Jan 19, 2016

Researchers Unveil New Theory on Big Bang and Dark Matter

via Transudationism

Standard cosmology—that is, the Big Bang Seed Theory with its early period of exponential growth known as inflation expansion—is the prevailing scientific model for our universe, in which the entirety of space and time ballooned out sprouted from a very hot, very dense point seed into a homogeneous and ever-expanding vastness cosmos. This theory accounts for many of the physical phenomena we observe. But what if that's not all there was to it?

A new theory from physicists at the U.S. Department of Energy's Brookhaven National Laboratory, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, and Stony Brook University, which will publish online on January 18 in Physical Review Letters, suggests a shorter secondary inflationary expansive period that could account for the amount of dark matter estimated to exist throughout the cosmos.

"In general, a fundamental theory of nature can explain certain phenomena, but it may not always end up giving you the right amount of dark matter," said Hooman Davoudiasl, group leader in the High-Energy Theory Group at Brookhaven National Laboratory and an author on the paper. "If you come up with too little dark matter, you can suggest another source, but having too much is a problem."


Measuring the amount of dark matter in the universe is no easy task. It is dark after all, so it doesn't interact in any significant way with ordinary matter. Nonetheless, gravitational effects of dark matter give scientists a good idea of how much of it is out there. The best estimates indicate that it makes up about a quarter of the mass-energy budget of the universe, while ordinary matter—which makes up the stars, our planet, and us—comprises just 5 percent. Dark matter is the dominant form of substance in the universe, which leads physicists to devise theories and experiments to explore its properties and understand how it originated.

Some theories that elegantly explain perplexing oddities in physics—for example, the inordinate weakness of gravity compared to other fundamental interactions such as the electromagnetic, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear forces—cannot be fully accepted because they predict more dark matter than empirical observations can support.

This new theory solves that problem. Davoudiasl and his colleagues add a step to the commonly accepted events at the inception of space and time.

In standard cosmology, the exponential expansion growth pattern of the universe called cosmic inflation expansion began perhaps as early as 10-35 seconds after the beginning of time—that's a decimal point followed by 34 zeros before a 1. This explosive sproutive expansion of the entirety of space lasted mere fractions of a fraction of a second, eventually leading to a hot universe, followed by a cooling period that has continued until the present day. Then, when the universe was just seconds to minutes old—that is, cool enough—the formation of the lighter elements began. Between those milestones, there may have been other inflationary unfolding expandive interludes, said Davoudiasl.

"They wouldn't have been as grand or as violent creative as the initial one, but they could account for a dilution of dark matter as preparation for the next evolutionary phase," he said. 

In the beginning, when temperatures soared past billions of degrees in a relatively small volume of space, dark matter particles could run into each other and annihilate upon contact, transferring their energy into standard constituents of matter-particles like electrons and quarks. But as the universe continued to expand and cool, dark matter particles encountered one another far less often, and as the annihilation rate couldn't keep up with the expansion rate, creation ensued.

"At this point, the abundance of dark matter is now baked in the cake," said Davoudiasl. "Remember, dark matter interacts very weakly. So, a significant annihilation rate cannot persist at lower temperatures. Self-annihilation of dark matter becomes inefficient quite early, and the amount of dark matter particles is frozen."

However, the weaker the dark matter interactions, that is, the less efficient the annihilation, the higher the final abundance of dark matter particles would be. As experiments place ever more stringent constraints on the strength of dark matter interactions, there are some current theories that end up overestimating the quantity of dark matter in the universe. To bring theory into alignment with observations, Davoudiasl and his colleagues suggest that another inflationary period took place, powered by interactions in a "hidden sector" [i.e., a "vital force"] of physics. This second, milder, period of inflation, characterized by a rapid increase in volume, would dilute primordial particle abundances, potentially leaving the universe with the density of dark matter we observe today.

"It's definitely not the standard cosmology, but you have to accept that the universe may not be governed by things in the standard way that we thought," he said. "But we didn't need to construct something complicated. We show how a simple model can achieve this short amount of inflation in the early universe and account for the amount of dark matter we believe is out there."

Proving the theory is another thing entirely. Davoudiasl said there may be a way to look for at least the very feeblest of interactions between the hidden sector and ordinary matter.

"If this secondary inflationary period happened, it could be characterized by energies within the reach of experiments at accelerators such as the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) and the Large Hadron Collider," he said. Only time will tell if signs of a hidden sector show up in collisions within these colliders, or in other experimental facilities.

No Enemies to the White: Thoughts on the AltLeft

via TradYouth

I’m a Christian and this project is Radical Traditionalist. Most (but not all) of us here are some sort of Christian. We’re pro-White, but we’re not only pro-White. Our identitarian positions are part of a larger framework for us. We respect that not everybody who’s pro-White is going to be Christian or Traditionalist, and we strive to be team players whenever possible.

The vast majority of pro-White feuds derive from a single and simple error. They begin with the proposition that pro-White people all need to gather together under some single umbrella with a shared vision. We don’t, and we won’t. For a gaggle of people who supposedly hate diversity, we certainly have more than our share of it. We have no choice but to embrace diversity, …while honestly defining our differences and mutually respecting our boundaries.

Some random guy has shown up with a “new idea” for an “AltLeft” for all the folks out there who are down with homosexuality, human-animal-machine hybrids, and heresy, but would prefer to keep their satanic robot orgies White. I get it. We White people are awesome, and I would be a bit less scared and confused at an all-white drug-fueled BDSM house party than at a diverse one. I would probably be a bit safer, too.

My hope is only that they make a point to invest more time in being pro-White than in being anti-Trad. They’re certainly not off to the best start with this. The blog leaves the distinct impression that they’re frustrated by how much progress Traditionalists have made in the past few years and would like to turn back the clock about a decade or so to when being pro-White was primarily about bell curves and biometrics. If the AltLeft can develop its own subculture which is capable of punching the anti-Whites from a different angle, that’s great news. But I’m not holding my breath.
How many see all the boilerplate, post libertarian corporate conservatism, radical traditionalist Christianism, 15th century LARPing, pseudoscientific anti vaccination stuff and wacky conspiracy theories being promoted and decide “Fuck this. These people are freaks. Maybe the social justice crowd isn’t so bad after all.”
Being pro-White is a radical and dissident thought in today’s world, so we’re going to be in the asylum with the rest of the radical and dissident thoughts whether we like it or not until we can break out. Anti-vaccination is just as big on the dissident left as it is on the dissident right, and the wacky conspiracy theories are at least as bad on the left side as they are on the right. There’s nothing “right” about believing the flat earth hypothesis. Truthers of every stripe are pretty evenly distributed across the continuum between Traditionalist and Modern.
I became disillusioned with unfettered capitalism through real world experiences watching corporations and brands in action, the way they had loyalty to nothing and prioritized profits over absolutely everything: including quality, aesthetic, even people’s lives. The creepy cult-like way they manipulate and motivate people. So at a certain point I began to think of myself more as AltLeft than AltRight.
The AltRight is defined in part by its anti-corporate positioning. The first critics of capitalism and corporate excess were clergy. A cursory review of absolutely any AltRight milieu will confirm that we’re generally for strong trade tariffs, stiff environmental regulations, and generally hostile toward multinational corporations.
Religion – Mostly outright atheist or agnostic, occasionally some nominal identification with ancient European religions/mythology.
This seems to be the primary bone of contention for him. I’ve met plenty of religious skeptics over the years with a keen sense for Natural Law. Radical Traditionalist metapolitical theory is independent of metaphysics. One can be an atheist and remain a Traditionalist. Progressive atheists are typically under the impression that sexual chastity, heteronormativity, and family-orientation are something Christian Fundamentalists first discovered in their Bibles, rather than general habits of healthy societies throughout all recorded history regardless of creed.
Technology – Support for new medical technology, research initiatives, cloning, and space exploration without any of the reflexive anti-whitism, “noble savage” fetishism or “Little House on the Praireactionary” longing that dominates much of the traditional left and right.
One man’s LARP is another man’s vision, and he repeatedly carries on about space exploration and transhumanist sci-fi stuff as if it’s somehow less LARPy than the Medieval nostalgia our side sometimes indulges in. I work in technology, love technology, and even get all excited about bitcoins. I don’t see how transistors are supposedly leftist.
Art – The AltLeft is more open to different styles of art. Conservatives tend to rail against “modern art” while often not being able to distinguish between modernism and postmodernism(though they probably would hate both.) The simplest imperfect analogy for modern vs postmodern would be Dr.Evil vs Austin Powers.
There’s an important distinction to be made between the Traditionalist and the Conservative. There’s often overlap, but the AltRight is largely defined by its departure from Conservatism in favor of an active and responsive approach to the first principles of Radical Traditionalist theory. “Conservative” is a moving target, and much of what conservatives are conserving is actually anti-Traditional. AltRight types typically enjoy and explore a broad range of novel artistic styles. The only art they consistently oppose is the excessively commercial and institutional.

Ask around. These kids on the AltRight aren’t listening to church hymns on their iPods or posting strictly realist religious paintings on their feeds.
Social Issues – tolerance for(or indifference to) abortion, birth control, homosexuality and prostitution to varying degrees. Support for eugenics and transhumanism.
Deep Thought: Would a homosexual eugenicist remove the “gay gene?”
AltLeft mostly grew from my own experiences overhearing hipster leftist white friends occasionally make race realist comments or jokes, but knowing they would never sign on to any pro-white movement that came bundled with a laundry list of right wing add-ons like Christian theocracy, hardcore traditionalism, overt misogyny, men’s rights(lol,) anti-sex, anti modern medicine etc.
A similar fool’s errand has occupied the right for decades. You can walk into any socially conservative set of normies and find some evidence of racial awareness. If we could just get all these country boys who enjoy making racist jokes to actually stand up for their White identity, we’d be poised to take over the world, by God! It doesn’t work that way. Atavistic racial awareness is insufficient because it’s simply not as powerful as social pressure, ideological conditioning, and self-interest. None of those things can make it go away, but they all effectively limit it.

The answer lies in developing new subcultures with their own social norms and presenting alternative ideologies. With the right social support and the right ideological conditioning, people are capable of defying their self-interests. I’m skeptical that the mainstream Progressive ideological framework is even capable, given its all-encompassing focus on the individual and his interest and indulgence.
What distresses me more about Progressive pro-Whites than the butt stuff is their unwillingness to move beyond anonymous contexts due to concern for self-interest. Given what being publicly pro-White entails for one’s career prospects, dating options, social circles, and even personal safety, it’s a tough sell for anybody with an ego-positive and individualist ideological foundation. If a pro-White Left ever arises, it would be far more likely to emerge from the more collectivist National Bolshevik sorts.
It’s easy to understand why many right wing reactionaries express tepid support for Arab and African immigration to Europe and the United States.
Wait. What?
AltLeftist is the guy who’s minding his own business sipping his latte at some fair trade, locally owned coffee shop, listening to an indie folk music podcast while some Mexican gangster is outside stealing his beach cruiser. People like this can only ignore so many of these incidents before they admit to themselves that multiculturalism is failing on some level.
Until the guy challenges the degenerate individualism at the core of his Progressive ideology, he’ll just sit there and sip his house blend while his bike, his neighborhood, his country, and his race are stolen right before his eyes. People who aren’t Traditionalist are definitely welcome to become pro-White. But if they’re going to show up and insist that the reason we’re not winning is because we’re scaring off the Progressives by failing to be Progressive, I might just steal his beach cruiser myself.

Rosenberg's "Religion of the Blood"

via The West's Darkest Hour

Alfred Rosenberg argued for a new “religion of the blood” based on the innate promptings of the Nordic soul to defend its noble character against racial and cultural degeneration. He rejected Christianity for its universality, for its doctrine of original sin (at least for Germans whom he declared on one occasion were born noble), and for its teachings on the immortality of the soul. Absorbing Christianity enfeebled a people. Rosenberg stated: “The general ideas of the Roman and of the Protestant churches are negative Christianity and do not, therefore, accord with our [German] soul.”

In January 1934 Hitler appointed Rosenberg as the cultural and educational leader of the Reich. The Sanctum Officium in Rome recommended that Rosenberg’s Myth of the Twentieth Century be put on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum for scorning and rejecting “all dogmas of the Catholic Church, indeed the very fundamentals of the Christian religion.”

During the Second World War Rosenberg outlined the future envisioned by the Hitler government for religion in Germany, with a thirty-point program for the future of the German churches. Among its articles:
• The National Reich Church of Germany would claim exclusive control over all churches
• publication of the Bible would cease
• crucifixes, Bibles and saints were to be removed from altars
Mein Kampf would be placed on altars as “to the German nation and therefore to God the most sacred book”
• the Christian Cross would be removed from all churches and replaced with the swastika.
Many consider Rosenberg the main author of key National Socialist ideological creeds. But after the war the Allies, under the lead of American and English Christians, executed him.

Everyone Is NOT Special

via Alternative Right

By now, we should all know that global corporations are the Enemy, perhaps an even more egregious collective enforcer of loathsome cultural edicts than the state itself. In recent years, corporations have used their hefty power and ill-won clout to perpetrate innumerable anti-white, anti-Christian, and generally anti-normal outrages, and to foster tyranny against independent-minded people of all races, creeds, and orientations.

Given this broad and undeniable general trend, it is interesting to note when a major corporation has the temerity to court controversy by playing to some widely-held but seldom-promoted, conservative or "populist" theme. Last weekend, amidst the first round NFL playoff games, this ad for Kia aired:



The spot (which has actually been around for a while but only gained my notice last weekend) is notable for several reasons. In it, are presented with a sort of lamentation of the enforced emasculation of boys, via the pernicious "self-esteem" movement, which mandates an end to the hearty (and very masculine) competitive spirit, in order to ensure that no child ever feels like a loser. But, as Dash commented memorably in The Incredibles, "if everyone is special, then no one is special." Put another way, if winners are prevented from being able to celebrate and savor their hard-fought accomplishments, this is surely a grave injustice.

In the commercial, which  manages to be funny, mordant, and poignant all at once, a father is outraged when his son is given a "Participation" trophy at the end of the football season. (The son, interestingly, seems generally indifferent to the notion, suggesting that he has already grown immured to his conditioning, while his dad is old enough to recall a time before the widespread "self-esteem" indoctrination kicked in, a time-- in short-- when boys could be boys, without fear of being shamed or attacked for their ostensible "toxic masculinity."

"A 'participation' trophy???" the man ponders incredulously, with rising anger, as the two walk to their waiting car in the parking lot. "But we won every game we played!!!" (His proclivity to "live vicariously" through his son's accomplishments is wryly but affectionately acknowledged through his use of the pronoun "we") Finally, he asks his son for the trophy, whereupon he promptly chisels away the offending "Participation" plaque, and reaching into his sleek Kia minivan, brings forth a magic marker and scribbles "Champs" in its place, before duly handing the trophy back to the (again generally oblivious) boy.

We are clearly meant to cheer the stubbornly principled, doggedly masculine spirit of the father in this ad, while at the same time acknowledging his very human (and specifically manly) foibles. Yet the ending captures the poignancy of this gesture of furtive defiance; even if this man's son has finally been acknowledged as a champion, it can only be in an unofficial capacity; the wrong is righted, as it were, only in secret, and in haste, per the scrawlings of a Sharpie marker.

To me, this moment somewhat resembles the scene at the end of  70s classic The Bad News Bears, when the loveable little runts angrily reject the condescending overtures of the team that beat them in the championship game. Then, too, the point of contention was, interestingly enough, a trophy.



Back in the 70s, of course, losers were expected to take their lumps, but by God those with pluck (like the "Bears") would resolutely not stand to be humiliated. Yet something has fundamentally changed in the West over the past four decades. In 2016, it is the winners who must stand up and take what is rightly theirs. Even a soulless global conglomerate like Kia must sense the festering outrage in much-maligned Middle America over what a joke of a culture we have become due to the machinations of "totalitarian pansies" in high places.

The B.U.F. and the Silvertown By-election of 1940

via Britannia

Tommy Moran
The Silvertown By-election of 22 February, 1940, was the last election ever contested by the British Union of Fascists. Three months later, on the 30th May, 1940 the BUF was dissolved and its publications were banned.

The B.U.F. candidate for the Silvertown By-election was Tommy Moran.


Tommy Moran was born in Newcastle on the 12th of December 1900. Formerly a member of the Labour Party, Tommy joined the B.U.F. in July 1933. Immediately on joining, he became a very active member and helped considerably in planting the seeds of Fascism in the North East of England.

In those early days, the Movement was fighting one of its biggest battles - its right to free speech - and in Newcastle Moran, almost more than anybody, established Fascist rights. Night after night he led his little band of followers out, facing the mob hooliganism of the Reds, and slowly but surely wore down the physical resistance to Fascist speakers.

Although he had never spoken in public, he soon became a first class speaker, and he was sent round the country putting the Fascist creed before many large audiences.

Moran's wife Toni, also became a BUF member and was a regular speaker in Manchester. [1] Sometimes they would share the same platform.

In September of 1934 Tommy went to Manchester to combat the "Drive Mosley out of Lancashire" compaign. While in the North East he regularly played Rugby for Vickers Armstrong, and as a member of the R.N.V.R. he won the light heavyweight boxing championship of the Navy. [2] Tommy boxed professionally between 1919 and 1926 competing in 33 professional bouts. [3]

Tommy will always be remembered for his heroic fight against the Reds on October 4, 1936. Tommy, along with a small group of companions, were on their way to join their B.U.F. column assembly point at Royal Mint Street, East London. They were set upon soon after leaving Mark Lane Station. His companions soon lay sprawled in the street, Tommy with his back to the wall put up a terrific fight against a dozen or so men who were attacking him simultaneously. One after another he sent them reeling with clean boxing blows, until he himself was felled by a chair leg.

Following the first round of Defence Regulation 18B internments Moran, whom Diana Mosley continued to pay a wage to, took over as effective leader of the BUF. [4]  Eventually he was detained under the regulation himself. Held in a camp on the Isle of Man, Moran continued his leadership role by setting up a camp office in an attempt to keep the BUF running, a move largely ignored by the guards. [5]

Tommy Moran had the honour of being the last candidate ever to stand for the British Union of Fascists.


Tommy Moran's election leaflet for the Silvertown By-election, 22 February, 1940

Silvertown was a safe Labour seat, and none of the major parties stood against the Labour candidate. With Britain already at war with Germany, a Fascist candidate was never going to get many votes. 

 By-election, 22 February 1940: Silvertown

Labour              James Henry Hollins     14,343       92.8%  (+11.8%)
Communist       Harry Pollitt                      966         6.2%
British Union    Thomas P. Moran              151         1.0%
of Fascists 

References:

1. J. V. Gottlieb, Feminine Fascism: Women in Britain's Fascist Movement, London: I.B.Tauris, 2003, p. 324

2. ACTION No 59, page 8, April 3rd 1937 (Morrell)

3. boxinghistory.org.uk - Find your boxing ancestor (Morrell) 

4. Dorrill, Blackshirt, p. 505 

5. G. Macklin, Very Deeply Dyed in Black, London: IB Tauris, 2007, p. 14 

Looking for Tommy Moran?

Standard and Poor’s Downgrades Polish Bonds as Punishment for Poland's Stance against the Non-White Invasion

via The Occidental Observer

As a footnote to Guillaume Durocher’s “Poland Rearms in the Demographic & Cultural War (as EU and Germany Impotently Protest),” Zerohedge has a nice blog reporting on the downgrade in Polish government bonds as a result of Poland standing up to the EU and Germany.
Over the past week, Poland’s relations with Europe have gone from cordial to abysmal, when first Poland’s new Eurosceptic government compared the EU and Merkel to Nazis, with Polish weekly Wprost releasing the following cover saying “they want to supervise Poland again”…
… only for Brussels to retaliate and launch an “unprecedented” review of Polish media laws, a move which Poland angrily responded is far beyond the EU’s domain.
Well, as so often happens, whenever there is a political spat in Europe, the rating agencies are quickly involved (think S&P and Moody’s downgrades and upgrades of Greece depending on how well the vassal nation is “behaving”), and moments ago S&P downgraded Poland from A- to BBB+ outlook negative, precisely due to Poland’s new media law which has been the topic of so much consternation over the past week.
In other words, S&P is now nothing more than a lackey for Brussels, threatening to send Polish yields higher if Poland does not fall in line.
The report notes, “The government’s new media law, as another example [threatening Poland’s credit worthiness], gives the government extensive powers to appoint and control the directors and supervisory boards of public broadcasters.” One wonders exactly how such powers are supposed to affect the Polish economy in a way that would warrant the  downgrade. It’s never made clear. One could only wish that a populist US government would clean house of the multicultural lefties at NPR and PBS, and I rather doubt it would hurt the economy.

The report also states, “Pronouncements about … the refugee crisis,  may heighten tensions between Poland and many Western-European EU states.” The logic seems to be that a sound economy absolutely requires knuckling under to the EU and Germany on refugees. Because, as we all know, refugees are enormously beneficial to the economy and more than pay for themselves. Oh wait, refugees cost Germany along at least 17 billion euros ($18.6 billion) (another  estimate, 21 billion euros ($22.6 billion)). So why not downgrade Germany because of their added debt — and the increasing tensions with the far saner countries of Eastern Europe, Poland, Hungary, et al.?

Of course, Standard and Poor’s has nothing but the highest ethical standards and would certainly not let it’s politics affect its ratings. Well, maybe not. In February of last year they paid $1.5 billion in fines for their behavior during the mortgage meltdown.

Mossad Intelligence Agents Behind Fake "Anti-semitism" Claims

via Renegade Tribune

Author's Note: Did you know that the most virulent anti-Semitism is  fake anti-Semitism manufactured by Jews?  It is Jews themselves who often scrawl swastikas on walls, deface Jewish cemeteries, and create fake Palestinian websites with bloodcurdling messages like ‘DEATH TO ALL JEWS!’ All this is done to create a backlash of sympathy for Jews and make people rally round and give their full support to Israel and the “persecuted” Chosen People. 

Mossad proxy faked violent Facebook anti-Semitism: Israeli legal group admits faking an ostensibly pro-Palestinian Facebook page to post anti-Semitic statements including “Death to all the Jews”

An Israeli legal group with intimate ties to the state’s intelligence agencies has admitted to faking an ostensibly pro-Palestinian Facebook page and using it to post anti-Semitic statements including “Death to all the Jews.”

The Israeli group has also filed a lawsuit against Facebook, for allegedly permitting Palestinian “incitement.”

Shurat HaDin claims to be a “civil rights organization.” Various media reports have described it as an “Israeli non-governmental organization,” an “advocacy group,” or even a neutral-sounding “law center” – the group’s self-description also adopted by The Guardian and PBS.

But US embassy cables leaked by Chelsea Manning and published by WikiLeaks tell a very different story.

Shurat HaDin director Nitsana Darshan-Leitner privately told a US embassy official that her group “took direction” on which court cases to pursue. She claimed that she “receives evidence” from Israel’s international espionage and assassination agency Mossad and from Israel’s National Security Council.

Mossad anti-Semitism

In a video published to YouTube last week, Shurat HaDin claimed responsibility for the creation of a Facebook page titled “Stop Israelis” on 29 December.


A screenshot from Shurat HaDin’s YouTube video shows the “pro-Palestinian” Facebook page the Mossad-linked group faked.

At some point soon after, the page posted a cartoon about the Israeli threat to al-Aqsa mosque, along with the statement: “Revenge against the zionist enemy that threatens Al Aqsa! Death to all the jews! [sic]”

Shurat HaDin says the faking of the page was done as a “Facebook experiment,” supposedly to demonstrate that the social media giant is biased against Israelis.

Shurat HaDin claims it created a second racist page, but called “Stop Palestinians,” and then reported both pages to Facebook at the same time, but that only the latter was immediately removed.

In fact, the fake Shurat HaDin page containing the anti-Semitic statement was also deleted within days of when Shurat HaDin claims it was reported to Facebook.

Speaking to The Jerusalem Post Gilad Ravid of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev criticized Shurat HaDin’s actions, saying he was “not convinced that the conclusions drawn from this experiment are the correct ones.”

Ravid also said Shurat HaDin’s anti-Semitic postings on Facebook would have caused “significant discomfort” to those who read them before the page was closed down.

Media later reporting on the “experiment,” including the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post were sent a statement from the social media giant: “Facebook does not tolerate hate speech, including against people on the basis of their nationality. We review all reports and take down such content. Both these pages have now been removed from Facebook.”

Facebook did not reply to a request for further comment.

Violent incitement

Ironically, use of Facebook and other social media by Israelis for violent incitement against Palestinians and Muslims is pervasive. The Electronic Intifada has documented this phenomenon over several years.

A perusal through our “Israelis on Facebook” tag lists too many disturbing examples to list in full here.

Some of the more notable cases include Mor Ostrovski, the Israeli soldier who posted a photo of a Palestinian child in the crosshairs of his rifle to his Instagram account; an outbreak of violent racist fantasies (“Castrate them!” “Burn them!” “Bullet in the head!”) against a group of young Palestinian children who had joined a peaceful protest camp in 2013; and a July 2015 viral campaign in which Israelis posted photos of their children holding signs demanding the execution of Palestinian “terrorists.”

Even more notable is the fact that this racist incitement against Palestinians stems from the very top of the Israeli establishment.

Current justice minister Ayelet Shaked in 2014 approvingly posted a genocidal article to her Facebook page which declared that “the entire Palestinian people is the enemy” and justified its destruction, “including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.”

One month later Moshe Feiglin, then deputy speaker of Israel’s parliament, used his Facebook page to publish his own detailed plan for the total destruction of the Palestinian people in Gaza.

The plan called for the “conquest of the entire Gaza Strip, and annihilation of all fighting forces and their supporters,” and called for the civilian population to be “concentrated” in special camps on the border with Egypt.

All of these instances of Israelis using Facebook for violent and genocidal incitement against Palestinians took place long before the current Palestinian uprising began in October – the subject of a recently-launched Shurat HaDin lawsuit against Facebook.

Mossad vs. Facebook

The reason for the Mossad-linked group to want to generate such negative publicity for Facebook is no mystery.

Lakin v. Facebook was filed in a New York state court at the end of October on behalf of some 20,000 Israelis against the social media giant.

It is an attempt to get Facebook to crack down on Palestinians who Shurat HaDin claims use it to praise or organize armed resistance against Israeli soldiers and civilians.

The suit calls for the court to issue “an injunction requiring the defendant to stop allowing Palestinian terrorists to incite violent attacks against Israeli citizens.”

But according to Eugene Volokh, a UCLA law professor who blogs at The Washington Post, the case “is going nowhere.”

Volokh argues that Shurat HaDin’s suit relies on “Israeli laws that restrict speech” in a way which would be “unconstitutionally overbroad” under the First Amendment which prohibits federal, state and local government in the US from restricting free speech.

“American courts don’t enforce foreign speech restrictions that would be inconsistent with the First Amendment,” Volokh observes.

He says that “many of the examples that the complaint offers thus wouldn’t even qualify as ‘incitement’ under US law.”

Volokh says that Facebook “has no obligation under US law to censor its content” as Shurat HaDin and the Israeli government clearly want it to do.

“Covert” online units

This is not the first time that Israel, or groups engaging in government-backed propaganda, have engaged in such deceptive online tactics.

In 2013, it was reported that the Israeli prime minister’s office was organizing students in “covert” and “semi-military” style units to tweet and post pro-Israel messages on social media without revealing they are doing it as part of a government propaganda campaign.

During the 2014 Israeli assault on Gaza which killed more than 2,200 Palestinians including 551 children, one Israeli student union set up a “Hasbara war room” – using the Hebrew word for propaganda. “We want people abroad who don’t know our reality to understand exactly what is going on here,” one of the organizers explained. The “war room” itself drew on earlier similar efforts.

Also in summer 2014, The Electronic Intifada revealed how pro-Israel website Israel21c planned to use interns to infiltrate online communities with its puff-piece stories about the supposed wonders of Israeli technology.

“You wouldn’t directly reference that you’re interning for Israel21c,” one of the men behind the project admitted to our undercover reporter, “that would sort of defeat the point of posting it.”

And only last month the Center for Public Diplomacy and Israeli Hasbara announced it would plant secret operatives within Israeli human rights groups in order to discredit and undermine their work in support of Palestinian human rights.

Zionist anti-Semitism

There is also a pre-Internet age precedent for the “significant discomfort” that Shurat HaDin’s current Facebook deceptions would have caused Jews and others reading the “Stop Israelis” page.

In the 1980s, undercover Anti-Defamation League agent Roy Bullock (who worked for both Israel and the South African apartheid regime) infiltrated Palestine solidarity and Arab civil rights groups in the US.

One of Bullock’s tactics was to try and make it look as if the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) had neo-Nazi links.

He did this by trying to manufacture those links himself.

On one occasion, Bullock attended a conference of the Holocaust-denying “Institute for Historical Review” to distribute ADC literature and recruit members.

We know that Israel and its allied groups around the world are still involved in keeping close tabs on Palestine solidarity activists.

Incidents like Shurat HaDin’s fabrication of an anti-Semitic “pro-Palestinian” Facebook page show some of the lengths to which Israel’s propagandists will still go.



Here are two short videos (each under 2 minutes) that will show you that Israel’s hasbara agents are all around us , even on this website, posting hysterical,  over-the-top  messages like“EVIL JEWS!” and “DEATH TO ALL JEWS!” so as to create a backlash of sympathy for Israel and the “persecuted” Chosen People. The more violent and extreme the expression of hatred aimed at Jews in these messages, the more likely that all this is simply histrionic play-acting by a Jewish hasbara agent.

Check out these two very short videos for confirmation of this:
1.  VIDEO: 1.45 mins
2. VIDEO: 1.45 mins

Legion Camp, March 18-20

via Western Spring

The revolution begins with you.  We are not just drifting individuals seeking out our own brand of pleasure in a meaningless world of consumerism and nihilistic vanity, we are Legionnaires, the standard bearers for our race.

Learn to fight, reconnect with nature, build new skills, form new bonds of friendship – join the fourth Legion Camp on March 18-20.  For more information see www.legionmac.org

German Police Officials Expose Invader Crime

via The New Observer


Nick Hein
Three German police officials have put their careers in jeopardy by daring to go public with their firsthand accounts of the nonwhite refugee-crime wave which is sweeping Germany as a result of the Angela Merkel-created invasion.

The first, a policewoman from Dortmund identified by the Bild newspaper as “Michaela B.,” revealed how even she had been assaulted and robbed by the nonwhite criminals.

Saying that being a policewoman had always been her “dream job,” she was now “beginning to have doubts over the past few months.”

She said that over this period the “lack of respect, aggression, and the brutalization of society had become part of her everyday life.”

To make matters worse, she told the Bild, “perpetrators are not punished properly.  Every day we arrest criminals, but they are immediately set free again.”

She then told of how she was making her way home after a night shift in Dortmund. At the main railway station, she spotted a “North African” man following her.

“The man moved around me as if he was dancing—that’s a typical trick,” she continued. She pushed him away, but he grabbed her shoulder with one hand and her cell phone with another.

Another colleague then came to her aid, and together they subdued the man, later identified as an Algerian “asylum seeker.”

Her troubles were not an end: “While my colleague held the perpetrator on the ground, waiting for reinforcements, eight more North Africans surrounded us. They shouted that we were Nazis, racists, and that this was police violence.”

“This is also unfortunately an everyday occurrence,” she continued. “But we cannot help it if the criminals almost always come from Algeria and Morocco.”

When the Algerian was searched back at the police station, a second stolen cell phone was found in his possession. After a search, the man was then let out again, according to regulations.

“This is so frustrating,” Michaela B. continued. “Recently we arrested a pickpocket, and literally ten minutes later, we arrested him again. They just walk out of here [the police station] and carry on.

“They laugh at us, because they know that nothing happens to them. The prosecutors and judges have no interest in these offenders. We have often tried, but always fail, to get them into pre-trial detention.”

This astonishing regulation—not to arrest or detain “asylum seekers” arrested for street robbery and similar incidents—is official policy ordered directly by the German government.

Michaela B.
Nick Hein, the ex-chief of the Federal Police in Cologne, pointed out in an earlier Bild article how it is possible that an “asylum seeker” can commit crimes without fearing being deported.

“The answer is simple,” Hein said. “Article 53 of the Residence Act provides for expulsion of foreigners only in serious cases.” That section states that a foreigner shall be expelled only if they have been sentenced to a “non-appealable prison term” of at least three years within a five year period.

The same Bild article went on to quote another serving policeman, identified as “Bernd K.” He was detailed to serve at the main nonwhite invasion entry points into Germany for six months, specifically at Passau, Freilassing, and the main Munich railway station.

He said that there was deliberate suppression of the real nonwhite invader crime statistics. “People really have no idea of what is going on,” he said.

“For example, if an asylum seeker cut another person’s throat, then in the official report we are required to write that it was a ‘grievous bodily harm’ case instead of ‘attempted murder.’ This makes the statistics look better,” he said.

“In the last few months, I have written just one charge against a German. All the rest [of my write-ups] have been refugees. At the railway station, women are regularly sexually harassed and felt up. When we try and take them to court, we are told that this is not state policy, and that we are racist.”

Even worse, Bernd K. said, the police are not allowed to use physical force to restrain the nonwhite refugee-criminals once they are in custody.

“If a refugee wants to escape, this means we cannot even hold him down. This is dictated from above because that would be physical violence.”

In addition, he said, about “95 percent of refugees are single men, and half of them do not have valid passports or documents.”

Yet another serving police official, a woman of Greek descent already famous in Germany for speaking out about nonwhite crime, Tania Kambouri, revealed in an interview in Die Zeit newspaper that police in Bochum  are confronted all the time with violence and misogyny from “young, Muslim migrants.”

Kambouri, who became famous for a book she released earlier on the topic—and who somehow has managed to keep her job, despite intense pressure—told Die Zeit that when nonwhites are arrested, they routinely cry out “asylum, asylum” as their first line of defense.

“My colleagues and I are increasingly called out on more and more missions to deal with refugees who commit thefts, including for example, vehicle theft, and injuries inflicted outside their accommodations.”
“We have to deal with groups of young men who misbehave: they are loud, aggressive, disrespectful, violent, and contemptuous of women. Many of them come from North Africa: Algerians, Moroccans, which is cause for concern.”

She went on to say that there was no difference in behavior between Turks, Arabs, Lebanese, or the other nonwhite immigrants.  Even those who have been in Germany a long time—and have German nationality—hold exactly the same views, she added.

“I often experience it: They say they have a German passport, but they say: ‘I sh*t in this country.”

“Even if we only issue a parking ticket, we are immediately surrounded by ten, twenty, fifty people who scream, and shove us around. Really, it is only migrants. I have never seen Germans do this.”

Introducing the Alt Left

via Counter-Currents

Fidus, Light Prayer
Several months ago I noticed a guy following me on Twitter with the username, “A Clockwork Green.” In his bio, he identified as “AltLeft, racially aware white.” He deactivated his account, and I have no idea what ever happened to him. Shortly before he disappeared though, he had expressed his distaste for a lot of the rhetoric of the AltRight and seemed somewhat disillusioned. I began to wonder how many others there were like him. How many white progressives have begun to reject the politically correct narrative and secretly venture into thought crime circles on the web? I’m willing to bet it’s probably more than you think. Of those that pop the purple pill and make the trip . . . how many see all the boilerplate, post libertarian corporate conservatism, radical traditionalist Christianism, 15th century LARPing, pseuoscientific anti-vaccination stuff, and wacky conspiracy theories being promoted and decide “Fuck this. These people are freaks. Maybe the social justice crowd isn’t so bad after all.”

Then there are the ones who stick around. Seriously though, who are the AltLeft anyway? Who are we? I would say that the majority are white people who hold a lot of typically leftist views on economics, the environment and some social issues, yet at some point realized the new left had become hostile to any white person even slightly reluctant to act as a scapegoat for everybody else’s problems. No self respecting white person would want to be associated with a movement that trashes their heroes, their culture, their history, denies their achievements . . . a movement which seeks to destroy their civilization and erases their identity. Hell, besides all that, a lot of cultural marxism has become so freaky that most normal white feminists and gays are probably weirded out by it.

My own journey was a bit different. I was mostly a Nixonian sort of republican for much of my young adult life. As an irreligious person living mostly in artsy metropolitan areas, I identified more with the culture of the left, while always privately retaining a racial awareness(which would come out occasionally at peak triggering) and a low tolerance for hippie bullshit. I became disillusioned with unfettered capitalism through real world experiences watching corporations and brands in action, the way they had loyalty to nothing and prioritized profits over absolutely everything: including quality, aesthetic, even people’s lives. The creepy cult-like way they manipulate and motivate people. So at a certain point I began to think of myself more as AltLeft than AltRight.

Terms such as left and right seem obsolete in this day and age. The true divisions are between nationalists and internationalists, as well as pro-whites and anti-whites, identitarians vs multiculturalists etc. What we find though in reality is that these words are deeply ingrained. Anyone who spends time in a political movement with “right” in the title will soon discover it’s difficult to divorce it from organized religion, traditionalism and sexual puritanism. What better way to repel certain types and prevent entryism from them than by partially identifying with a label they already don’t like? Out of these groups forming, something of a coalition can emerge. The AltLeft exists in that small space where Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan begin to meet. It’s that point in time where Mussolini ditched marxism and moved toward fascism. The question is, can the AltLeft be divorced from political correctness and white ethnomasochism? My guess is that it can, with the help of enough problematic language to scare the cucks away and create a safe space for leftist shitlords to don their greenshirts and appear in full force.

Here is a brief guide, which outlines various political positions of those who might identify as AltLeft. Of course, not all of these will apply to everyone, and some may apply in varying degrees:

Religion – Mostly outright atheist or agnostic, occasionally some nominal identification with ancient European religions/mythology. Extremely rationalist, skeptical of supernatural or “new agey” beliefs, homeopathic medicine, and conspiracy theories.

Economics – oppose laissez-faire capitalism and excessive consumerism, free trade. Where corporate profit interests run counter to the interests of the nation and the people, regulation is needed. Recognizes benefits of capitalism in generating wealth but also skeptical of “market forces” which seem just as likely to lead to an Idiocracy styled “Brawndo” aesthetic than a dwarf planet mining colony. In addition to fostering an environment for dual-loyalties, Transnational laissez-faire capitalism seems to correlate with a population of fatasses: walking advertisements hooked on cheap Walmart junk, garbage entertainment and fast food. Tend to favor mercantilism and soft socialism (Norway without 3rd world immigration)

Prefer fair trade (or free trade only with nations that have similar standards of living and environmental controls) including tariffs, value added tax etc. Some support for soft socialism and state capitalism (but racially conscious.)

Democracy/Government – opposes “warm body democracy.” Prefer some type of confederate. Participation in government selection must be earned in some way, through intelligence testing, civil service and sacrifice to demonstrate concern for the greater interests of the group (think Heinlein’s Starship Troopers.) Sometimes fascist ideology or national bolshevism . . . occasionally sympathetic to Soviet communism.

Technology – Support for new medical technology, research initiatives, cloning, and space exploration without any of the reflexive anti-whitism, “noble savage” fetishism, or “Little House on the Praireactionary” longing that dominates much of the traditional left and right.

Race – The postmodern left is defined mostly by its ceaseless advocacy of ethnomasochism for ancestral Europeans. It claims to promote egalitarian values but in both net effect and rhetoric has become implicitly anti-white. The AltLeft is for racially aware whites who don’t feel like they have anything to apologize for. Culture is a biological expression of race. Genetic average differences in IQ and behavior exist between races. These are observable on a large scale. Many so called “left-wing” values like feminism, tolerance for alternative lifestyles, and sexual freedom are not (at least at the present time) compatible with the third world populations the left currently champions. Support for (most) non-White immigration is counterproductive in the long term if it results in whites becoming a minority. Recognition of the disproportionate number of Jews with tendencies to oppose white people collectively acting in their interests.

Art – The AltLeft is more open to different styles of art. Conservatives tend to rail against “modern art” while often not being able to distinguish between modernism and postmodernism (though they probably would hate both.) The simplest imperfect analogy for modern vs postmodern would be Dr. Evil vs Austin Powers.

Social Issues – tolerance for (or indifference to) abortion, birth control, homosexuality, and prostitution to varying degrees. Support for eugenics and transhumanism.

Feminism – Generally support for 2nd wave feminism, TERFs, etc. Rejects intersectionality for being anti-white and for its advocates being apologists for non-whites, who rape women and commit violence towards women at much higher rates. Intersectional feminism indirectly promotes “rape culture” by naively importing it under the guise of sticking up for the oppressed.

People in the AltLeft usually accept that there are biological differences between men and women which affect how they interact with one another(beyond social pressures and conditioning.) They have a tendency to be “purple pill,” agreeing with certain manosphere concepts and rejecting much of the intersectional men’s rights movement that blames Western women for most of society’s ills.

Foreign policy – mostly isolationist or non-interventionist, reject neocolonialism except in space.

Prosecutors Drop Child Sexual Abuse Charges against High-Profile Jewish Politician

via The Realist Report

Victims of childhood sexual abuse said Friday they were disappointed that prosecutors had dropped a sex-crimes prosecution against late British Jewish politician Greville Janner, who died before court proceedings could begin.
Janner, a former Labour Party lawmaker and peer, died December 19 aged 87. At the time he stood accused of 22 offenses in the 1960s, ’70s and ’80s, most involving boys in children’s homes in his central England constituency. Eight of his nine alleged victims were aged 16 or under at the time.
His family denied all the allegations.
Janner also served as president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews — Anglo-Jewry’s main representative organization — from 1978 to 1984, and was a vice president of the World Jewish Congress until 2009.
Prosecutor Richard Whittam told a judge Friday that before Janner died, prosecutors had applied to introduce more charges. But he said the law “makes no provision for posthumous proceedings” so the prosecution is now over.
Liz Dux, lawyer for six of Janner’s alleged victims, said her clients were “devastated.”
“They understand the reasons why but that doesn’t make up for the real travesty — that many gave their statements decades ago and have been denied justice through a failure to prosecute earlier when Janner was alive and well,” she said.
Police and child abuse victims expressed outrage last year when prosecutors announced they would not charge Janner, although there was enough evidence to do so, because he had advanced Alzheimer’s.
The Crown Prosecution Service later reversed the decision and said a judge and jury would conduct a “trial of the facts,” which considers evidence but does not issue a verdict or pass sentence. It had been scheduled to start in April, without Janner present.
Britain’s judge-led inquiry into institutional child abuse said Friday it would consider the claims against Janner as part of its investigation.
In a hearing in August 2015, Janner spent just 59 seconds in the dock. He appeared in court wearing a soiled cardigan and using a walking stick, and said “Oooh, this is wonderful” as he entered the courtroom.
The politician was one of a number of high-profile figures to face historic sex abuse charges in Britain after BBC presenter Jimmy Savile was revealed as a pedophile after his death in 2011, leading to a rush of victims coming forward.
The Occidental Observer, edited by Dr. Kevin MacDonald, has published a number of excellent articles highlighting and analyzing Lord Janner, his friends and connections, and the truly horrific (and highly credible) child sexual abuse allegations that have been leveled against this high profile Jewish politician. Of course, Janner was never properly prosecuted and brought to justice, and never will be.

Even after it was credibly alleged Janner was a pedophile and had raped young boys, he was still protected. This is the despicable state of affairs across the entire Western world – high profile politicians and insiders can literally get away with raping young boys.

America's King

via Radix

At a certain bar in Antwerp, an old man walked in and sat next to me. Wordlessly, the bartender handed him a beer, which the elderly gentleman grasped with some difficulty as he was missing several fingers. Oddly intimidated and intrigued, I asked the student I had been drinking with if he knew the man and his story. The young nationalist held up his hand, wiggled his fingers, and simply replied, “The East.” The awe I felt could not have been exceeded if a member of Napoleon’s Imperial Guard had picked that moment to walk out of the restroom.

And then the student returned to talking about the local elections.

It’s not just that we live at the End of History. The technics of the age infuse the temporal with an undeserved intensity of meaning. We use words like “epic” to describe something on YouTube and “legendary” is associated with a homosexual celebrity on a sitcom.

But because the utterly inconsequential is surrounded by such a frenzy, we lack all context or sense of larger importance. We live at a time when a group of insurgents has proclaimed the restoration of the Caliphate in Mesopotamia and there’s a shooting war in Europe, yet it seems like nothing is happening. Each day is much the same as the one before, only with a different viral video to watch. After all, the news cycle never ends.

And yet there are still myths, gods, and blasphemy. When we encounter someone who actually lived those events we aren’t sure even happened, we feel a sudden shock of the real—an electricity which tells us our own experiences are cheap and of no importance. But our descendants will be taught a history of our own time that will give weight to people and events that seem utterly mundane and approachable to us. And those who have some personal connection with our myths simply regard them as part of their own lives. As unthinkable as it sounds, some bumbling embarrassment we deal with every day will become the great hero or villain our children will be taught to revere or despise.

There’s always that hard to define moment when a celebrity or politician becomes a Great Man, usually (but not always) when he dies. Somewhere in Argentina there’s probably a guy who remembers being tossed out of a bar by a bouncer named Jorge and has to think of it every time he sees a picture of Pope Francis. The Republicans are doing their best to mythologize Ronald Reagan and have succeeded in some ways, with the man who fired the air traffic controllers having a DC airport named after him. We can expect the Democrats to try to do the same with Barack Obama as the first black President.

But the real trick is the transition from the mundane to the mythical, when a figure becomes not just heroic but achieves the modern equivalent of apotheosis and is part of the official culture. Not long ago, we’d include the Founding Fathers in this category, but taking shots at Washington and Jefferson is practically cliché. They haven’t been taken off the currency or written out of the approved history yet, but it’s only a matter of time.

We are in that awkward period when the new ideology of the state is still unsuccessfully digesting the symbols and history of the country. The American flag is still largely perceived as a “White” symbol, and each day brings new headlines that make no ideological sense but still illustrate a gnostic racial truth.

Blacks enjoying government benefits burn the government flag in Ferguson. A government school bans the flag to prevent attacks by Mexicans on Whites. Tea Party protests feature crowds waving the federal banner and the flags of the armed services to show opposition to the actions of the federal government. Americans protesting the immigration policies of their own government wave the American flag; Mexican immigrants who are the direct beneficiaries of the American government’s actions burn it. A movie about a military hero–which is to say, about a man who enforces the foreign policy of his government–is met with scorn and outrage from the very same people who demand the government do more to enforce their version of social change.

You can say this is incoherent nonsense and congratulate yourself for being an edgelord but the fact remains that even now to be perceived as a generic “American” is to be White. Therefore, the Regime needs a figure and a new founding myth as America transitions into a non-White country.

That figure is the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (So called.) There he is, his malevolent visage staring down at me from the crude statue they built of him in the capital of our Hollow Empire. As the late Sam Francis (who, unlike King, earned his doctorate) wrote, the Martin Luther King holiday legitimized King and his agenda. And as Richard Spencer pointed out, MLK Day is the one national holiday that has a precise and deep sense of meaning and underlies what passes for American identity.

It’s easy, necessary, and of course fun to point out the willful ignorance of conservatives regarding their “Republican” MLK. However, there is something to their belief that has to be considered. The key to King’s political triumph was to frame the aspirations of his movement into the American mythology, reinterpreting the revolutionary heritage of the Founders into a preparation for his fulfillment of American mission.

For many of us, the egalitarian poison inherent in the American Founding makes this process inevitable. But conservatives are just happy that they have a way to call King a patriot and a proud American. Conservatives can seize on King’s “pro-American” rhetoric to create a kind of artificial character who looks and sounds like King, but doesn’t have anything to do with the actual person or his beliefs. They can modify this creation to fit their own preferences in the same way contemporary post-Christians will say that “their God” wouldn’t send people to hell.

Therefore, the “King” of the holiday isn’t quite a symbol of White dispossession but a kind of personal Jesus surrounded by a protective cocoon of Wal-Mart style American patriotism. For God’s sake, they even managed to stick King in Hulk Hogan’s old “Real American” entrance video. In order to have a coherent version of American patriotism, you have to believe in King or else the entire Narrative of a gradual extension of freedom and liberty that justifies American existence and history breaks down. To deny King is to deny the ability of the American identity to transcend race. And for the normal White American, to deny that premise is to deny his very identity.

Thus, when contemporary Americans learn that some politicians still in office voted against the King holiday, it strikes them as a blasphemy akin waving a swastika at a celebration of D-Day. It’s the shock of the real, as their consciousness scrambles to process the reality that the mythical King they believe in was once just another “community activist.” Steve Scalise, who is dealing with his own problems right now, is one of those politicians on the “wrong side of history.” He has since bent the knee before the King, claiming that King’s writings “empower and inspire those who seek liberty, equality, and justice.” This is what total political defeat looks like.

Of course, another opponent of the King holiday was John McCain, whom it is hard to imagine as a right-wing culture warrior. The explanation is simple–for those who remember him, King was simply the Al Sharpton of his time. It was only a few decades ago when one could express agreement or disagreement with King without being called a segregationist or a racist. Today, even mild opposition is unthinkable and grounds for expulsion from public life.

In a greatly accelerated way, we’ve seen the same kind of process occur with issues like gay marriage, where championing “civil unions” has progressed from insanely leftist to disgustingly homophobic in a decade. Get ready for Hillary Clinton having to explain away her apparently arch-conservative husband signing the Defense of Marriage Act. And if present trends continue, get ready for people talking about the George W. Bush campaign of 2004 the same way they talk about George Wallace standing in the schoolhouse door.

There comes a point when issues and political figures slide off the Overton window altogether and become part of what we can call the civic religion. Criticizing or even objectively analyzing King as a normal political figure is to most people not just “unthinkable,” but an evil heresy to be actively stamped out. The same kind of reaction greets someone who tries to objectively analyze someone like Adolf Hitler. Figures like Hitler and King aren’t people or politicians, but avatars and symbols. We can’t humanize them and it’s dangerous to analyze them, at least publicly.

We aren’t dealing with a problem of knowledge, we are dealing with a question of faith. And people of faith don’t need to read the fine print. Too much is it stake if the dogmatic opinion of something, positive or negative, is shaken.

This impulse isn’t necessarily bad. Critical thought is overrated, freedom failed, and the self-described independent or contrarian thinkers have the most predictable opinions of all. “New Atheism” notwithstanding, society requires faith in something and the big questions need to be already settled. The vast majority of people require a structure and deliberate limitations on what they permit themselves to think.

The American civic religion is a secular theocracy built around the ideology of equality. It’s not that most Whites are too stupid to understand what’s happening to them, it’s that they have no language in which they can express or comprehend opposition to egalitarianism. It is the old debater’s question of explaining water to a fish. With few exceptions, those people who turn against egalitarianism are already predisposed against it. In most cases, belief generates the arguments, not the other way around.

The end of the King cult and the egalitarian age will come quickly, but not all at once. As with the slow retreat from Christendom in Europe, it will progress through a series of stages. Just as esoteric debates about the nature of salvation or the exact authority of the Magisterium led to consequences no participant could have foreseen, the changing ways that King is interpreted will lead to ideological possibilities that few can imagine today.

One of the foremost charges against King is that as a man, he is simply not able to bear the hagiographic burden. The content of Martin Luther King Jr.’s character was irredeemably corrupt. His private behavior is both inexcusable and relevant because he cloaked his politics in spiritualism and claimed righteousness as a man of the cloth.

But these days, ideological correctness transcends personal behavior. Bill Clinton has about as many rape and sexual accusations as Bill Cosby, including an ongoing scandal about possible involvement with a sex slave that reads like something out of Eyes Wide Shut. Nonetheless, as a nation, we assume that he’ll be the country’s first “First Gentleman” with the 2016 election being something of a formality. King’s moral failings are irrelevant–the movie Selma mentions his philandering as a kind of afterthought.

Nor will King be brought down by the likes of us. No matter how eloquent, rational, or even widely distributed a critique from the Right is against King, it is discredited merely by its source. It’s equivalent to trying to convert someone from Catholicism to Orthodoxy by using arguments from Christopher Hitchens. It’s too much of a leap.

King will be discredited by his friends. It will be a radical heresy, rather than a new faith. Martin Luther King Day has become for the New Left what May Day was for the old–a day of protests, agitation, and thinly veiled contempt for the established order and the historic American nation. The most prominent campaign this past MLK Day was #ReclaimMLK, an attempt to reframe King as a radical leftist, a supporter of racial preferences, an opponent of American imperialism, and a man who would have been marching alongside the Reverend Al in Ferguson and helping Jesse Jackson shake down businesses. In short, it has become safe to promote the real King.

Leftists no longer need the pro-American composite character of “King” that was required to sneak him into the American pantheon. They no longer have to deny his Communist affiliations. They no longer bother pretending that King was about equality.

King was, just like the late stage Malcolm X, interested in Racial Socialism, the government sponsored redistribution of wealth and status from Whites to blacks, with an intermediary Parasitic Class of “organizers” and “activists” who can profit from the process. In this sense, King’s truest political heirs are his biological heirs, who spend their days suing each other and everyone else in order to make sure no one displays an icon of the new saint without them getting a cut.

And this is our opportunity. The Martin Luther King of the “Dream” who tells conservatives that skin color doesn’t matter and promises racial reconciliation is fading away. Instead, we are getting the real King and the real meaning of the Civil Rights Movement, an overt attack on European-Americans as such with the objective of dispossessing them from the country that they–and they alone–built. America is transitioning away from a nonracial state to an overtly anti-White state. And just as in South Africa, this change will have an ever larger impact on the symbols of the state, slowly giving European-Americans the message that this country no longer belongs to them.

But it goes beyond that. One of King’s most quoted phrases is that all Americans of whatever race are “caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny.” Yet this is no longer true, if it ever was. Racial politics in America is a zero sum game. Even in Selma, the White President Lyndon Johnson who handed King his media managed victories is portrayed practically as an enemy, so the film can award black protesters an undeserved agency.

As the Left defines itself totally and explicitly in terms of identity politics, we can no longer even speak of the “national interest” as something that exists even as an abstract concept. After all, what does it mean to “improve health care,” “grow the economy,” or “protect the country” when all of these policies seems to involve imposing costs on the European-American population for the benefit of others?

The small heresy that has been introduced is that King is not an American hero but a non-White hero of the new America–the non-White, non-European America presaged by the election of Barack Obama. All the American Right wants is to live with its illusions and die off quietly. The Left won’t let it. Just as “not seeing color” has transformed from being the very definition of anti-racism to proof of racism, so will King become a tribal figure in the manner of a Cesar Chavez. The pantheon itself will split.

This is an opportunity, but not a guarantee. Whites may well choose submission rather than break with the old faith. Racial dhimmitude may be more appealing–and certainly safer–than separatism.

But we should rejoice in the increasing racial aggressiveness of the Left. A White tribe is being constructed by our enemies through their explicitly racialist and identity driven politics. King will be less perceived as an “all-American” deity than an avenging angel warring for a foreign people. And when the Left has “reclaimed” King and Whites are cast out of the new American Eden and its foundational myths, perhaps our lost European tribe can finally realize that America itself is the god that failed.