groups to explain their activism.
“Jewish tradition reminds us that we were all created equally, b’tzelem Elohim, in the ‘image of God’ (Genesis 1:27), and also shows us that marriage is a sacred responsibility, not only between the partners, but also between the couple and the larger community,” the Conservative movement’s Rabbinical Assembly said in a statement.
The Times of Israel added that Jewish groups were also now looking to “next steps in advancing LGBT rights, including in the workplace.”

ADL-gayrights

JPOST-ADL_GAY_MARRIAGE

However, in the Jews-only state of Israel, which all these Jewish organizations unconditionally support, homosexual marriage has been specifically outlawed.
As reported in the homosexual activist newspaper, Pink News, “legislation for the option of civil marriage for Israeli citizens who cannot be wed via religious institutions, including same-sex marriage and marriages between members of different faiths, like Muslims and Jews,” has been specifically rejected by the Israeli parliament, or Knesset.

Pink-News01

According to Pink News, currently “only a select set of religious institutions, for example the Chief Rabbinate, are sanctioned to authorize marriage in Israel. As a result LGBT and mixed faith couples cannot be legally wed or have an equivalent of civil marriage in the country, or even a weaker concept of partnership.

Furthermore, according to Pink News, “Israel refuses to weigh requests for asylum by LGBT people fleeing persecution, including LGBT Palestinians.”
In other words, Israel, which is the darling of all the Jewish organizations in America, outlaws not only homosexual marriage but even marriage between Jews and non-Jews.
At the same time, Israel-supporting Jewish organizations in America and elsewhere are the biggest promoters of homosexual marriage and interracial marriage (for non-Jews), and have even been credited by Vice President Joe Biden as having “driven gay marriage changes” in the US.

YNet-queers1

Why would the Jews promote a policy in America and the West, which they themselves outlaw in their own country, Israel?

The only answer must be that the Jewish lobby knows very well that the promotion of homosexual “marriage,” transgenderism, and other mental illnesses are detrimental to the orderly functioning of society.

The promotion of homosexual marriage is part of a deliberate attack upon traditional European culture and normal family life, which has for thousands of years held fast to the notion that marriage is a bond between male and female, the existence or otherwise of homosexuals notwithstanding.

The Jews understand this very well, and this is the reason why they will not allow this attack on family values to take root in Israel—but are determined to see it promoted and propagated in order to further the destruction and dissolution of the European people.

Propaganda, Part 3

via Western Spring

Part 1
Part 2

For the third and final part of this series we shall look at how we can affect change on mainstream consciousness in order to achieve our ultimate objective: to secure the existence of our people and a future for White children.

Television

It almost a cliché amongst racial nationalists that ‘the Jews’ – or more precisely, a coterie of White hating Jews – control what we are able to watch on TV. Like so many clichés, this belief is close to the truth but it doesn’t take into account the multiplicity of factors that define the various TV networks, and so to claim as many people do, that if ‘the Jews’ were ousted from their control of the mainstream media we would all suddenly be receiving pure and unsullied TV output that underpins our ideas is absurd.

Due to years of programming and mental conditioning under our current education system, most of the Gentiles working within the mainstream media are just as anti-White as their many Jewish bosses and colleagues, and so we have to look at the mainstream media as an almost monolithic enemy power where we have no friends.

We cannot, therefore, expect any positive media attention or coverage by these people at all. We must develop a mode of operation that the media can’t ignore – that they are compelled to cover, so that our target audience of ethnocentric Whites, know that we exist and by default get to know that there is a way out of this multicultural nightmare that’s been forced onto us. We can’t however expect the mass media to provide coverage of our activities and ideas on the TV without them doing two things; presenting us as toothless buffoons, or as sinister, potential mass-murderers who have no place in a civilised society.

The Internet

Recently, Nick Grifford (Win White/Rags Make Paper) made the extremely perspicuous observation that many ‘right-wing’ or White nationalist websites are ineffective if not counterproductive, and we have to say, he’s speaking the truth.

We have Stormfront: a forum over-run with state agents and mindless, infighting bigots, both of which groups are intent on hindering our progress.

We have various other websites dedicated to recording and listing, anti-White crimes, but without offering any positive course of action beyond childish and hollow threats revenge, and let us not forget that we have various ‘’far-right’’ websites that seem obsessed, amongst other things; with America’s latest attacks against hostile powers in the Middle East; the rather boring Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with a morass of material explaining how bad it is for the White race, again, without offering any solutions.

We can’t, of course, control the output of everyone in the nationalist movement but we should strive to coalesce around certain key ideas and one in particular, and keep on repeating it until all genuine people in the movement understand that the time for talking is over.

The evidence for the success of this approach has been Daily Stormer’s recent declaration that they see the White Enclave Movement as the only solution to our current crisis. This is good news and we must, therefore, start moving towards the ‘propaganda of the deed’ and use the Internet as a tool to show our progress.

Propaganda of the Deed: The White Enclave Movement

Putting aside the invidious nature of the mainstream media and all their lies, we have to acknowledge another factor in our race’s decline: our culture and our genetics. All over our nation, except in places like Ulster, our people live as atomised consumer units whose primary value is their own individualised concept of happiness.

The pay-offs for this mode of existence is freedom. In a world where you don’t have to believe anything in particular, where you can believe anything you want, you are free to pursue your own self-defined concept of truth and this results in the various whacky displays of individualism that we see all around us.

Kevin MacDonald, the author of Culture of Critique, concluded that this individualism is a corollary of our Darwinian past where most of our adaptations were geared towards struggling against the environment, and not other groups; meaning that we are more prone to social isolation as indicated in single households becoming widespread amongst the North European people, and with the growth of the State in the late Medieval period.

Let’s be very clear: we must develop a network of interconnected racial strongholds throughout our country otherwise our race is going to become extinct. This means that we have to shake off our natural inclination towards individualism, become more collective in our outlook, and coalesce around a single unifying idea that must become the core aim of our movement: the creation of a White Independent Nation.

‘White-only areas’ means what it says; White-only areas. Enforced from the top down through local activism, arts and culture. We must create communities where everyone understands that we do not accept multicultural Britain and the benefit of this will be a sense of racial unity that will result in higher public trust, a huge pool of potential activists, and security against the injustices being thrown at us by the anti-White system.

Due to our insistence upon the acceptance of this core idea and our non-acceptance of dissent, these areas will feel different to multicultural Britain where White people have been laying down as victims for far too long; but the sense of community, the fact that anti-White crimes such as organized Muslim paedophile gangs will not be tolerated, and the sense of shared purpose, will have an effect on mainstream consciousness, if we can build these communities, within our lifetimes and manage to sustain them, which of course we can.

Propaganda of the deed: we must create areas where there are British pubs, British cafes, British schools, British police, British politicians, British book shops, British cultural centres, British community festivals, British sports clubs, and so on; so that anyone who visits these places makes the realisation that it is possible to escape multiculturalism and to join a real community of people who will back them to the gates of hell.

The message will get out and this is the kind of message we need to become deeply embedded into the psyche of every White person in Britain! If we can manage to do this, massive change will follow!

To conclude this series, I have to make a personal appeal to anybody reading these words to do more, please join Western Spring or Win-White.

Don’t fall into the trap of thinking of ‘Our Cause’ as something that should only be fought for if it doesn’t involve personal sacrifice. This way of thinking is weak and totally non-Aryan.

Sadly, many of our people are so corrupted by the individualism, the materialism, and the consumerism promoted by the mass media, they do not care enough about the survival of our race. However we have the opportunity to alter our situation and shape our own circumstances, if only we are prepared think collectively, prepared to sacrifice for the common good and exert the effort required. There are millions of White people who can be reached with this new idea of building a White Independent Nation and so each of us has to make the commitment to not just support this idea, but to live it. This is ‘propaganda of the deed’ and it is so much more powerful than mere words!

Israel Lobby, Jewish Billionaires Immediately Trash Iran Deal

via The Realist Report

I thought there was no such thing as an "Israel lobby"? Isn't that a "bigoted, anti-Semitic canard"? The Jewish Daily Forward reports:
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) said in a statement it was “deeply concerned” that the deal “would fail to block Iran’s path to a nuclear weapon and further entrench and empower the leading state sponsor of terror.”

The considerable clout of pro-Israel interests on Capitol Hill will play an important role in deciding the fate of the pact, hammered out in Vienna after many months by Iran, the United States, Britain, China, France, Russia and Germany.

Congressional votes on the deal, which got a rough initial reception from Republican lawmakers, were not expected until September. Regardless of Israeli lobbying, however, odds were slim that U.S. lawmakers would be able to derail the deal.

AIPAC has 11 registered lobbyists in Washington and spends about $3 million a year on lobbying, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics, a watchdog group that monitors lobbying expenditures and campaign finance.

AIPAC is widely viewed as the most influential group in the United States advancing the Israeli government’s agenda. 
“Few lobbies dedicated to international issues are so active and well-financed as the Israel lobby,” the center said of pro-Israel organizations generally.

Israeli Minister of Public Security Gilad Erdan, speaking to Israel’s Army Radio, said his government “must focus and explain all of the holes in this agreement” and “hopefully the Congress and Senate will see the truth.” [...]

Some of the lobbying will be aimed at Jewish members of Congress, who will be influential voices in the upcoming debate. Two of them are so far withholding judgment: Senator Benjamin Cardin, the senior Senate Foreign Relations Committee Democrat; and Senator Charles Schumer, the No. 3 Senate Democrat.

Besides lobbying, 2016 political campaign contributions to members of the U.S. Congress are expected to be dangled.

In 2014, pro-Israel groups contributed $11.9 million to congressional candidates, with $6.8 million going to Democrats and $5.1 million to Republicans, according to the center.

Among the top recipients were Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senator John Cornyn, the No. 2 Senate Republican, and Representative Steny Hoyer, the No. 2 House Democrat.

Meanwhile, Sheldon Adelson, a U.S. billionaire businessman and outspoken critic of the Iran negotiations, could also use his vast financial resources to try to influence Congress.

In 2012, Adelson pumped $92.8 million into Republican “super PACs,” the center said, making him the single highest contributor to outside groups that year. [...]
According to professional Jewish advocates, such as Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League, the very idea that there is such a thing as "the Israel lobby" or that it wields enormous, dominating influence in Washington, DC and  American politics generally is an "anti-Semitic canard."

And yet here we have a well-established and respected Jewish newspaper - The Jewish Daily Forward - openly reporting on the network of pro-Israel political lobbying organizations, along with a number of plutocratic Jewish billionaires who finance and fund the election campaigns of major political candidates (especially at the presidential level), who are determined to undermine and derail the internationally negotiated deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The Jewish state of Israel and its international network of advocates and partisans are determined to undermine any sort of peaceful, respectable, and diplomatic solution to any of the problems between America and the wider Western world on one hand, and the Islamic world on the other.

The Jewish strategy of the 21st century is to pit the West against the Islamic world in a never-ending "clash of civilizations," where the American military and her NATO allies are to be engaged in a "Global War on Terrorism" - a paradigm of foreign policy conjured up entirely by Jewish intellectuals and Israeli military and geopolitical strategists in the late 1970s - against a faceless, manufactured "enemy" known as "radical Islam" in an effort to advance Israel's geopolitical agenda in the Middle East.

Unfortunately, this Jewish strategy has been highly successful, especially following 9/11, a false flag attack organized and executed by Jewish criminals in key positions of power and influence in the American government and mass media, an event that was used to initiate and institutionalize the fraudulent "Global War on Terrorism".

It is past time that the American people recognize these basic facts.