Sep 10, 2015

The Diversity Agenda: White Genocide

via The End of Zion

Here is the U.N. General Assembly’s definition of Genocide:
Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Article III: The following acts shall be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide;
(e) Complicity in genocide.
So only White people can be “racist,” right? WRONG!

Watch the following two minute video and you will see that there is an plan of genocide against White people by many racist non-Whites, which our treasonous, enemy-owned media covers up, all the while claiming that we are the racist ones:


Here are some more genocidal anti-White statements:

Jewish comedian Louis C.K.:
I love being white I really do. Seriously, if you’re not white you’re missing out because this sh** is pearly good. Let me be clear by the way, I’m not saying that white people are better. I’m saying that being white is clearly better, who could even argue?
I don’t want to go to the future and find out what happens to white people because we’re going to pay hard for this sh**, you gotta know that … we’re not just gonna fall from number 1 to 2. They’re going to hold us down and f*** us in the ass forever and we totally deserve it

Here are the lyrics to the NOFX song ‘Kill all the White Man.’ (NOFX is comprised of 2 Jews, one Mexican and one self-hating, trashy White guy. The song lyrics are written by the Jews:
Oh yeah, kill all the white man,
Oh yeah, kill all the white man.
The white man call himself civilized,
Cause he know how to take over,
The white man come to pillage my village,
Now he tell me I have to bend over.
Oh yeah, kill all the white man,
Oh yeah, kill all the white man.
No I do not like the white man up in me,
He rape my people as he rape my country,
Everything I love and cherish, he try to take away,
We will be rid of him, soon come the day.
Oh yeah, kill all the white man,
Oh yeah, kill all the white man.

Mexican leaders agitate for the murder of Whites and the Mexican conquest of the Southwest United States constantly through either violence or demographic displacement, or some combination of the two. Again, this is covered up by the media.

Professor Jose Gutierrez of La Raza (“the race”) is on record, on American soil, saying “the gringo must be eliminated.” He has also said:
We are millions. We just have to survive. We have an aging White America. They are not making babies. They’re dying. It’s a matter of time. The EXPLOSION is in our population.


There’s no end to quotes such as these. Every other group in the world looks out for their own interests and is never criticized for it, except for Whites, who by and large DON’T look out for their interests.

I think it’s about time we start, before it’s too late.

Our Big, Fat, Beautiful Dog Whistle

via Radix

For months now, Donald Trump’s “Overton Window” has been moving in a radical direction. He went from denouncing illegal-immigrant criminals—low-hanging fruit, which amounts to an anecdotal understanding of the demographic transformation across (formerly) European countries—to waxing existential about the American nation in his campaign’s immigration statement and declaring “they must go!” 

Then come comments about a “Big, Fat, Beautiful, Open Door” for legal immigrants, and The Donald seems to be floating towards Cuckservatism. . .


We could go into how both legal immigration (as it’s currently constituted) and illegal immigration are part of the same evil trend. Should we really care if migrants filled out the paperwork correctly and took a stupid civil test? Illegal immigration is, in fact, far better than legal, as it does not grant citizenship. And the good thing about the “illegals” is that they often go back. 

But the fact is, Trump—for all his bluster about going to the greatest schools and getting the greatest grades—most likely has never thought through the meanings of race and nationalism with a great deal of seriousness. (Among his generation, he is hardly alone.)

Tutoring politicians is the primary role of a political vanguard, which should never blindly support or endorse any politician, like so many conservatives get excited about “their man.” The vangaurd, to the contrary, pushes all of them, all of political culture, into radical directions . . . against the will of established powers and into directions the participants may not fully understand.

Looking at the question from another perspective, Trump is expressing the deeply symbolic nature of the immigration issue. By “symbolic,” I don’t mean that immigration is not a real issue with palpable and often immediate effects. What I mean is that when we talk about immigration, we’re really talking about something else.

Concern over “illegal” immigration really means concern over White displacement by Hispanics and other non-Whites. In other words, when a conservative says “illegal immigrant,” he or she is thinking of a dangerous Mexican gang member. Support for “legal” immigration, on the other hand, means that people have a hard time actively opposing the immigration of smart White people (and, to a less extent, Asians). When people talk about how great legal immigration is, they are imagining a Norwegian PhD in biochemistry. Leftists are thus entirely correct when they claim that the immigration debate is filled with racial “dog whistles.”

Two years ago, Trump sounded some of these when he mentioned his desire to increase European immigration. (He was quickly scolded for it by a watchful Republican.)
“Nobody wants to say it, but I have many friends from Europe, they want to come in,” Trump said. “Tremendous people, hard-working people. They can't come in. I know people whose sons went to Harvard, top of their class, went to the Wharton School of finance, great, great students. They happen to be a citizen of a foreign country. They learn, they take all of our knowledge, and they can't work in this country. We throw them out. We educate them, we make them really good, they go home -- they can't stay here -- so they work from their country and they work very effectively against this. How stupid is that?”
[Rep. Ruben] Hinojosa [(R-Tex.)] called Trump’s message “an ill-informed economic myth” with racial undertones.
Our job, to borrow the language of psychoanalysis, is to make what was once unconscious, conscious.

"Humanitarian" Interventions Generally Makes Things Worse

via The Occidental Observer

Editor's Note: The following interview with Alain de Benoist was first published in Boulevard Voltaire; translated from the French by Tom Sunic


*****

Q: The photo of that Syrian child stranded on the beach is now in the process of turning a new page in European opinion. In our epoch of “storytelling” it evidently suggests that the migrant issue is a “human drama.”

Of course it is a “human drama.” One must have dry heart or be blinded by hatred if not recognizing it. Muslims threatened by jihadist Islamism, entire families fleeing the Middle East destabilized by Western policies — of course this is a “human drama.” But this is also a political issue and even an issue of geopolitics. Hence the need to figure out the relationship between the political sphere and the humanitarian sphere. Well, experience has shown that “humanitarian” interventions generally only aggravate matters further. The dominance of the legal categories over the political categories is one of the major causes of the impotence of the states.

The migratory tsunami which we are witnessing is adding up to a disaster. First, there was a calculation based on thousands of refugees, then tens of thousands, then hundreds of thousands. As of now more than 350,000 migrants have crossed the Mediterranean over the recent months. Germany has agreed to accept 800,000 of them, far more than the entire registry of its own birth rates each year. We are way ahead of the interstitial immigration of thirty years ago! Faced with such an onslaught the European countries are asking themselves: “How are we going to welcome them?” Never do they ask themselves:  “How are we going to prevent them from coming in?” Even the French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius considers “scandalous” the attitude of the countries wishing to close their borders. Will it be the same way when the number of migrants’ entries is counted by the millions? Will the politicians be then more concerned about countless “human dramas” happening in the world right now than about the common good of their fellow citizens? This is the heart of the matter.

Q: Beyond the emotions triggered by the “shock of the photos”, which arguments are being offered by those who want to convince us of the merit of the migrations?

Those arguments are being displayed on the two levels; first the moral argument (“these are our brothers, we have a moral obligation to them“); and then the economic argument (judging by the words of William Lacy Swing, the Chief Executive of the International Organization for Migration;  “Migrations are necessary if we want a prosperous economy.”  The first argument scrambles together private and personal morality with public and political morality, both of them having their origin in the belief in universalism. Those who use these arguments consider that before being a Frenchman, a German, a Syrian or a Chinese, individuals are “human beings” first, that is to say, they belong in an immediate fashion to humanity, whereas in fact they belong to humanity in a mediate fashion through specific culture in which they were born and which they have inherited. For them, the world is inhabited by abstract, rootless “persons” whose common trait is interchangeability. As for cultures — they see them only as epiphenomena. This is what Jacques Attali  said in the Cadmos magazine in 1981: “For me, European culture does not exist, nor has it ever existed.”

The Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations has recently released a report about the European countries which says that in the absence of the replacement migrations the population decline is inevitable.” It also states that “for Europe, as a whole, what is needed is twice the level of immigration, as recorded in the 1990s” — barring which the retirement age will be pushed to 75. Europe is aging, immigration will save it; this is the perfect illustration of the idea that men are interchangeable, regardless of their origin. Therefore economic imperatives must prevail over all other imperatives. The ethics of “human rights” is only a cover-up for financial interests.

Q: Unquestionably there is also a demographic aspect to it. You know those words by the former Algerian President Houari Boumédiène), which the right-wing folks always like harping on:  “Some day millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere and move to the Northern Hemisphere. They won’t go there as friends; they’ll go there in order to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The belly of our women will secure us victory.”  Is this the Big Replacement? 

According to some, Boumédiène must have uttered these remarks in February 1974 at the 2nd Islamic Summit in Lahore, Pakistan, According to others, he said those words on April 10, 1974, from the rostrum of the UN. This uncertainty is revealing, especially as the full text of this alleged speech of his has never been made public by anybody. Houari Boumédiène, who was not a fool, knew  well that the Middle East is in the Northern Hemisphere, not in the Southern Hemisphere! So there is a good chance that this is an apocryphal text.

As far as this topic is concerned it is more prudent to listen to demographers. The population of the African continent has risen from 100 million in 1900 to over a billion today. In the 2050, or thirty-five years down the road, there will be between two and three billion Africans, with four billion by the end of the century.  Although demographic relationships cannot be reduced to a communicating vessels phenomenon, it would be naive to expect that such a prodigious population growth, which we ourselves have also fostered, will have no impact on the future migrations. As Bernard Lugan notes: “how can we hope that migrants will stop their rush into the European “paradise” if this  “paradise” is undefended and inhabited by old men? “The Big Replacement? Well, personally, I prefer to speak about “the Great Transformation.” In my opinion the Big Replacement will occur with the replacement of the man by the machine, that is to say the substitution of artificial intelligence to human intelligence. A danger far closer than we can possibly imagine.

Snowpiercer: A Glimpse into Israel’s Endgame

via TradYouth

About two years ago a South Korean movie studio made a little piece called  Snowpiercer (2013).  It’s the best little movie that you might not have heard of.  In fact, it almost didn’t come to America at all because of a disagreement between the director and the Weinstein Company.  This movie’s greatest claim to fame is not that it fought tooth-and-nail to make its way out of art house cinemas for wider release.  No, this movie’s claim to fame is that it managed to sneak in a pro-hierarchy film into an egalitarian film industry.

In this post-apocalypse future the world is doomed to an eternal winter after a coalition of at least 76 countries agreed to disperse chemical coolant “CW7” into the upper atmosphere.  CW7 was supposed to return the world’s temperatures to the “finest levels” and thus remove the dangers of global warming.  You guessed it: environmental engineering resulted in mankind’s near-total destruction, not its salvation.  If this movie were made by White Nationalists it would have been a story about how Israel trapped every other nation on Earth into a grovelling subservience.

The weather in Snowpiercer is a play on contemporary fears of global warming adding relevancy and timeliness to the story.  The weather is, of course, a permanent and deathly cold freezing winter.  The weather is cold, the train is warm.  The train is a political system and its classes are segmented and separated into successively higher ranked cars.  To live outside of your allotted station in life is to suffer the freezing death of exposure.  That’s what the cold is:  it’s the doom that awaits people who try to buck the system.  We have a more-or-less similar apparatus in place right now.  Our opposition’s greatest tool is economic terrorism.  Outspoken or active White Nationalists are chased out of the scene after their employers receive threatening calls or are simply informed that they are employing an evilnaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews. It’s hard to raise a family let alone pay bills when no respectable white collar employer will have you.

Curtis Everett is a tail-section passenger planning a rebellion against the train’s creator, Wilford.  He wants better living conditions, food and treatment for the tail-sectioners and he wants to do all of this by taking over the train and deposing Wilford from the engine car.  His #2, Edgar, was born on the train and he doesn’t know anything of the outside world and Curtis is just silly enough to tell him “We’ll be different when we get there.”  Spoiler alert:  No, you won’t.

The tail section is policed by armed guards.  The guards distribute protein blocks for food.  The guards perform head-counts to see how many people are in the tail section.  The guards perform “health inspections” on the children at Wilford’s behest, and it’s after one of these inspections where a child is stolen by one of Wilford’s henchmen to replace a “missing part” on the train that Curtis launches the revolt.  Curtis and the other tail section occupants refused to revolt prior to this because they feared the guards would shoot them.  However, Curtis believed the guards were using empty weapons having fired all of their rounds during the last large revolt.  And he was right.  The only reason the guards could treat the tail section passengers so poorly was because they let them do so out of fear.  Police have no power and if the people rise up and revolt all at once the police are powerless to stop it.

During a fight against a well-equipped army of ax-wielding henchmen Curtis has to make a choice to let Edgar die or to stop a high-level train official from escaping.  He lets Edgar die.  Even at this early point Curtis has already begun his transformation into something other than a tail-sectioner.  Curtis isn’t able to take anyone with him to the top, to the sacred engine.  The people who help him to the top are either self-interested in escaping or will die trying to help him.

All hail Wilford.  He was just a super-smart kid who wanted to grow up and build a luxury train, right?  RIGHT?   No.  He’s not.  The train isn’t “just a train” in this movie.  The train is the society that we all live in.  Wilford was a young man who dreamed of ruling the world and realized that a certain world-wide cataclysmic event would allow him seize control.  He realized that the unending debate and division surrounding climate control would give him an opportunity to create an autocratic one-world government.  We’ve seen a lot of these in our time, some of which have had more success than others.  NATO, EU, G8, etc… sound familiar?  The Culture Distorters are hard at work whipping up a new humanitarian crisis with Syrian refugees in Europe, and it’s just pitiful to see how Europeans are handling this latest episode.

But, back to the movie- Every now and again the front-passenger cars need to take one of the tail-section passengers to perform some essential function on the train or to entertain themselves.  Both seem to have about the same impact on the tail-sectioners: one of them is disappeared into the forward sections.  When a tail-section passenger is “disappeared” into a forward section of the train there is no return.  People are “disappeared” for pleasure, business and less frequently in cases of rebellion, however the result is always the same: if you leave the tail section you’re not coming back.  Ever.  There are a few times during the film that tail-sectioners encounter one of the their friends who were taken and these former tail-section passengers can’t imagine doing anything other than what they’ve been reassigned to perform.  Reassignment is absolute and changes everything about the person.  It doesn’t matter how you achieve a new station or duty in the train, everything about your person is changed after you are reassigned.

The Great and benevolent Wilford designed a train to run on a world-wide track.  But, why is this important?  Why doesn’t the train travel only in one country and not in others?  In fact, why does the train need to travel at all?  If the “engine is eternal” why couldn’t it stay in one spot and just idle?  Because it’s not “just a train.”  It’s a system, a government and it’s a world-wide government that controls everybody.  If the train stops?  Everybody dies.  If people fail to occupy their predestined and preordained station in life and also to fulfill its requirements?  Everybody dies.  To be out of place or to refuse to perform a necessary function in the train is death.  Does this remind anybody else of Israel’s Samson Option?  The movie’s director might very well have been making commentary on the North Korean government, but damned if it doesn’t look like an incriminating case for Israel’s ideal world.

Before Curtis can lead his revolt to the front he has to free a prisoner, Namgoong Minsu, a “security expert” who helps Curtis open the doors between train cars.  Namgoon, Nam for short, is a kronole addict.  Kronole is industrial waste and is formed into little cubes.  Train passengers sniff the chalky blocks and get high.  It is also “highly flammable.”  The movie maker could have had anyone be the security expert, but a drug fiend was chosen.  For every door that Nam opened he received a block of kronole from Curtis.  After Nam gets Curtis through all the doors and delivers him to the engine, Nam forms all of the kronole blocks into one large lump to make an explosive strong enough to breach an exit door on the train.  Nam didn’t want to take the engine, he just wanted off of the crazy train.  Nam was a drop out from society, and he wanted to escape.

The nearer Curtis comes to the head of the train is the nearer he comes to the highest levels of the train’s society.  He has to pass through the middle of the train (middle class) to get there, and then he passes by the bourgeois middle and upper class.  The final cars before they reach the engine?  A party and rave car.  The train’s occupants become increasingly decadent and boojee before the engine is reached.  They lounge around getting high on kronole, playing hunt-the-zipper and making orgy porgy.  They are also the ones work the hardest to stop Cutis.  The bourgeois are the ones who will fight any revolution the hardest because it means that their comfortable party lifestyle will come to an end should the revolution succeed.  No surprises there.  Traditionalist Youth Network’s most reliable opponents are stuck up and confused white kids from middle to middle-upper class families who are quite content with their White Cosmopolitan Liberal Supremacism.

Remember how reassignment is absolute and irreversibly changes people?  Curtis was right there outside the engine’s chamber when Nam packed his kronole bomb against a door.  So what did Curtis do?  In the moment before he was about to dethrone Wilford and take control of the train?  He stops Nam from escaping.  If Curtis had control of the train he probably would have done the same thing with Nam as what Wilford’s police force did with him previously: lock him up so that he couldn’t escape.  Everybody is property of the train and nobody is allowed to leave the train.

When Curtis finally gets a chance to meet with the great Wilford, Wilford thrusts Curtis into the heart of the engine.  Curtis is overwhelmed by the power and prestige and is all but converted.  Meanwhile, Nam’s kronole bomb finally detonates.  The explosion sets off an avalanche and knocks the entire train off the tracks, with many of the cars spilling off down the side of a mountain.  What’s the moral of the story?  If you break down all barriers between the classes the train will literally go off the tracks and kill everyone.

Was Snowpiercer an ideal or even a decent kind of thing for people to live in?  No, but it worked.  Can we as activists and leaders hope to do better for our people by trying to work within the system?  That’s entirely dependent on the assumption that we intend to keep the current system.  Ideally we should hope to flip this government right off the rails, ditch the wreckage and brave the cold for the sake of our people and our future.

"Black Lives Matter" -- Reality, Not so Much

via American Renaissance

Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it, so that when men come to be undeceived, it is too late; the jest is over, and the tale hath had its effect.— Jonathan Swift (1667-1745)

The great lie of the summer has been the Black Lives Matter movement. It was founded on one falsehood–that a Ferguson, Mo., police officer shot a black suspect who was trying to surrender–and it is perpetuated by another: that trigger-happy cops are filling our morgues with young black men.

The reality is that Michael Brown is dead because he robbed a convenience store, assaulted a uniformed officer and then made a move for the officer’s gun. The reality is that a cop is six times more likely to be killed by someone black than the reverse. The reality is that the Michael Browns are a much bigger threat to black lives than are the police.

{snip}

Actually, it’s not hard to understand at all, once you realize that this movement is not about the fate of blacks per se but about scapegoating the police in particular, and white America in general, for antisocial ghetto behavior. It’s about holding whites to a higher standard than the young black men in these neighborhoods hold each other to. Ultimately, it’s a political movement, the inevitable extension of a racial and ethnic spoils system that helps Democrats get elected. The Black Lives Matter narrative may be demonstrably false, but it’s also politically expedient.

{snip}

Publicly, law-enforcement officials have been reluctant to link the movement’s antipolice rhetoric to the spike in violent crime. Privately, they have been echoing South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who said in a speech last week that the movement was harming the very people whose interests it claims to represent. “Most of the people who now live in terror because local police are too intimidated to do their jobs are black,” the governor said. “Black lives do matter, and they have been disgracefully jeopardized by the movement that has laid waste to Ferguson and Baltimore.”

{snip}

But the left has no interest in discussing ghetto pathology. Summer movies like “Straight Outta Compton” are too busy glorifying it, and summer books like Ta-Nehisi Coates’s “Between the World and Me” are too busy intellectualizing it. The Black Lives Matter crowd has become an appendage of the civil-rights industry, which uses the black underclass to push an agenda that invariably leaves the supposed beneficiaries worse off.

#NoFatso

via Alternative Right

"To find out who rules over you, just discern who you are not allowed to criticize." This quote, apparently misattributed to French philosophe Voltaire, retains the profound flavor of truth no matter who first uttered it.

Of course, there are proximate authorities, and then there are ultimate authorities. I doubt that the morbidly obese are our true rulers; nevertheless, as comedienne Nicole Arbour has discovered with the recent yanking of her video "Dear Fat People" from Youtube, one clearly isn't allowed to criticize the plus-sized.


Comedian and YouTube star Nicole Arbour, whose videos regularly get millions of views, is offensive — and she embraces that.

But after her viral video "Dear Fat People" received outcry from commenters and leaders in the body acceptance community, her YouTube and Google+ channels were temporarily disabled Sunday. "We literally broke the Internet… With comedy. #censorship" Arbour tweeted after her account was taken down. (It has since been reinstated.) The video remained posted at Facebook, where it has more than 18 million views and 175,000 likes.

Arbour, however, embraces the role as a controversial comedian.

"She's like the Donald Trump of YouTube," one commenter wrote on her Sept. 5 post titled "Most Offensive Video EVER," which was uploaded a day after "Dear Fat People."

The video calls out race, childhood obesity, "stupid people," violence and more controversial issues.

The video is still up at Facebook (see it here). In it, Arbour specifically states that she's not targeting people with underlying medical conditions, but only those who make inappropriate excuses for bad lifestyle choices. Still, her critics are, er, blubbering about how mean she is for implying that the overweight ought to feel motivated to get healthy, instead of being flattered, indulged, and fawned over. Here is a-- heh!-- hefty sample of Youtube responses from the anti- "Dear Fat People" contingent (trigger warning: whininess, poutiness, unseemly attention whoring, repugnant concern-trolling ahead!):




Yikes! And there are zillions more Youtube vids just like these and probably worse... (Y'all can find out. I don't have the—heh—stomach—to watch any more.)
 One fears that yet another requisite ritual apology/self-abasement may be forthcoming. Then again, maybe Ms. Arbour take a page from the Trump playbook and commit the truly revolutionary act of refusing to grovel before the perpetually sanctimonious and the habitually aggrieved.
 One thing for sure: contemporary media show-trials make great entertainment. So go grab a Big Mac, a Peanut Buster Parfait, and a big box of buttered popcorn . . . and stay tuned.

More Insanity from the MSM

via Koinen's Corner

Confused teen, 'Lila' Perry
Praxis Mag Editor's Note: The simple truth is if you have a Y chromosome you are male, if not, you're female. It doesn't matter what you "think" you are, it doesn't matter what destructive anti-White elites say you are, that's just how it works.

Damn, I get tired of this transgender-promoting cultural Marxism in the Jew-controlled mainstream media.  It's like waking up every morning in the middle of an arena-sized insane asylum. Here's the latest headline:

Room for her in locker room?  Bathroom access for transgender teen divides Missouri town

There is no question this is one confused teenager.  But dammit, it's not a her.  It's not a she.

He might think he's a girl.  He might wish he was a girl.  He might want, more than anything else, to be a member of the 'fair sex.'  But he's not!  Just like that phony POS Bruce Jenner, this person is still carrying around his male package.  He's got the voice of a typical young man in puberty.  He is physically a male.  He has the genes of a male.

You know what he needs?  What would do him a hell of a lot more good than undressing in a girl's locker room and furtively enjoying (sneaking peeks at) all the fantastic scenery there?
He needs his father to provide him with a healthy dose of masculinity by taking him out in the back yard with an axe, a saw, maybe a chainsaw, and a wheelbarrow, and teaching him something about maleness by showing him how to cut down and remove that fallen-down tree branch.  And then his dad might even make him mow the lawn.

But whatever his problems, and however he finally manages to work through them, there's absolutely nothing in this story which justifies all the favorable transgender-promoting tone and language used in this featured story on CNN.

But don't stop with that story.  Check out all the articles about the illegal 'refugee' invasion and destruction of Europe.  No end to the guilt-tripping, tear-jerker, 'what more we need to do,' 'how you can help' messages of White suicide and genocide.  But never any serious discussion of what needs to be done to repel this invasion and save White Europe and Western Civilization.

The Effeminization of Politics

via Western Spring

Well, we’ve all seen the photo of that poor little lad washed up on the beach in Turkey, but would we have guessed that it would blow open the gates of Europe? Even if we didn’t, it wouldn’t have taken long for the truth to sink in as the BBC’s crocodile tears department went to work. So cynically has this tragedy been exploited to further the open borders agenda of the Left, that those who speak the evident truth about the present crisis in Europe are vilified as “heartless” and “hateful”, “sick” and “vile”.

The only leading politician in Europe who has yet committed the “revolutionary act” of telling the truth is the Prime Minister of Hungary, Victor Orban. He has actually told us two truths – firstly, that if the invasion continues, Europeans will become a minority in their own continent and, secondly, that it’s all the fault of the Germans.

We all know the truth of the first point, but the second one is worth pondering for a moment; the Germans unilaterally – unilaterally –  decided to (in effect) invite the whole population of Syria to move to Germany by telling the invaders that no Syrian would be sent back, that means in turn that they have invited the whole of Syria to move to the Schengen zone! Not content with that, they now demand that all European countries should bear the burden of their own folly. Already the EU is buckling as resistance to German demands builds up; sooner or later national self interest will trump the internationalist “castles in the sky” which is the EU. If Germany has chosen to commit suicide, that’s up to her, but she must not drag the rest of Europe down with her.

Here in Britain, we found out only the other week that immigration last year reached its highest level ever as some 380,000 more foreigners entered the country than left it, and the week before we were told that immigration had for the first time pipped all other subjects, even the economy, to first place in the list of public concerns. Now all that has been swept aside by a tidal wave of emotion about a tragedy which, by no stretch of the imagination, was the fault of Britain but which has been ruthlessly exploited by the open borders advocates.

The main reason why this invasion (and it is an invasion, the great majority of the incomers are fit and healthy young men in no need of humanitarian assistance) has succeeded to date, and will go on succeeding, is that all male European politicians have become effeminized – with the honourable exception of Mr. Orban, of course. I mean no disrespect to women when I comment that our (male) politicians, thinking it necessary to “get in touch” with their “feminine side”, have imported into public affairs a degree of emotionalism which is inappropriate in those who have to take very tough decisions in the defence of their country, decisions which might sometimes involve the use of force.

It was not for nothing that Margaret Thatcher was once said to be “the only man in her cabinet”.

The Spirit of Cambria

via Traditional Britain Group

Traditional Britain Group Editor's Note: In an age of globalisation, the local identities of the nations and regions of these islands emphasise our common British heritage, says Stuart Millson, who finds much inspiration in the countryside of Wales.
The ideal way in which to approach Wales is through the border country of Gloucestershire, Herefordshire and Monmouthshire, a landscape in which there seems to be no defined border – merely a sense of one country slowly blending into another. Even travelling from one side of the city of Gloucester to the other reveals a difference in feeling and atmosphere: the gentle Cotswolds of Birdlip and Leckhampton Hills to the east disappearing down to the Severn plain – the landscape becoming somewhat less pastoral –as we move into the Forest of Dean, where accents are strong and locals (quite rightly!) eye everyone with mild suspicion.

From the Forest to Ross-on-Wye, we move through the last of England, and slowly but surely Welsh names begin to appear – although English voices can still be heard. There is even a village along with the way with a split nationality: English Bicknor, and Welsh Bicknor. And there is something interesting about the appearance of the towns along the route. They seem to be devoid of sprawl, self-contained, suggesting perhaps in this border country, an ancient past of stockades from which to observe the comings and goings along the roads and tracks.

Abergavenny, Brecon, Crickhowell – and the road is now twisting at the edges of great ranges of hills. The gearbox of the car is used heavily as we keep up with the gradients, and sudden turns at the tops of those long stretches. But the eyes of the driver have difficulty concentrating entirely on the road: the Brecon Beacons and their valleys draw everyone’s gaze. It is the A40 which runs through this part of southern mid-Wales, and it is a relief to be rumbling along its course – a more stimulating experience than the monotony of the M4, with its endless trains of lorries and sudden slow-downs, and often (apart from the hills of Wiltshire and the dramatic appearance in the distance of the bridges of the Severn) uninteresting views. The journey continues, and before long, signs for Carmarthen appear – the town which marks the final few furlongs of this journey to West Wales. And beyond Carmarthen, a noble ruin in the green valley…

The great castle at Dryslwyn is a fortress in the sky – a stone monument to the power of almost-forgotten Welsh warlords and noblemen, such as Rhys ap Gruffydd and his feuding sons. Dryslwyn stands on the banks of the River Towey, some ten miles from Carmarthen. The river, rich in salmon and sea-trout, meanders in great bends and loops through a green valley and flood-plain where dairy herds and patient anglers may be found. All is peaceful today, in a land that was once known as the Kingdom of Deheubarth. However, in 1287, Earl Edmund of Cornwall laid siege to the castle in the name of King Edward l.

Rhys ap Maredudd, the lord of Dryslwyn, was in revolt against the King, and in the August of that year paid the price for his rebellion as 11,000 men besieged his fortress. Today, only the fragments of the once-noble fortifications survive, although archaeological excavation has yielded a wealth of artefacts, including two large 16-inch stone balls, the missiles of their time, which would have been hurled at the structure by a trebuchet, the deadly mediaeval siege engine. Other smaller projectiles were discovered by the archaeologists, alongside dozens of arrowheads, spears and even fragments of chain mail, penetrated no doubt by the impact of well-aimed heavy swords. The battlefields of those centuries were bloody, terrifying places.

Just over a century later – the summer of 1403 to be precise – and Dryslwyn was again at the eye of the storm of Welsh history, having been seized by the legendary Owain Glyndŵr, a warrior-leader of his country – a Hereward the Wake, or the equivalent of St. George or Robin Hood for a patriotic Welshman. How remote all these events seem to the modern mind – ancient bones and the hardly-recognisable decaying relics buried in the soil – so far away from our plasma, electronic, and comfortable, instantaneous world.

But there is another point to make here. Despite the ancient feuds between the Welsh and the English (and Scotland and England, too) the battles and sieges of antiquity speak of an ancestral, tribal sense of Britain; cultures which were, perhaps, different in nuance, but the same in essence. From this mixture grew the British nation – the Welsh archers fighting for an English King at Agincourt, the Welsh riflemen at Rorke’s Drift, the Highlanders advancing alongside English country regiments across the battlefields of 20th-century Europe. The culture to be found at places such as Dryslwyn castle is as much a part of the British identity as it is of the Welsh; and it must stand as a repudiation of those political parties, such as Plaid Cymru (and the SNP in Scotland), which seem to reject links with their natural kinsfolk in England – preferring instead the lure of the EU and the “diversity” of large-scale immigration into Cardiff and Glasgow.

In the ruins of Dryslwyn on a summer’s day, looking out across Carmarthenshire, is as near as you can get to the experience of stepping out of a time machine. Red kites, buzzards, kestrels and ravens soar above the landscape of Deheubarth… and in the distance, the standards and glinting shields of Edmund’s army are just coming into view.

Fascism: American Style

via Counter-Currents

Albert Finney portrays Political Machine
Boss Leo O’Bannon in the Goebbels Award
winning film, Miller’s Crossing (1990)
In recent years, I have encountered a handful of passionate, self-identifying Fascists who have demonstrated that they have absolutely no idea what the term actually means. For some it means a Conan the Barbarian style ethos guiding atomized individuals in a lawless society in which one earns the right to go to the 7-11 by packing a pistol. For another it means a state apparatus which finds inventive ways to apply Biblical punishments to homosexuals. (I hope ISIS does not prove disappointing to him.) America’s anti-fascists think it is synonymous with the Military-Industrial Complex. All of these people would be sorely disappointed and surprised had they lived under any Fascist regime of the past.

Americans who aspire to a certain kind of Fascism do not need to look to Mussolini or the Hispanic countries for inspiration. There are plenty of homegrown examples in big cities where Irish and Italian politicians are comfortably in charge. There is, in fact, an ethnic Catholic way of bringing Order out of Chaos (to borrow a phrase}.

Historians will tell you that Fascism is incredibly fluid and hard to pin down. Is it Modernist or Traditional? Socialist or Capitalist? Catholic or Pagan? Racio-nationalist or patriotic? Anti-Semitic or neutral? The fact is that Fascism is more of a mindset than a doctrine, one of populism and authoritarianism, which adapts to the problems of the time and place and makes no attempt to transplant a foreign form into a new setting.

Mayor Daley's two commandments for lower tier members of the Chicago Machine
Mayor Daley’s two commandments
for lower tier members of
the Chicago Machine
The Fascist mindset is the result of two things. One is a reaction, not necessarily to the rise of the Left, but to the rise of the special interests. These special interests will fight to the death over very narrow areas of policy-making power, which others see as a minor concern. Multiply this by every narrow area of policy-making and government becomes a market in which residents are butchered for lobbies of every kind, from right to left, from capitalists to public sector employee unions. Asymmetric Interest Theory tells us that the special interest lobby will win every time . . . unless there is an authoritarian figure keeping all parties in line.

The second aspect of the Fascist mindset is not the result of a strong nationalist sentiment, as many believe, but is in fact the creative response to the problem of a void of nationalism. When very few citizens are dedicated to the identity to which the state’s borders correspond, chaos and corruption will follow. Italy was a very young country filled with regionalists and amoral familists when Mussolini adapted socialism to their unique circumstances and created a new nationalism. The South American countries were filled with rather recent immigrants, former slaves, colonized peoples, and  rootless cross-breeds. From Pinochet to Chavez, South American “Fascists” emphasize military discipline, nationalism, and their favorite strand of Catholicism to invent nationalistic solidarity in societies where there is no history of solidarity.

Large, ethnically diverse American cities in the late industrial era facing Negro invasion, Jewish subversion, and special interest lobbies seeking their piece of the pie have governing problems closer to those of Italy and South American countries than the governing problems of relatively homogeneous colonial settlements facing lack of infrastructure, long winters, and Indian raids. While Chicago and similar cities are full of “90 Minute Patriots,” when it comes to the powerful, their sense of Chicagoan civic duty (or “Chicagoan Nationalism”) will never check their personal greed and ambition. That is why the iron fist of a political boss is needed to remind people when they have spent enough time at the trough. The difference between a Machine Boss and a corrupt politician lies in his ability to do this. The Boss’ system is sustainable; the corrupt politician is grabbing money from the register while the store is on fire.

The Party Boss’ relation with the people is mediated through a system of representation within the Democratic Party. Client-patron relationships are created which are fluid and depend on the lower rungs of the ladder maintaining stability and receiving appropriate benefits as a result. The “carrots” could be city jobs, contracts, envelopes of cash known as “street money,” frozen Christmas Turkeys, and other smaller payoffs. The “stick” is being thrown into outer darkness of the political process. The legend is that anyone not registered as a Democrat and staying in line would never get their sidewalk fixed in a Machine-run city.

In these cases, the machine boss selects people to fill elected positions in a way that balances the interests of a stable coalition of diverse groups within a city. Expectations are set regarding the performance of various groups within the coalition, and if all goes well, the spoils are dispersed in a way the coalition members find acceptable. It is easy to underestimate the genius required to conceive of and maintain such a system. The presence or absence of these kinds of Party Machines is why Chicago is not the hellhole of Detroit, nor did Pittsburgh descend to the levels of Cleveland, nor did Boston or to a lesser extent Philadelphia sink to the level of Baltimore. For more information on the struggle of our rnemies to bring these down, see E. Michael Jones book The Slaughter of Cities: Urban Renewal As Ethnic Cleansing.

To get a sense of how well the senior Mayor Daley, of Chicago’s Daley Machine played defense on behalf of the White middle class and working class, see how his rival from Obama’s neighborhood, a liberal cuck married to a Jewess, Leon Despres accidentally recounts how awesome Daley was (you won’t find this kind of candor from the Daley Machine veterans because they are too professional to speak loosely):

Ultimately, Fascism is a creative defense mechanism for societies in crisis which lack a rich and settled common identity. More rooted societies have numerous historical movements that Fascism’s potential constituents can rally to for redress of their grievances. Peoples with a healthy sense of nationalism don’t need new flags and uniforms or marches in formation to mobilize the people or encourage sacrifice for the collective. This is why National Liberation Movements have no need for the symbols of the Right and resist dilution when allying with the International Left. National Liberation Movements arise in societies where the rootedness and identity are so strong that they survive without reference to or support from the State.

Some may say that the US is such a society . . . whether or not that is the case, the limitations of Fascism should be addressed here as well. Fascism is a form of defense. In its American form it is a sort of holding pattern for riding out a crisis. Our enemy cannot be fought to a stalemate in which we all agree to go home and recommence battle the following day. This idea is natural to the Indo-Europeans who once sent champions to battle one at a time and would cease hostilities as soon as the sun set. The Semitic opponent is not honor bound; in fact their holy books instruct them to wake up early and kill the opponent in his sleep. Therefore a more strident aggressive approach is needed to expel the culture distorters and recreate A Nice White Country from scratch. This is the prerequisite for preventing the end of the White Majority in the US and Canada.

I am not aware of an American version of a more aggressive political system that might address this problem, but there is such a system we can look to in Europe and, though transplantation would be ineffective, it may certainly provide inspiration.

Retrotopia: A Cab Ride in Toledo

via The Archdruid Report

Author's Note: This is the third installment of an exploration of some of the possible futures discussed on this blog, using the toolkit of narrative fiction. Our narrator arrives in the capital of the Lakeland Republic, and further surprises are in store. 
The train pulled into the Toledo station something like ten minutes late—we’d had to wait for another train to clear the bridge over Sandusky Harbor, and then rolled along the Lake Erie shoreline for half an hour, past little lakeside towns and open country dotted with shore pines, before finally veering inland toward the Lakeland Republic’s capital. All the way along the shore, I watched big two- and three-masted schooners catching a ride from the wind, some obviously heading out from the Toledo lakefront, some just as obviously heading toward it. The sailing ship I’d spotted outside Sandusky was clearly nothing unusual here.
Once the train swung due west toward downtown Toledo, it was more farm country—the twentieth century kind with tractors and pickups rather than the nineteenth century kind with draft horses and wagons. Then the same sequence I’d watched around other Lakeland cities followed: houses became more frequent, fields gave way to truck gardens, and not too far after that the train was rolling past residential neighborhoods dotted with schools, parks, and little clusters of shops, striped at intervals with the omnipresent streetcar tracks and, here and there, crossed by the streetcars themselves. The houses gave way eventually to the warehouses and factories of an industrial district, and then to the dark waters of the Maumee River, swirling and rushing past the feet of a dozen bridges.
“Toledo,” the conductor called out from behind me. “End of the line, ladies and gentlemen. Please make sure you have your luggage and belongings before you leave, and thank you for riding with us.”
As the car I was in reached the far shore, I got a brief glimpse of tree-lined streetscapes, and then brick walls blotted out the view. Some of the other passengers got their luggage down from the overhead racks. Me, I had other things on my mind; it had finally occurred to me that unless I could get a veepad signal, I had no way to call the people who were supposed to meet me and make sure we didn’t miss each other, and I’d checked my veepad one last time and gotten the same dark field as before. I shrugged mentally, decided to wait and see what happened.
The train slowed to a crawl. The immigrant family across from me had apparently spotted somebody waiting for them on the platform, and were waving at the window. They already had their plastic-bag luggage in hand, and the moment the train stopped they hefted the bags and headed for the exit. I got my suitcase down from the rack; the boy who’d been sitting next to me went back to help his parents with their luggage, and I stepped into the aisle and followed the people in front of me up to the front of the car and out onto the platform.
A brightly painted sign said THIS WAY TO THE STATION. I followed that and the flow of people. Partway along I passed the immigrant family standing there with half a dozen other people in what looked like Victorian clothing out of a history vid—the wife’s family from Ann Arbor, I guessed—all talking a mile a minute. The wife was teary-eyed and beaming, and the two kids looked for the first time since I’d seen them as though they might get around to smiling one of these days. I thought about the conversation I’d had with the husband, wondered if things really were that much better at the bottom end of the income scale here.
I went through a big double door of glass and metal into what had to be the main room of the station, a huge open space under a vaulted ceiling, with benches in long rows on one side, ticket counters on the other, and what looked like half a dozen restaurants and a bar ahead in the middle distance. Okay, I said to myself, here’s where I try to find someone who has a clue about how to locate people and get around in this bizarre country.
I’d almost finished thinking that when a woman and a man in what I’d come to think of as Bogart clothing got up off one of the nearby benches and came over toward me. “Mr. Carr?”
Well, that was easy, I thought, and turned toward them. She was tall for a woman, with red-brown curls spilling out from under a broad-brimmed hat; he was a couple of inches shorter than she was, with the kind of forgettable face you look for when you’re hiring spies or administrative assistants.
“I’m Melissa Berger,” the woman said, shaking my hand, “and this is Fred Vanich.” I shook his hand as well. “I hope your trip this morning wasn’t too disconcerting,” she went on.
That last word was unexpected enough that I laughed. “Not quite,” I said. “Though there were a few surprises.”
“I can imagine. If you’ll come this way?”
“Can I take that for you?” Vanich said, and I handed over my suitcase and followed them.
“I’m afraid we’ve had to do some rescheduling,” Berger said as we headed for the doors. “The President was hoping to meet with you this afternoon, after you have time to get settled in at the hotel, but he’s got a minor crisis on his hands.  One of the Restorationist parties in our coalition is breathing fire and brimstone over a line item in an appropriations bill. It’ll blow over in a day or so, but—well, I’m sure you know how it goes.”
“Yeah,” I said. “Ellen’s been having to deal with that sort of thing every other day or so since the election.”
“That was quite an upset,” she said.
I nodded. “We were pretty happy with the way it turned out.”
Outside the air was blustery and crisp, with the first taste of approaching winter on it. The trees lining the street still clung to a few brown and crumpled leaves. Just past the trees, where I’d expected to see cabs waiting for passengers in a cloud of exhaust, horses stood placidly in front of brightly colored—buggies? Carriages? Whatever they were called, they looked like boxes with big windows, some with four wheels supporting them and some with two, and a seat up top for the driver.
I blinked, and almost stopped. Berger gave me an amused look. “I know,” she said. “We do a lot of things differently here.”
“I’ve noticed that,” I replied.
She led the way to one of the four-wheeled buggies, or whatever they were. Obviously things had been arranged in advance; she said “Good afternoon, Earl,” to the driver, he said “Good afternoon, ma’am” in response, and without another word being said my suitcase found its way into the trunk in back and the three of us were settling into place in comfortable leather seats inside, Berger and I facing forward and Vanich across from us facing backward.
The buggy swung out into traffic and headed down the street. “Is this standard here?” I asked, indicating the vehicle with a gesture.
“The cab? More or less,” said Berger. “There are a few towns with electric cabs and a fair number with pedal cabs, but you’ll find horse cabs everywhere there’s taxi service at all. The others don’t produce methane feedstock.”
I considered that. “But no gasoline or diesel cabs.”
“Not since Partition, no.”
That made a certain amount of sense to me. “I’m guessing the embargo had a lot to do with that.”
“Well, to some extent. There was quite a bit of smuggling, of course—Chicago being right on our border.”
I snorted. “And Chicago being Chicago.”  The Free City of Chicago was the smallest of the nations that came out of Partition, and made up for that by being far and away the most gaudily corrupt.
“Well, yes.  But there wasn’t that much of a market for petroleum products,” she went on. “There’s the tailpipe tax, of course, and we also lost most of the necessary infrastructure during the war—highways, pipelines, all of it.”
“I’m surprised your government didn’t subsidize rebuilding.”
“We don’t do things that way here,” she said.
I gave her a long startled look. “Obviously I have a lot to learn,” I said finally.
She nodded. “Outsiders generally do.”
I filed away the word outsider for future reference. “One thing I’ve been wondering since I crossed the border,” I said then. “Or rather two. You really don’t have metanet service in the Lakeland Republic?”
“That’s correct,” she replied at once. “We actually have jamming stations along the borders, though it’s been fifteen or sixteen years since we last had to use them.”
“Hold it,” I said. “Jamming stations?”
“Mr. Carr,” Berger said, “since Partition we’ve fought off three attempts at regime change and one full-blown military invasion. All the regime change campaigns were one hundred per cent coordinated via the metanet— saturation propaganda via social media, flashmobs, swarming attacks, you know the drill. The third one fizzled because we’d rigged a kill switch in what little metanet infrastructure we had by then and shut it down, and after that the legislature voted to scrap what was left. Then when Brazil and the Confederacy invaded in ‘49, one reason they pulled back a bloody stump was that military doctrine these days—theirs, yours, everybody else’s—is fixated on disrupting network infrastructure and realtime comm-comm, and we don’t have those, so they literally had no clue how to fight us. So, yes, we have jamming stations. If you’d like to visit one I can arrange that.”
I took that in. “That won’t be necessary,” I said then. “Just out of curiosity, do you jam anything else?”
“Not any more. We used to jam radio broadcasts from the Confederacy, but that’s because they jammed ours. We got that settled three years ago.”
“Television?”
“Waste of time. Only about three per cent of the Republic’s within range of a ground station, and the satellite situation—well, I’m sure you know at least as much about that as I do.”
I was by no means sure of that, but let it pass. “Okay, and that leads to my second question. How on earth do you take notes when you don’t have veepads?”
Instead of answering, she directed a rueful look at Vanich, who nodded once, as though my words had settled something.
“I’m guessing,” I said then, “that somebody just won a bet.”
“And it wasn’t me,” Berger said. “There are four questions that outsiders always ask, and there’s always a certain amount of speculation, shall we say, about which one gets asked first.” She held up one finger. “How do you take notes?” A second. “How do you find out what’s happening in the world?” A third. “What do you do to contact people?” A fourth. “And how do you pay your bar tab?”
I laughed. “I’ve got a fifth,” I said. “How do you look up facts without Metapedia?”
“That’s an uncommon one, Mr. Carr,” Vanich said. His voice was as bland and featureless as his face. If he wasn’t a spy, I decided, the Lakeland Republic was misusing his talents. “I’ve heard it now and then, but it’s uncommon.”
“To answer your question,” Berger said then, “most people use paper notebooks.” She pulled a flat rectangular shape out of her purse, fanned it open to show pages with neat angular handwriting on them, put it away again. “Available at any stationery store, but you won’t have to worry about that.  There’s one waiting at your hotel room.”
“Thank you,” I said, trying to wrap my head around writing down notes on sheets of paper. It sounded about as primitive as carving them with a chisel on stone. “Just out of curiosity, what about the others? I was planning on asking those sometime soon.”
“Fair enough,” she said. “You find out what’s happening by reading a newspaper or listening to the radio. You contact people by phone, if you’re in a county with phone service, or by writing a letter or sending a radiogram anywhere. You pay your bar tab with cash, and any larger purchases with a check—we’ve got all that set up for you; you’ll just have to visit a bank, and there’s one a block and a half from the hotel. You look up facts in books—your own, if you’ve got them, or a public library’s if you don’t. There’s a branch five blocks from your hotel.”
“Not as convenient as accessing the metanet,” I noted.
“True, but there are more important things than convenience.”
“Like national survival?”
I’d meant the words as an olive branch of sorts, and she took them that way. “Among other things.”
She looked out the window, then, and turned in her seat to face me. “We’re almost to your hotel. I’m going to have to go back to the Capitol right away and see if I can shake some sense into the Restos, and Fred has his own work to get done.  One way or another, there’ll be someone to take you around tomorrow. If you like, after you’ve settled in and had some lunch, I can have somebody come out and show you the tourist sights, or whatever else you’d like to see.”
“Thank you,” I said, “but I’d like to suggest something different. I hear your streets are pretty safe.”
She nodded. “I know the kind of thing you have to deal with in Philadelphia. We don’t have that sort of trouble here.”
“In that case, I’d like to wander around a bit on my own, check out the landscape—maybe visit the public library you mentioned.”
It was a long shot; I figured the Lakeland government would want me under the watchful eye of a handler the whole time I was in the country. To my surprise, she looked relieved. “If that works for you, it works for us,” she said. “I’ll have somebody call you first thing tomorrow—eight o’clock, if that’s not too early.”
“That’ll be fine.”
“With any luck this whole business will have blown over by then and President Meeker can see you right away.”
“Here’s hoping,” I said.
The cab came to a halt. A moment later, the driver opened the door. I shook both their hands, climbed down to the sidewalk.

Aylan Nation: European Decline and Afro-Asian Expansion

via Radix

History is being made before our eyes. Or rather, if Europe, above all, has given birth to History, then we are witnessing a true “End of History.” We have known the demographic facts of European decline and Afro-Asian expansion for years. We have seen all of Western Europe’s great cities become scarred or encircled with ghettos. We know that European women have 1.4 children on average, and that Africa is projected by the United Nations to reach a population of over 4 billion this century. But never before has this reality been so visible as it is today. 

In the camps of Calais, washed up on Lampedusa, storming Ceuta and Melilla, arriving en masse at Kos, we can see the shape of things to come. The eviction of poor Germans at Ludwigshafen to make room for migrants, the punishment of Dresden with the overnight imposition of a refugee camp, and the horrific rape gangs of Rotherham are merely a foretaste.

Do you see that in the distance? Those aren’t mountains. They’re waves. A tide of humanity, of Afro-Islamic humanity, moving to submerge Europe this century.

The outpouring of emotion on official and social media has been growing to unprecedented levels. The hundreds drowned in the Mediterranean and the dozens of dead in overheated trucks in Austria did not elicit the emotion of one Kurdish boy, whose image has been reproduced a seemingly infinite amount of time, across social networks, the mass media, and even public art and seen by hundreds of millions around the world. The details of the event are irrelevant, the psychological impact has already been achieved. Few know and fewer care that little Aylan Kurdi and his family had been living as Syrian refugees in Turkey for three years. Not making enough to live on, they were supported by a family member in Canada until their entry to that country was denied. Thus, the family attempted to reach Europe not to flee immediate violence, but, rather, for a better life, and “to get his [father’s] damaged teeth fixed.” Poor little Aylan, dead for a cavity.

But, for the nation-wreckers, this death is not in vain. Bernard-Henri Lévy—a leading advocate of the Libyan and Syrian interventions and among the guilty men responsible for these migrant deaths—has already noted that Aylan’s corpse will be useful to undermining European opposition to immigration. Even one as mainstream a politician as Mayor of Antwerp Bart De Wever (of the pseudo-nationalist New Flemish Alliance (NVA)) has said he wants to “try to stay rational because [Aylan’s death] is becoming a means of emotional pressure to argue in favor of a European policy of open borders.” A “rational” approach to politics? Impossible in the age of “victimocracy,” of the “dictatorship of emotion.” We shouldn’t underestimate the degree, to which what we call “democracy” amounts to media and political elites managing public opinion on a set of complex issues by reducing them to catchy phrases or, in this case, images.

Such emotional manipulation is necessary for the globalists. The replacement of European populations by Africans and Muslims has long been opposed by the peoples of Europe. For the past 70 years, public opinion in virtually all countries has been overwhelmingly hostile to displacement-level non-European immigration. Last July, 64 percent of Frenchmen were opposed to allowing migrant settlements and, even after highly-televised deaths of migrants in trucks and Aylan, 51 percent remain opposed. Similar figures could be cited across the West.

This puts the lie to the West’s pseudo-democracies. Of course, given our evolutionary predisposition towards ethnocentrism, implicit and explicit ethno-racial politics necessarily resonate with public opinion. As a result, the entire game since 1945 has been for mainstream conservative parties to pander to White tribalism without actually defending the interests of White majorities, while at the same time scrupulously suppressing and marginalizing any populist politicians who could actually preserve these interests (Enoch Powell, Jean-Marie Le Pen, Patrick Buchanan, et al.).

Make no mistake, there is a conscious effort by the mainstream political parties and, especially media and academia, to demonize the defense of European interests and to apologize for the Afro-Islamic invasion. In France, the Trotskyite-founded news site Mediapart is officially colluding with other European media to launch an international campaign under the hashtag #OpenEurope to produce sob-stories promoting immigration (and never about the European victims of immigration). German media have, since 1945, officially and continuously worked to undermine right-wing and nationalist ideas, lest any free speech lead to a return of He Who Must Not Be Named. (The head of the German press’ trade union has openly proclaimed this as an objective of German media.)

Unfortunately for the System, Europeans’ will-to-life is yet strong enough that—even though most reject “racism”—they in their overwhelming majority instinctively oppose policies leading to their physical replacement by Blacks and Muslims. We know what the results of this mass settlement will be. First, ethno-cultural Balkanization. The current French Prime Minister says that Afro-Islamic immigration has led to de facto “segregation” on French soil, and yet continues to be an enthusiastic immigrationist. Second, it will lead to increases in crime, welfare use, and left-wing votes, decreases in social trust, educational performance, and economic achievement, and the creation of ethnic powder kegs, ready to explode at a moment’s notice into race riots or even, as in Yugoslavia or Lebanon, outright tribal war.

The indigenous peoples of Europe would be reduced to vulnerable minorities at the mercy of the new Afro-Islamic majorities for their well-being and the respect of their rights. According to mainstream projections, indigenous Europeans will become a minority in Great Britain by the 2060s and, no doubt, in France and Germany shortly thereafter. Yet, know full well that the rule of law and human/minority rights are absolutely alien and unpracticed concepts in Sub-Saharan Africa and the House of Islam. Indeed, they are European concepts.

Of course, the official media pretend not to understand and reduce an existential issue of national survival to one of mere “color prejudice.” As The Economist asks disingenuously: “[H]ow might the many voters who share [Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor] Orban’s [anti-immigration] restrictive views be convinced that a few dark-skinned refugees will not irreparably alter the nature of their societies?”

Western Cultural Marxists vs. Eastern Anti-Communists

The current crisis has also starkly shown the divisions within Europe itself. In the West, we have known over 60 years of relative economic prosperity and ethno-masochist propaganda. Far from trying to stop the tide of refugees, European officials and Western leaders have been seeking to organize and even encourage it. Empowered by Aylan’s corpse, the European Commission has been emboldened to propose a quadrupled figure of 160,000 for binding refugee quotas to be imposed throughout the European Union. French and German leaders have pledged to support a binding scheme. European naval operations in the Mediterranean, far from seeking to repulse the invaders, encourage more adventurers by rescuing them and bringing them to European soil.

Worse, the Westerners seem seized by a kind of collective insanity of “moral signaling” and economistic autism. Pope Francis has demanded that every Catholic parish in Europe welcome a refugee family. Ten-thousand people in Iceland, a country of less than 330,000, have offered to host Syrian refugees. In Finland, the prime minister himself (one Juha Sipila, whom history and, perhaps, the coming European Revolution will judge harshly) has pledged to house refugees in his home. I have personally heard British diplomats make the point, in the context of the migration crisis, that Europe’s demographic aging means Afro-Muslims settlement should be welcomed to “rejuvenate” the Old Continent. Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad!

In the East, in contrast, a generation of European leaders—still scarred by Communism and still blessed with an intuitive understanding of what is a European—are resisting the invasion. Viktor Orbán in Hungary is building a wall across his southern border (immediately-condemned by the EU and Western leaders) and has passed legislation allowing police and the army to search homes for illegal immigrants. Czech President Miloš Zeman has gone so far as to suggest the creation of a European army to halt the African invasion. The leaders of the old Visegrád bloc_—made up of Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia—have assembled and solemnly pledged to reject the EU’s migrant quota scheme. Though we must be honest with ourselves: the “conservative” reflexes of the Ossis_, based on traditional mentalities not yet destroyed by diversity propaganda—as opposed to a vigorous racialist ideology—will not prove enough.

I personally have grown … intolerant … of those Europeans who shame other Europeans for being unwilling to accept more immigration—and I make a point of shaming them in turn. The situation’s moralizing and moral signaling have been quintessentially Eurocentric. There is the typical assumption that renewed moral sacrifice by Europeans alone is what is critical to solving the situation, combined with ignorance and apathy for the situation elsewhere. Only Europeans are susceptible to this.

For example, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has again pledged to “control our borders” against the influx of migrants. Meanwhile, Grand Rabbi of France Haïm Korsi, naturally an avowed Zionist with a firm belief in Israel as a racially Jewish ethno-state, has demanded that France be “a land of asylum” and undergo “a civic and human awakening” to welcome migrants. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, all wealthy and nearby, have accepted virtually no “refugees.” For there, we can be assured, pictures of Aylan will not be opening hearts or borders.

Geopolitical Anarcho-Tyranny

How is all this happening and being allowed to happen? No doubt, the events currently underway will be greatly studied by the historians of the future. If we triumph and survive, those historians will be Europeans examining just how close our peoples came to losing their homelands (not to mention their minds). If we fail, those historians will, no doubt, be East Asians seeking to understand what madness seized the European world, in a similar spirit to our study of Ancient Greece and Rome.

The details will long remain unclear: How many “refugees” are using fake Syrian passports? And are U.S. organizations financing some of the illegal immigrants? But let us look at the big picture. The current situation is completely artificial and the fruit of Western governmental action. It is the United States and its allies that destroyed Iraq, Libya, and Syria, creating millions of refugees and opening the floodgates of African immigration. Libyan Leader Muammar Gaddafi had proven an effective watchman on Europe’s southern frontier and a generous financier of development projects in Sub-Saharan Africa. He warned us before his assassination: “There are millions of blacks who could come to the Mediterranean to cross to France and Italy, and Libya plays a role in security in the Mediterranean.”

Why then has this “migrant crisis” been allowed and even made to occur? I do not believe in any concerted or conscious overarching conspiracy. Rather, the American Empire and its satellites (which include the EU and national governments in Europe), in what I like to call the Atlantic Constellation, have a kind of collective intelligence, which goes as follows.

For the most part, the Empire[1] “goes with the flow” and is happy to allow the further development of a neoliberal, globalized, and borderless capitalism, the steady erosion of national sovereignty, the gradual emergence of an ultra-wealthy superclass of deracinated, mostly “Jeurasian” oligarchs and elites, and the slow reduction of ethnic Europeans to minorities in their historic homelands. This is what President George Bush senior and others theorists of globalism have called “the New World Order.”

However, on occasion, the American Empire and its satellites want a little show, they want a spectacle, they want a war. If so, the following three imperatives must be respected:
  1. Powers independent of the United States, and, especially, enemies of Israel, are to be isolated (Perón’s Argentina, De Gaulle’s France, Putin’s Russia …), punished, and, if possible, destroyed (Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Syria).
  2. Nothing that undermines Israel as the Jewish State or Jewish privilege more broadly can be tolerated.
  3. Anything that undermines ethnic Europeans worldwide, and especially destroys their nations as cohesive and sovereign entities, can be safely encouraged.[2]
The policy of the United States and other Western powers since the end of the Cold War, and, arguably long, long before that, has followed these imperatives. The American Empire and the Atlantic Constellation rule through a mixture of tyranny (outright coercion and war) and anarchy (the conscious promotion of chaos, of which de-nationalizing individualist consumerism in the West and the civil-war-producing Islamic State in the Middle East are two different versions).

There is then a kind of overarching structural logic[3], within which there is contingency. This accounts for the destruction of nationalist regimes across the European world—European ethno-nationalism being in all likelihood the only thing, which could overthrow the ethnic and plutocratic elites currently ruling in the West. (Given the popularity of Noam Chomsky and critiques of “neoliberalism,” these elites clearly do not consider Marxoid babble to be a threat to their power; their concern is with the the Right.) This also accounts for the destructions of Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Libya, and the aborted overthrow of Bashar Al-Assad in Syria, all executed by shifting American-led coalitions. The timing of these wars did not answer to a historical inevitability, but were contingent events compatible with the three underlying fundamental interests (Imperial-American, Jewish-Zionist, and anti-European). This structural logic has culminated in the current “crisis” threatening to submerge Europe—putting out the incomparable lights of her civilization, forever.

The demographic changes—executed against the will of the European peoples—must be understood as ideologically-driven ethnic warfare. In this, the changes underway in Europe and North America can be compared to the Stalinist policies of physically removing rebellious ethnic groups to Siberia. The objective is the same: to weaken peoples considered “problematic,” to physically replace them with populations believed to be more “pliant,” to fundamentally break the nation’s will and its resistance potential, and ultimately to break its sense of peoplehood itself.

What is to be done? Our grandchildren will not forgive us for doing nothing. What are you going to do? The Waves are coming.

Notes:


  1. I am freely borrowing here the terminology of Alain Soral.
  2. On some of the major ideological roots of anti-Europeanism and anti-nationalism, see Kevin B. MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements (1st books library: 2002).
  3. Mind you, there are localized conspiracies following these imperatives, as U.S. Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark has remarked on several occasions, namely on the multiculturalist ideology behind the 1999 bombing of Serbia, the Bush administration’s plans to topple all independent Mideastern regimes, or the financing of the Islamic State by U.S. allies.