May 7, 2015

A White Search for Identity and Meaning

via Western Spring

Author's Note: I found my identity, my purpose and the meaning of it all in a belief in nature, evolution, the DNA code and in Whiteness.

I was going to call this Regaining Our Identity, but I’m not sure we Whites as Whites have ever collectively really had a proper identity to regain as the distinct people–White people–that we are. Instead, we’ve traditionally used narrower national identities for ourselves–Irish, English, German, etc.–but we must now, when our national lands are being invaded by non-Whites and they are also now being called Irish, English, German, etc,  focus our  identity on what makes us, us no matter where we were born or where we live.

This essential  identity is of course is our common White DNA code.  We are THE WHITE PEOPLE on this dark planet. We are different than all other peoples. We are not superior across the board, but we are different.  Whites are Whites. This is who we are. And, if you ask me, I’ll tell you that we are more than a race.  We are a separate species of human (even though we can, unfortunately, still bear children with non-Whites)– so I’ve changed the title to what you see above.  Before proceeding, it makes sense to correctly understand that when I use “White people,” with an upper case “W” I mean “non-Jewish White people of European descent.”   The term Aryan, although not widely used these days, is synonymous with “White people” the way I use the Whites and White people.

We Whites have had national identities, and religious identities, and political identities.  And, we’ve even taken on various frivolous identities as fans of sports teams and other relatively meaningless things  These are all secondary identities, because we are not born with them and we can change them. When we’ve taken on some of these secondary identities, we’ve forgotten who and what we are and we then often wrongly welcome as brothers and sisters those who are not White simply because they live in the same country or have the same religion or  share some of our interests or politics or even because  they may like the same sports teams or have the same views on some things as us as individuals.  Substituting these secondary identities is absurd and harmful to us as Whites and to our continued existence, our expansion, and our evolution along a White path.

As I’ve written elsewhere, I once had a conversation with a White guy who maintained very strongly that he was a White Nationalist but he also said that he was a good Christian.  I then asked him if it should happen that he must choose  between letting a Black Christian or a White non-Christian (an atheist or a follower of an explicitly White religion) live under his roof and marry his White daughter, which of the two would he choose?  He said he’d choose the Black Christian over the White non-Christian.  To me, this was a sure sign that this guy just didn’t understand reality and the nature of existence, evolution, genocide, or even White Nationalism.   Clearly, this man was confused and was putting a secondary identity, Christianity, in front of what should have been his primary identity: White.  To me, this is dead wrong. I wanted nothing else to do with this guy.  But why should a religious system be a secondary identity and not a primary identity?  It’s because you can change religions like changing a pair of shoes. You can’t do that with your DNA and your genes.  You are born with your most essential and primary identity–your essential Whiteness.  Too many Whites either don’t seem to know this or try to deny it.  Don’t be like one of them.  They are weak seeds and are disgusting.

But, it is true that not many of us have ever had a genuine and conscious identity based on who and what we are as a result of our genetic heritage as White people.  I’m talking about the kind of essential genetic identity that I believe we would see if we took  White babies from  White families from every White nation and put them on a deserted island and let them grow up without any cultural cues.  What would they be like?  My answer is that they would be pretty much as they would be had they grown up in normal circumstances but would be minus some unnecessary cultural/religious baggage that may be harming us “civilized” Whites in our present White hating world that wants Whites to go extinct.

Why the search for identity and  meaning?

I felt empty and without meaning and identity for many years, but, paradoxically, I wasn’t aware of it at the time–at least in those terms.  It was like a cosmic loneliness or emptiness  that expressed itself more as a sort of unthinking, unknowing ennui or unmindfullness. I guess I was happy enough each day, but I had no real direction.  It was living more like a lower animal.  I went to work. I ate. I slept. I had a social life, but it was empty. I slept walked through life. I just existed.  I didn’t think about the bigger questions of existence and not at all about race.   But, there was something nagging inside me.  At times I’d have a very vague feeling that there must be something more important to do and that there must be some meaningful direction.  Something bigger seemed to be missing. Something that I should strive for.  As the feeling got stronger inside me, I tried to find that something bigger that I felt was missing.  And, I tried to find  meaning and identity in politics and social movements and in various other things, but they always came up short and never completely expressed the way I felt. There was always something missing.


I was raised Roman Catholic, but left that faith very young. However, it left a residual memory that made me look at various religions. I did so, and found them all wanting.  I also looked at various philosophies and also found them wanting. None of these things had it completely right, in my view, but I wasn’t sure what “right” in this context even meant. They just didn’t feel comfortable or right to me.  Many of them had some things right but they didn’t have it all. And, again, I never really thought much about race at all and certainly not about DNA and genes and evolution and why there were even different races and whether or not there was something deeper to human differences.

Then it dawned on me that what I was doing was only seeing the world as it existed in our everyday reality. A tree was just a tree. An automobile was just an automobile. A person was just a person.  I then realized that this was a ham handed way to look at things. In order to find the bigger, I needed to go smaller and deeper.  I needed to see details.  I needed to start with the very small and build up from there. I knew that  to really find identity and meaning I had to understand that everything in existence, except perhaps at the level of vibrations, waves, energies and forces is made up of ever smaller things, and this was so of trees, automobiles and people, including me.  I realized that I was alienated from my most essential identity, the one I was born with
Such thoughts led me to realize that  what most religions and philosophies and world views were missing was this deeper thinking about what makes the world we see around us. I also realized that some religious traditions that did look at what makes up our reality mistakenly concluded that our normal state of reality is an illusion.  I totally rejected that idea. A tree really is a tree. An automobile really is an automobile. A person really is a person.  They are as we see and experience them. They are not illusions.  However, they are made up of smaller things which in turn are made up of waves, frequencies, forces and energies.

I realized to remove my alienation from my most essential self, I must go ever smaller and deeper. I was unknowingly denying who and what I was by birth and substituting secondary identities for my real identity because I wasn’t going smaller and deeper. It was  like I was covering the essential me with layers of cheap paint. I  needed to scrape off those layers and layers of paint to get to the real me.  For a time, I called myself a conservative, but that didn’t fill me. I also called myself a European-American and used the terms Western Society  and Western Culture to describe what I was part of, but eventually these seemed a little like weasel words to me and it was as though I was trying to hide my true feelings from haters of Whites so I would be acceptable in polite society.  But, as I evolved intellectually, I finally chucked those terms and concepts and came out of the closet as a “White person,” with no apologies and no quibbling or euphemisms.  Other awakened Whites may prefer these lesser terms and ways that I no longer prefer for myself, and that’s fine, I don’t mean to criticize them.  We all must decide for ourselves what feels right for ourselves.  And, I have a personal policy of never publicly criticizing other awake Whites, but It is necessary, here, to briefly touch on these terms and my personal evolution. And, I will say for certain audiences I still do use terms such as conservative and Western Man, etc. so I will be somewhat understood.

I tried to find what my true and most essential self was.  Again, I looked in various places before it became clear that my true and most essential self is my DNA Code, which is a more inclusive term than simply saying my genes, but the latter term is still valid if one does understand that the DNA code in each of us is more than genes.  And, just to be clear “genes” aren’t really things at all.  They are simply sections of the DNA code–groups of the four chemicals in certain locations on the DNA spiral that do certain things.

But, what is that DNA code and why is it important?  Well, each of us–the person we see in the mirror–didn’t just pop up out of nothing.  In fact, nothing in existence pops up out of nothing.  Everything can be reduced to smaller parts until we end up with  waves, forces and energies.  And, these then cause subatomic particles, atoms, molecules and so forth.  For us, it makes sense to start at the level of DNA because that is where the recipe or the blueprint for each of us comes from.  It is there where the subatomic particles waves, etc. coalesce in a way that provides the blueprint to make us.  This blueprint for us, this DNA code, is made up of around 3 billion combinations of the four chemicals that comprise DNA and which are abbreviated at A, T, C, G. The way these letters are shuffled makes us who and what we are. These letters are contained in the 46 chromosomes that we humans carry.  We got 23 of these chromosomes  from out mother and 23 from our father.  And, on these 46 chromosomes are around 20,000 sections that we call genes.  If we are born of a White mother and a White father, we are White.  If we are born of a White and any other race* we are not truly White because we lack the full 46 chromosomes of our kind.


Odinism 6

In believing in DNA and genes one must at some point realize that this can also be called racism or racialism, and in today’s world these terms are used to brow beat Whites into not even thinking in terms of their genetic interests and identity.  This leaves us Whites as people without a meaningful identity to rally around.  Instead, we see other Whites as just unrelated individuals.  They are not us and we are not them.  We feel no kinship with them.  If these other Whites are attacked by non-Whites, well, that’s just their bad luck and it has nothing to do with us, or so we think. Of course, this is an attitude that is harmful to all Whites.  We need to start realizing that an attack on any White by a non-white where the motivation is, in whole or in part, because the victim is White, is an attack on all Whites.  I have to note here, just as a reminder,  that I believe the major races of man are more than mere races and are actually different species, but that I often use the term race to be understood by many who may not otherwise understand.  Now, racism is actually a survival mechanism and I believe some Whites–maybe most–have a genetic mutation for racism which gives them a stronger sense of us and not us and thus helps keep them from danger and miscegenation.  As evidence of this genetic component, I point to Williams syndrome.  Those born with Williams syndrome are missing a handful of genes, and the result is that they are considered to be genetically non-racist.  They just don’t seem to understand racial differences.  It should be noted that to prove the presence of a gene or genes, one only needs to prove its opposite exists so with the proof of a genetically non-racist view as found in those with Williams syndrome, it is logical to say that there is, in fact, an opposite view that is also genetically determined. Point made, I believe. And, I am quick to add that I believe I am a born White racist due to my genes, and I like it–because, as previously mentioned, this gives me a survival advantage and it simply means that I do notice racial differences.  It really doesn’t have anything to do with hate of others, just means that I see them as different and not who I want to be around.

Not just DNA

However, using just the DNA/gene basis of our beings misses products of our minds such as values, ethics and a moral code. Now,  ultimately, when these are true to who we really are, these come from our DNA code, but the reality is that as we live among other people, even our own kind, these things often come from without and we often internalize them and may even think that they are from the real us.  No matter. I think it is important to accept these, if they are in tune with our DNA code, as legitimate additions to our identity, but only so long as they do not trump Whiteness.  Thus, the DNA code and our values, ethics and moral code must be combined in such a way that they  are inclusive of most of our people, or at least the ones who also feel alienated and who have open minds capable to rejecting societal conditioning that is universal rather than particular. In other words, our most essential values, ethics and morals must always and in all ways put our essential Whites first and above all else.

I have concluded that we Whites are a separate people.  A people apart.  And, that it begins with our DNA code and our genes. I believe we are a selected people and I use that term precisely because it conveys both an evolutionary meaning as in natural selection and it also conveys more of a religious concept of being selected by something more than we are truly able to understand–the something just behind everything. Read into that what you will.

Our true White beliefs

Jews like to say that their history goes back 4,000 years and they use this reference to time to justify many things about them as a people and imply that because they claim what they think is a long history that this makes their beliefs right.  Don’t buy it. I say our true White beliefs  go back millions and millions of year and started at the moment existence began.   Old books and scrolls written by humans?  Our ways started long before that.  Our beliefs are one with the ways of existence and are written throughout existence. Our beliefs began with existence itself, are one with it, and never contradict it.


It is believed that humanity began in Africa and spread over the planet.  This may be true, but even if it is not, we accept the idea that humanity began someplace and spread. Whatever the case may be, and let’s just assume that humanity began in Africa– a land with lots of sun. The result was that people developed certain features that adapted them to that environment.  The most notable feature was dark skin.  Dark skin protected them from the sun’s rays.  And, of course, they also developed other features, many of which you can see just by looking at them.  And, they also developed internal features and brain features, etc.  But, as they or even earlier forms moved north, the sun became dimmer and with less sun their dark skin prevented them from making enough vitamin D to prevent the bone softening condition known as rickets.  Those with rickets often died young and didn’t produce as many children.  So, natural selection kept working and some were born lighter and they did produce more vitamin D. As they mated with other lighter ones who had their gene modifications, more lighter children were born and soon all of Europe was full of white people.  Evolution continued and more and more adaptations were incorporated in those that were successful in living longer lives to produce more children.  In essence, that is a simplified explanation of how it works.  Those with a genetic advantage–a little lighter, a little faster, a little this or a little that, generally live longer and produce more children and pass on their genetic advantages.  When this is extended out hundreds of thousands or millions of years, many of these small changes accumulate and a new species id born out of the old, so long as some of those adapting are isolated.

Some of us also believe that darker skin not only blocks sun rays but also waves or rays or sub-atomic particles that help us evolve and that those of us with White skin evolve much faster as a result of our skin’s ability to let these “forces” enter.  And, as evidence of this, we simply offer the observed fact that no types of humans have more variety among their group than Whites. Call this a hypothesis if you wish, but to me it is a religious belief.

My search for identity and meaning in my life has led me to this:  I am a White person.  I do not hide it. I like myself. I advocate for White interests. My values, my ethics, my morals put Whiteness above all else. What is good for me and for the White DNA code, that is what makes me happy in a reasonable way and which helps me live a long life to multiply my  personal and group DNA code and to help it evolve ever higher is good and moral and anything that does the opposite is not good and is not moral.


I am indifferent to non-Whites and practice non-interference in their lives, their ways or their fates. We Whites are, or should be, on our own to fulfill our highest possible destiny and non-Whites should also be on their own.  I believe in racial separation and even isolation to prevent gene flow from non-Whites to Whites so that we Whites can evolve as I believe we should which is along an exclusively White trajectory.  I also believe in the Golden Rule and in being honest, fair, and in not harming others unless they intend harm to me and mine.  I am against miscegenation, birth control, homosexuality, abortions, so-called family planning, suicide, putting oneself in danger or anything else that will harm Whites or keep our birth rate from being at it s absolute maximum.  I don’t care if non-Whites practice any of these things.  That is their business not mine and as I just wrote, I believe in indifference and non-interference in their business.   My concerns are for Whites and the White DNA code exclusively.


It is now recognized science that we humans have obtained genes from plants.  It is also known that we shed genes wherever we go.  Crime scene specialists can get DNA samples from a criminal suspect who simply touched a wall or turned on light switch in a crime scene.  This scientific  knowledge lets us know that we Whites should try to avoid any contamination from genes of non-Whites by being as separate and isolated from them as possible.  The purity we seek is more than just the ritual and meaningless “purity” sought in many other religious traditions.  The purity we seek so we can perfect ourselves and evolve along our best trajectory is real purity–a purity of our DNA so it will lead us ever higher and closer to ultimate reality.


My search for identity and meaning has led me to this:  I am a White person.  My Whiteness is essential to my being.  The purpose of every form of life is to make more like itself.  There are eternal gene wars  that are fiercest among closely related types that occupy the same niches.  Whites mating with non-Whites is bedroom genocide for Whites.  Evolution requires that we Whites not have gene flow from non-Whites and we must be separated or isolated from non-Whites as much as possible.

Baltimore: Not My Circus, Not My Monkeys

via TradYouth

The Baltimore crisis may be cooling down, but the heat is rising both literally and politically. We’re pretty much guaranteed that the recent wilding in Maryland is merely the opening event in a series of vaguely related racial riots which won’t wrap up until the wintry chill returns.

Throughout identitarian circles, the most popular reaction was to unilaterally support the police force and consider the riots in Baltimore as a problem to be solved with greater law enforcement. Personally, I felt no need to react and little point in commenting, as the police chief, the mayor, the governor, and the president of the political entity in question are all Black. Pretty much all of the rioters were Black, most of the police contending with the rioters were Black, and while only half of the officers who allegedly killed the Black man were themselves Black, I’m certain beyond a reasonable doubt that not one of the three White officers have an inkling of fellow-feeling with my faith, my folk, or my family.

Not my circus, not my monkeys.

I’m supposed to care about all the property destruction. But why should I care about what they do with their property? I’m supposed to care about the danger caused by the riots in their communities. But it’s their own communities, so they can estimate that risk for themselves. I’m supposed to care about police brutality, but it’s not like one can expect the Andy Griffith style of friendly and folksy law enforcement in a gangland hellscape that is notorious for its violence and criminality. Perhaps I should sympathize with the cops there? Not really. When they swore in, they agreed to the foolish and thankless drudgery of imposing a whole range of bad laws designed by and for different people altogether, to the detriment of the community.

Giving a damn about Baltimore, Ferguson, and the upcoming riots requires a reactionary mindset in which I would care about the collective fate of the American social experiment in diversity and multiculturalism. It would require a meddlesome presumption that I have a stake in or a valid opinion on how people I have utterly nothing in common with except a common federal tax collector deal with their local problems. I have no idea how Baltimore should be policed, which laws should be enforced or relaxed, or how to best handle all that rioting mayhem. I say we step back and give them the leverage and latitude to muddle through it on their own terms.

For me, my primary concern is that the mayhem could affect innocent noncombatants from outside their communities, like what happened to the hapless trucker Reginald Denny who was drug out of his vehicle and viciously assaulted to the brink of death during the LA riots in the early nineties. If that sort of thing returns, and it most likely will if these incidents keep spreading and growing, then I’ll side with whatever martial law or vigilantism is proposed to put a stop to it. But, of course, in today’s political environment, whites rising up to defend themselves against even the most egregious attacks will be smeared by the media as villains and ruthlessly shut down…by their fellow whites.

If innocent folks from out of town start coming under attack, then I’ll take a side between the non-whites and the state. Until then, I’m neutral.

The only lasting solution is a comprehensively tribal one where we define our own areas well and try to invest our time, our resources, and our political energy in those areas. Attempting to make this vast region between the Rio Grande and the Great Lakes entirely safe for white people again is a lost cause, certainly lost in the pragmatic near-term. The best we can hope for is to carve out safe spaces away from the diversity, decadence, and disease which is spreading like a fungal infection on an AIDS patient’s bruised and blistered back.

Speaking of monkeys and AIDS, my own monkeys right here in Southern Indiana are suffering from an AIDS epidemic brought on by rampant drug abuse and promiscuity. Be careful what you mock Blacks for, because the tidal wave of decadence will eventually inundate your own community. A couple decades ago, white supremacists chuckled about the rampant fatherlessness and welfare dependence in the Black community. Now, our own working class communities have reached the same levels of dysfunction we once mocked those wretched Blacks for.

Racial differences are real, and they matter, but our intellect is only a temporary buffer against the ravages of godlessness and greed. If anything, at this stage, our creativity and intelligence enables us to be more creative and elaborate in our self-harm. After all, inner city Blacks struggle to even wrap their minds around the esoteric proposition that there are lesbians trapped in men’s bodies who should be declared women, surgically mutilated, and celebrated as heroes. Inner city Blacks fight back against immigrant invaders of their communities because they can’t wrap their minds around the esoteric proposition that they have some grand historic debt to a vague “other” which must be repaid in the form of self-destruction. As things spiral closer and closer to the Abyss, our creativity, abstraction-orientation, and plasticity of mind will turbo-charge us to the bottom more rapidly than the other races.

While each tribe the world over should be allowed and encouraged to work through this crisis independently, it’s a shared crisis, and within the coming decades the riotous destruction of property and callous disregard for law and order will take root in White American communities. We can’t and shouldn’t take ownership of the problems in Baltimore and Ferguson. What we should do is strive to provide options and opportunities for our own folks, ordinary White American folks, to return to church, rebuild traditional families, reject promiscuity, kill their local drug dealers, and start developing future neighborhoods safe enough to drop our future grandchildren off in them.

Divorce and the Pressures on Men and Women

via Henry Dampier

This article from the Imaginative Conservative is better than most full length books on the topic of the decay of the family. Here’s an excerpt:
Each generation thus accepts as normal what would have shocked their grandparents had it happened all at once: premarital sex, cohabitation, illegitimacy, divorce, same-sex marriage, daycare, fast-food dinners. Indeed, shocking the previous generation is part of the thrill of what might be said to amount to the institutionalization and politicization of filial rebellion.
Warnings about family decline will, to the extent that it involves “culture,” simply sound to the liberal and the young as “no big deal”: these are the perennial lamentations of the hopelessly old-fashioned—the old and conservative bemoaning the good old days. Things change: “Deal with it!”
But this kind of cultural development is not all that has become accepted as normal. Filial rebellion has a political dimension. Zimmerman describes destructive family policies enacted not only during the French and Russian revolutions, but also following the American. What might shock even the liberal and the young, yet today barely disturbs the conservative and the old, are destruction of constitutional protections and intrusive invasions of personal freedom and family privacy by the government’s ever-expanding family machinery. Here we see something highly consequential, but perhaps also more susceptible to redress than what is indicated by Wilson’s cultural despair, that is, the heavy hand of the state.
G. K. Chesterton once suggested that the family was the main check on state power and that weakening it would destroy freedom. Chesterton was writing about divorce, and here another critical difference emerges between today’s debates and the way the issue was framed by Dawson and Zimmerman and theorists they cite. While homosexuality, abortion, pornography, and other cultural issues on today’s family-values agenda do appear in their writings, they are not central. The recurring issue throughout Western history that seems to be the most direct cause of marriage and family breakdown is divorce.
Most Americans know from personal experience that the most direct and common threat to the family today is not the marriage of two homosexuals but divorce within families. Divorce now threatens most families and every society in the Western world. Not only is it multiplying single-parent homes among the affluent as welfare did among the poor; it now poses a serious threat to privacy, civil liberties, and constitutional government, as children are forcibly taken from their parents on a variety of divorce-related pretexts and parents who resist are taken away in handcuffs. Most people know someone whose children and private life have been placed under government supervision through divorce, very likely without the person’s consent. Yet even many who think of themselves as conservatives do not raise as a public issue this flagrant restriction of freedom.
This has a couple strong pressures on the behavior of both men and women, particularly in the propertied classes. Lower classes of men can just go ‘deadbeat’ — crossing state lines or just chronically under-earning — while the richer classes generally are less capable of evading the collectors. This can also happen to richer men, but there’s been less attention paid to the phenomenon.

For the women, because they can no longer rely on a man to uphold his part of the social contract, they’ll often be quite a lot more frantic about building up their careers to pick up for the deficit of men who want to be ‘providers.’ Because all educated men learn in college that being a bread-winner is sexist and immoral — and many of them believe it — they’ll tend to participate less vigorously in the labor force. This gets accentuated by the lack of women interested in being reliable, submissive, and pleasant wives.

Both sides of the gender divide in the middle class and better are mostly responding to incentives. Men want to avoid expropriation, and women work harder to provide themselves with the security that most men are unwilling to give freely anymore, lacking any sort of social security for that bond to be made.

Because the idea of the happy family has been roundly attacked by everyone in respectable society for a period of decades — instead encouraging a lifestyle focused around serving the state and the corporations that the state enables — the entire appeal of family life decays. Both become less attractive to the other, and the purpose of family life becomes muddled.

The left has attempted to float a new conception of marriage to the middle class called the ‘equal partnership’ — in which two equals with no fixed roles collaborate to earn lots of money and have an exciting lifestyle. If children are involved, part of what they earn money to achieve is to send their children to ‘great schools,’ where they themselves will also become over-achieving strivers, finishing their educations in their late 20s or early 30s before jumping into equally high-intensity careers. Any shortfall in middle class births can just be replaced by people from Asia, or by the emerging class of Black and Hispanic Head Start geniuses which are sure to turn up any time now.

These people are wildly outnumbered by the slackers, but the state prefers to encourage achievement within its own frame of reference, and tends to look down on those who are neither hyper-productive nor on welfare.

When people can be assured that their children will be obedient, pleasant, and positive for their families, they will be eager to have those children. When it’s more likely that those children will be rebellious, ungrateful, and unstable, people will be more inclined to jam in the Nuvaring and watch Netflix instead.

The despair around this state of affairs, though, is both sinful and misguided. And the despair often espoused by critics of that state, in effect, keeps that state on life support for much longer than it would be otherwise. This isn’t a state on particularly strong foundations, and the people who keep whining and moaning about how big and powerful and scary that it is aren’t being creative enough about how to get out from underneath it.

As much as the state might want to create ‘reproduction’ by importing millions of foreigners, or by pursuing inferior science fiction substitutes which have major costs and side effects, the family is still the only institution capable of healthy, reliable reproduction. A weak state is incapable of restraining its own agencies from usurping authority from families — which is, in effect, eating the future human seed corn. The cannibalization was slow before the 1960s, but it has reached a rate which will actually be fatal, causing effective death rates similar to those last seen in major wars, even leading to severe depopulation in states like Germany and Western-mimicking states like Japan.

Against Love-Based Marriages

via Faith & Heritage

Hunter Wallace over at Occidental Dissent posted a fascinating review of Stephanie Coontz’s book, Marriage, a History. Coontz is a feminist, but in her honest chronicling of what she considers positive changes, we can see the roots of the breakdown of marriage. Predictably, the rot originates in the ill-named Enlightenment, resulting in the gradual transition from the mid-1700s to the mid-1900s of marriage from the traditional, patriarchal, community- and economy-based institution to the modern, egalitarian, individual, love-based institution. This came to full flower in the 1960s with no-fault divorce, abortion, and miscegenation all becoming fully legalized in the West. The present-day agitation for sodomy and polyamory to be recognized as marriages is just another step along the road on which love-based marriage has set us.

Love-based marriages are a horrible idea and entirely without support in Scripture. This is not to say that marriages should not include romantic love – they most certainly should – but holding up romantic love as the sole and necessary means of spouse-selection and marital vitality is completely without precedent in human history prior to the twentieth century. By taking biblical law, parental authority, and the community out of the mate-selection process, the West flung the doors wide open to all manner of anti-social immoral behaviors such as the interracial, sodomitic, and polyamorous unions we are seeing today. How many times have you seen such behaviors and choices defended on the basis of “love”? And if “love” is the only thing of importance, why get married at all? One can experience the full range of romantic love outside of marriage. The idea of love-based marriage leads to the very dissolution of the whole marital institution.

The conservative prophecies warning against the results of changes to the basis and definition of marriage have been accurate for almost three centuries now.
During the eighteenth century the spread of the market economy and the advent of the Enlightenment wrought profound changes in record time. By the end of the 1700s personal choice of partners had replaced arranged marriage as a social ideal, and individuals were encouraged to marry for love. For the first time in five thousand years, marriage came to be seen as a private relationship between two individuals rather than one link in a larger system of political and economic alliances. . . .
Especially momentous for relations between husband and wife was the weakening of the political model upon which marriage had long been based. Until the late seventeenth century the family was thought of as a miniature monarchy, with the husband king over his dependents. As long as political absolutism remained unchallenged in society as a whole, so did the hierarchy of traditional marriage. But the new political ideas fostered by the Glorious Revolution in England in 1688 and the even more far-reaching revolutions in America and France in the last quarter of the eighteenth century dealt a series of cataclysmic blows to the traditional justification for patriarchal authority. . . .
The people who pioneered the new ideas about love and marriage were not, by and large, trying to create anything like the egalitarian partnerships that modern Westerners associate with companionship, intimacy, and “true love.” Their aim was to make marriage more secure by getting rid of the cynicism that accompanied mercenary marriage and encouraging couples to place each other first in their affections and loyalties.
But basing marriage on love and companionship represented a break with thousands of years of tradition. Many contemporaries immediately recognized the danger this entailed. They worried that the unprecedented idea of basing marriage on love would produce rampant individualism.
Critics of the love match argued – prematurely, as it turned out, but correctly – that the values of free choice and egalitarianism could easily spin out of control. If the choice of a marriage partner was a personal decision, conservatives asked, what would prevent young people, especially women, from choosing unwisely? If people were encouraged to expect marriage to be the best and happiest experience of their lives, what would hold a marriage together if things went “for worse” rather than “for better”?
If wives and husbands were intimates, wouldn’t women demand to share decisions equally? If women possessed the same faculties of reason as men, why would they confine themselves to domesticity? Would men still financially support women and children if they lost control over their wives’ and children’s labor and could not even discipline them properly? If parents, church, and state no longer dictated people’s private lives, how could society make sure the right people married and had children or stop the wrong ones from doing so?
Conservatives warned that “the pursuit of happiness,” claimed as a right in the American Declaration of Independence, would undermine the social and moral order.

Post-Christian America, Continued

via The Audacious Epigone

That 1-in-5 American adults and 1-in-3 under the age of 30 claim no religious affiliation naturally leads to the question of whether this is a reflection of declining religious piety in the US or a product of social cocooning and a distaste for organized religion without any meaningful corresponding decline in the belief in an Abrahamic, monotheistic God. Even if it is the latter (and my best guess now is that the former provides the predominant explanation, something I didn't used to think to be the case), it's hard to imagine how stripping away the communal, social, repetitive aspect of expressed, organized religion and instead relegating it to the position of internal, individualized personal beliefs leads to anything other than a decline in the influence of its tenets and mores (ie, same-sex marriage*).

The following graph shows the percentages of all American adults and those under the age of 30 who attend religious services no more than once a year. Note this doesn't even allow for attendance on both Christmas and Easter, so these are effectively people with zero spiritual connection to any organized religion.

Coming of age in the mid-nineties, the generational cohort I'm a part of is the last one in which most members will have the shared experience of some sort of religious destination as part of their upbringings. In the next few years, those who attend religious services will be in the minority, as is already the case with young adults.

GSS variables used: ATTEND(0-2), YEAR, AGE(18-29) 

Victims and Values

via Kevin Alfred Strom

Listen Now

Michael Price, killed by a Black assailant, is
just one victim among many of non-White crime
In Seattle less than two weeks ago a young man was walking to his car in the company of two young women friends. It was 2AM and they were going home after a Saturday night out. All three were White. Within moments after getting out on the sidewalk, they were intercepted by a group of up to twelve Black males, who surrounded them and immediately began aggressively touching, fondling, and making sexual remarks to the women. “We ‘jus wanna hug you, baby,” one of the Blacks gibbered, as he and his companions grabbed and put their filthy hands all over the girls. The lone White man made a move to defend his friends, but he was no match for the Black gang, who beat him and knocked him unconscious. One of the women remembers the sound of his head hitting the ground: “It was a wet smack. Like it was a really — one of those sounds that you can kind of feel in your gut,” she said. The Blacks then stole his wallet — leaving him for dead for all they knew — and fled. The young women escaped rape and injury — this time. In just the last few days, Seattle police said there have been no fewer than eight similar assaults in the same neighborhood alone. More than 40 businesses in that same neighborhood have pleaded with the police for help because of the violence.

After the man was released from the Intensive Care Unit at Harborview Medical Center he described his injuries: “Bleeding on three sections of my brain, I think the back and each temporal lobe,” he said.

Most significantly, this young White man refuses to give his name. He knows, even if unconsciously, that, in the current climate in this country, a White man defending White women from sexual attack by Blacks could easily be construed as “racism.” You know the drill: “All they were doing was touching them, man! They just wanted to get a hug. Just a little fun. Don’ they like Black people?”  And that young man knows what happens to “racists” in our society. He knows how they are treated in the media and in the courts. And he’s seen the Black mobs on television, howling for the blood of White policemen when the media give the policeman’s home address. So the victim — who could easily have died — refuses to give his name.

I only know that the attackers were Black and the victims were White because of a local blog — part of the alternative media — that covered the story, and some of the comments on local media sites. The Seattle police’s own Web site — though supposedly they are “seeking leads” in the case — didn’t even mention the words “Black” or “African-American.” “Seeking leads” indeed. That omission should be regarded as a crime in itself.

One commenter on a story about this attack lets us hear about real life in Seattle, which is quite different from the sanitized media version:

Seattle Police are not considering the gang attack as a priority or a hate crime because the man is not homosexual. The Mayor is not planning an announcement on the case because, well, you know…. anyone going to Capitol Hill after dark is taking their lives in their own hands and can expect nothing from Seattle Police.

Many years ago, I had a night class at SCCC and one night (the second night of the class) I was attacked by a gang of about a dozen young Blacks. I was not seriously hurt…. They did not want blood, just some kind of fun racist attack amusement. I called the police and they said, what did you do to threaten the young Black gentlemen?

That comment made it very clear. I dropped the class. I have not gone back.

Neither should you. Until Seattle’s police can give everyone the level of protection they give to gays and lesbians and bisexuals and transsexuals and even teenage sexual predators (a real protected class in Seattle schools), do not go to Capitol Hill and do not patronize its businesses.

The major media themselves, typified by CBS station KIRO-TV, made no mention of the race of the attackers or the race of the victims. The president and CEO of CBS is Leslie Roy Moonves, a Jew. The head of CBS entertainment is Nina Tassler, also a Jew.

This assault is just one of many every day that I could cite. The violent crime wave of non-Whites against Whites — and the complicity of the media in keeping the real nature of this crime wave from being known — has been going on for more than a generation now. Typically the media make no mention of the race of an attacker or killer until they are forced to do so. And then, when a non-White is arrested or convicted of attacking a White man or woman and they can’t avoid showing his picture without looking bad, they make sure that the story stays local.

When 15-year-old White teenager Molly Conley was walking home one night in Everett, Washington, with her friends, she was gunned down and murdered in cold blood — for no apparent reason besides the fact she was a White girl — by a 28-year-old Black male, Erick Walker. Walker was just sentenced a few days ago. No national news coverage.

In New Orleans on the first of this month, a 36-year-old White father of three, Michael Price, was gunned down and killed as he was on his way to deliver a pizza. A Black named Michael Anthony Portis has been arrested for the killing. No national news coverage.

Just a few days ago in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, a second mistrial was declared in the case of the murder of 21-year-old Missy Snodgrass, a White woman who consorted with Blacks and whose decomposed body was found in the basement of a vacant house. One of those Blacks, 42-year-old Michael Molina, was convicted of the murder and had even been sentenced — but a simple remark by the prosecutor about Molina’s silence on the matter got the case thrown out. In the second trial, someone from the increasingly-Black juror pool refused to convict. No national news coverage.

Just a few days ago, Cindy Williams, a White woman from Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, complained to some Black teenage girls that they were making too much noise in a movie theatre. After the show let out, the Black females got some reinforcements, including Black males, and Williams was brutally attacked by the gang, who left her bruised in the street with a broken eye socket. No mention of race in the media reports, which were local only — though the public comments section revealed the truth: One commenter joked “I’m sure it was those darn Irish kids again.” Another said “The usual suspects, of course.” And some others: “The girls are black so you won’t be seeing any photos. You see, that would be helpful but the modern media sees it as racist to try and help catch blacks who assaulted someone.” …”CBS should give us descriptions. We could be of help locating these thugs.”… “Yes, but it is racist to identify the race of any non-white criminals.” The media blackout is less and less effective. Now you see why many controlled media outlets are turning off their comments sections.

Joshua Richey, a White man, was returning to the parking lot last month at an Atlanta-area Kroger grocery store, when he saw two Blacks breaking into his truck. When he called out for them to stop, the Blacks shot him dead. Demarius Thompson and Shontavious Chestnut have been arrested for the killing. Initial media reports, when the suspects were still at large, somehow failed to mention that they were Black. In  the coverage before the arrests, the comments sections provided the only clue that the killers weren’t White, and I’ll cite just one: “In a couple years, after about 100 more murders in the area, black people will have successfully done what they do in every location they inhabit. Run off all legitimate businesses and tax payers with their abhorrent crime rates. They will be complaining about a ‘food desert’ and that they have to drive 20 miles to the next white town over to fill up and get groceries. Then they will start migrating to follow the successful (white) people who they ran off to the next location and rinse and repeat. Africans truly are a loathsome bunch.” There has been so much violence at this one Kroger alone — in a racially-mixed Atlanta neighborhood — that locals now casually refer to it as “the Murder Kroger.” No national news coverage, of course.

When a Black or Mestizo gets tapped a bit too heavily with a nightstick by a White officer, the non-Whites, their numerous race-based organizations, and the controlled media go into overdrive. The case often becomes a nationwide sensation. We hear about it constantly, as we have with Michael Brown — and even years later, as we have with Rodney King. But, outside of local stories, and limited ones at that, only the alternative media and our own fledgling pro-White media are going to tell you the truth.

But bringing you the truth about non-White murder and violence is only one part of why we’re here. Helping create the White community spirit and racial consciousness that will build a movement to put an end to these outrages is also only part of our job. Perhaps the greatest, most important, and most challenging job that the National Alliance faces is a reordering of the values held by our people. It is changing our values that will ultimately save the lives of future generations of Whites — in fact, it is the only thing that will save them.

The philosopher Kierkegaard tells the story of how one night, a group of thieves broke into a jewelry store. But instead of stealing anything, they had an unusual plan that they hoped would get them the swag they wanted and at the same time keep them out of prison. They simply switched all the price tags in the store. Then they left.

The next day all the customers and employees were mixed up — though they didn’t know it — as to what was valuable and what was cheap. The real and once-expensive gems had suddenly become cheap, and the cheap costume jewelry, which had sold for only a pittance before, was suddenly marked with price tags in the thousands of dollars. Customers who thought they were purchasing valuable gems were getting cheap imitations. And the thieves never had to wield a gun or force anyone to do anything. They got hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of diamonds for just a few cents on the dollar.

The store’s employees believed in the price tags that the thieves had switched. Their values were inverted. So they lost what they were charged with protecting; they lost everything of value in the store.

So also we White Americans have lost track of what is really valuable and what is essentially worthless. We have accepted the inverted values that have been pushed by the Jewish supremacists. Two of the most valuable things in the world — racial survival and progress — have been labeled as things of no value or negative value. And multiracialism and racial mixing — which lead to misery and death for all those who engage in them — have been labeled as the ultimate good.

Keeping our country’s industrial infrastructure — and doing our own work and keeping the jobs for our own people — and keeping the wealth our people have created at home — are being treated as things of little or no value. These truly valuable things have been traded for cheap Asian-made trinkets and junk, Dollar Store gewgaws and TVs and SUVs that will all be buried in a landfill in a few years; and for the windfall profits of a sellout few.

We’re giving away our wealth with the excuse that we need to “protect Israel” — we’re giving away control of our own economy because the Jewish-controlled media tell us that the Jews who run the Fed are “the best ones for the job” — we’re giving away our very land to those same Wall Street vultures and to the Asians who manufacture our consumer products and buy our debt — we’re literally giving away the lives of our sons and daughters to protect Israel in the Middle East. For what? Do you think that these “Gringo Go Home” Mestizos are going to thank you for this country and the billions of dollars they have extorted from us? Do you think that the future Black panjandrums — the Idi Amins-to-come of North America — are going to build statues to you and spare your daughters because you were Politically Correct and sold out your own people? Do you think the Jewish supremacists will phone Yahweh and have him pat you on the head extra nice when you go to Heaven because you committed racial suicide? If you do believe any of these things, you’re crazy.

As Sam Dickson has said, those who betray their own people are never memorialized by anyone. They are universally contemptible. The verdict of Nature and of those with sound instincts is against them. Even if they prevail, they will not survive; their people will not survive; even their memory will not survive. Nothing will be left of them but dry dust underneath the feet of those people who still live.

The first step in reordering our values will take place when we determine that we shall live as a people, as a race, no matter what. No value, whether secular, religious, economic, ethical, or physical can ever be higher than that of our survival. Remember that and live. Forget it and die. It really is as simple as that.

The Nation of Islam as an African-American Group Evolutionary Strategy

via The Occidental Observer

For many years I’ve had a tempered respect for Black Nationalists. If our struggle is a difficult one, hampered at every turn by the hostile controllers of culture, theirs is perhaps an even greater labor. To start with, leading Black Nationalists have had to contend with the biological handicaps of their race — the most potent being a lower IQ and attending dispositions towards impulsive behaviors and criminality. On top of this, modern Black mainstream culture is even more spiritually and morally bankrupt than our own. Social problems accompanying this culture are acute. Blacks account for 30% of all abortions, but comprise just 14% of the population. The traditional family unit is next to non-existent in modern Black America. Just under half of Black men will never marry and those that do will marry White women at twice the rate of Black women marrying Black men — bringing destruction to the genetic distinction of both our races.

Black Nationalists have also had to contend with the fact that most of their co-ethnics enjoy living among Whites and receiving all the benefits that that entails. Black separatism is simply too unappealing to enter the Black mainstream. On top of this, Black Nationalists have also been subject to hysterical treatment from the ADL and SPLC — organizations that work over-time to prevent the emergence of non-Jewish nationalisms that dare to acknowledge racial realities or point out the Jewish role in the Great Game of modern ethnic warfare. Although Jewish hatred reserves a special place for European man, Black Nationalists have not been spared.

I don’t feel like I’m going out on a limb when I state that, as far as fashioning a rebirth of one’s people goes, our counterparts of a darker hue do not have much to work with.

Historical Context

It is true that admirable and respectable Black leaders have been few and far between, with figures such as Jesse Jackson appearing as little more than race-baiting players of the victim card. But there have also been notable exceptions to the rule, even if they enjoyed little enduring popularity or success among their own people. Some were keenly aware, often more so than many Whites, of the incompatibility of our peoples to co-exist productively and peacefully. These figures, the Jamaican Marcus Garvey (1887–1940) among them, openly rejected multiculturalism as a sham decades before it became political dogma. Garvey was a strong believer in his race, and was an advocate of both Black Nationalism and Pan-Africanism. Like others, including Booker T. Washington and Dusé Mohamed Ali, Garvey believed that the African’s worst enemy was himself. These men struggled hard to inculcate in their people a drive towards self-improvement, and overcoming the shortfalls with which nature and nurture had conspired to hold them down. They frequently cast an unflinching gaze upon their co-ethnics, and spared little in the way of feelings.

Marcus Garvey
Marcus Garvey

Like many White advocates of today, leaders like Garvey were shunned and berated by many of those who didn’t want to face up to reality. Attracting most scrutiny was Garvey’s ‘Back to Africa’ proposal for a Black exodus from America to a new colony in Liberia. W.E.B. Dubois once said that Garvey was “without doubt, the most dangerous enemy of the Negro race in America and in the world.”

Similar hyperbolic nonsense has been said about the likes of sedate and educated White advocates such as David Duke, William Pierce, and our own Kevin MacDonald. Garvey himself displayed a measured demeanor towards White race realists, appreciating that they, like him, simply wanted the best for their people. After engaging in a conference with KKK Imperial Giant Edward Young Clarke in 1922, Garvey remarked, “I regard the Klan, the Anglo-Saxon clubs and White American societies, as far as the Negro is concerned, as better friends of the race than all other groups of hypocritical whites put together. I like honesty and fair play. You may call me a Klansman if you will, but, potentially, every white man is a Klansman, as far as the Negro in competition with whites socially, economically and politically is concerned, and there is no use lying.”

What Garvey appreciated was the honesty implicit in the open recognition of racial realities, and the attending recognition of the reality of inter-ethnic competition. Despite the ethnic gulf, Clarke and Garvey could agree on the fact that the world was one of ethnic struggle, and that each of them was engaged in attempting to help their group to prosper. Separatism, they agreed, would help them both.

In later years, Garvey corresponded with White advocate and Methodist preacher Earnest Sevier Cox (1880-1966), who campaigned politically against miscegenation and was an ardent proponent of stricter segregation and the eventual repatriation of Blacks to Africa. The pair eventually became close friends, with Cox dedicating his short pamphlet Let My People Go to Garvey, and Garvey in return advertising Cox’ s book White America in his own Black Nationalist publications. The efforts of Cox to make African repatriation a legislative reality were so strenuous that Garvey was noted as remarking that Cox had done “wonderfully well for the Negro and should not be forgotten.”

Although appreciated and admired by White advocates, Garvey gained little following among his own people. He died “broke, alone and unpopular” after suffering two strokes. However, some of Garvey’s ideas did take root when the economic troubles of the 30s provided fertile ground for Black efforts at adaptation to a changing environment. Between 1900 and 1930 around 2,250,000 Blacks left the rural South for northern cities.[1] This led to an overall 400% increase in the northern Black population, and an astonishing increase of 611% in Detroit.[2] The change in environment was a shock to Blacks as well as Whites, and the majority struggled to cope with the comparative lack of social controls compared to their previous existence in the South. Without these social controls, Black culture began a downward spiral—an important corroboration of the theory (also apparent in The Bell Curve and  The Culture of Critiquethat the decline in social controls related to sex and the family has far worse effects on those with lower IQ. Marcus Garvey’s Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA) can be seen as an early attempt to formulate a response to the, new environment, but generally speaking the most persistent attempt to formulate a path to Black evolutionary fitness, in effect, a Black group evolutionary strategy, was to be rooted in religion. Martha Lee notes that Black religious participation was “often motivated by a racial or nationalist urge” and that economic conditions during the Depression “exaggerated these tendencies on a large scale.”[3]

New Black religious movements, such as the Moorish Science Temple, sprung up with promises to combine ethno-religious separatism with the re-imposition of much-needed strict moral and social controls. Noble Drew Ali of the Moorish Science Temple argued that “Christianity is for the European (palefaces). Moslemism is for the Asiatic (olive-skinned). When each group has its own peculiar religion, there will be peace on earth.”[4] By the late 20s both the MST and Garvey’s UNIA had waned and were fading into obscurity amid increasing Black degeneration. But with the onset of the Depression, the stage was set for the entry of what must be seen as one of the most coherent, if strange, examples of Black attempts at a group evolutionary strategy — the Nation of Islam (NOI).

Fard Muhammad, Founder of the Nation of Islam
Fard Muhammad, Founder of the Nation of Islam

The origins of the Nation of Islam are obscure, and rest in the perplexing figure of Fard Muhammad. Muhammad was of unverifiable ethnic origin, though even most of his Afro-centric followers concede he had a White mother or Father. The FBI later asserted he was a New Zealander of mixed White and Polynesian heritage. Muhammad arrived in Detroit in 1930, and while selling silks door-to-door, he also imparted to his Black customers a curious version of Islam which promised the redemption of the Black race, Allah’s true ‘Chosen People.’ By 1933 he had gathered enough members and resources to open a school, training classes for women on how to be proper wives and mothers, and a private security force — the Fruit of Islam.[5]

Features of the Group Evolutionary Strategy

The Nation of Islam, since the date of its founding, has displayed many of the features of a group evolutionary strategy, several of which mirror Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy. This is particularly true in the sense that religious ideology provides the blueprint for both evolutionary strategies. On the most basic level, the Nation of Islam aims at developing a cohesive group. There is an emphasis on the inculcation of within-group altruism combined with outgroup hostility. The older teachings of Black Nationalists, particularly Pan-Africanism, are very much evident in the Nation of Islam’s teachings. Diogenes X Grassal, a NOI preacher active in the 1970s, made it explicit that his brand of Islam meant “Black Unity.”[6] Mattias Gardell writes that the creed of the Nation of Islam serves “as a vehicle for black unity and resistance.”[7] Similarly, Clifton Marsh notes that the Nation of Islam advocates the creation of Black institutions, rituals, and holidays to celebrate Black unity and African heritage.[8] The Nation of Islam promotes efforts to establish a separate nation for black Americans on American soil, and generally advocates cultural segregation from non-Black influences.

Like the Jews, there is an emphasis on the primacy of group ethnic interests rather than individual interests. NOI members are strongly discouraged from engaging in commercial or social contact with non-Blacks. Young NOI members are encouraged to see all Blacks as part of a large kinship group, and NOI youth movements are excellent examples of the effort to develop anti-individualism. The Fruit of Islam organization “includes a range of iconography borrowed from the military, including marches, drills, martial arts training, captains, lieutenants, organizational hierarchies, and saluting superiors with hand upraised and a click of the heels.”[9] This is in addition to a culture which aims to prevent socialization between groups, and encourages high levels of in-group political and economic co-operation. Individualism is also challenged within the group by the adoption of distinctive dress, which both identifies them as members of a group and also limits their expression of individuality.

Distinctive Dress as a Feature of the Nation of Islam
Distinctive Dress as a Feature of the Nation of Islam
Outgroup hostility is a key feature of the Nation of Islam and is intimately bound up with its ideology. Members of the Nation of Islam believe that Fard Muhammad was either Allah, or had been sent by Allah to reveal to Blacks their true status as the ‘Chosen People.’ NOI theology tells that for hundreds of thousands of years Blacks enjoyed a flourishing civilization (“the most civilized and perfect society in the world”) in a Nile Valley paradise until the entry of Whites into the world. Whites are the diametric opposite of Allah’s Chosen People, being the evil products of the mad scientist Yakub, who lived over 6,000 years ago. Yakub was a power-crazed scientist, and by accounts had an unusually large head. He wished to attain power in the flourishing civilization and sought to achieve this by introducing disunity by breeding a new type of man. His plans became known and he was banished to the island of Patmos where, with his followers, he began to selectively breed for lighter skin. His followers continued the practice, killing the darkest of the island’s offspring, until the population grew gradually lighter. NOI theology states that “As they grew lighter and lighter they grew weaker and weaker. Their blood became weaker, their bones became weaker, their minds became weaker, their morals became weaker.”[10]

These evil Whites then set sail for the Black paradise, bringing the beautiful civilization to an end and introducing practices like slavery. It was ordained that Whites were to rule for six thousand years, before it would come to an end amid a Black reawakening. It is commonly asserted by NOI followers that the end of this reign began in 1914 with the First World War and that the White decline continues. Whites, uniquely evil in the eyes of the NOI, are commonly referred to as ‘Devils.’ One of the lesser discussed elements of the early NOI was Fard Muhammad’s promise that “the murder of four Whites would insure a free journey to Mecca.”[11] At least one such sacrifice was offered when Detroit’s Robert Karriem sacrificed his roomer, John Smith, on November 21 1932. A day later two welfare workers were threatened with the same fate.

Special hostility in the NOI is also reserved for Jews, who are seen as somewhat distinct from, and worse than, Whites. A large part of this hostility is due to research conducted by Nation of Islam scholars, eventually published as The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews. The book asserts that Jews dominated the Atlantic slave trade, and relies on over 3,000 scholarly sources. Predictably, the work has been attacked by Jewish scholars and organizations who maintain that Jewish involvement in the slave trade was minimal at best and that the NOI is peddling a canard. However, these Jews have yet to actually prove their point with evidence. Much of the NOI’s hostility towards Jews is also rooted in the observations of the NOI leadership that Jews have been the wire-pullers of supposedly ‘Black’ mainstream organizations, as well as enjoying disproportionate influence in the economy. In 2000 NOI leader Louis Farrakhan addressed an audience, saying:
They [Jews] control Black intellectuals, they control Black politicians, Black preachers, Black artists—they control Black life. I’m not against Jews, I’m against control by any group, of us. … I don’t know how you can talk about Black liberation without confronting that and not talk about those who stifle Black thought, freedom of Black liberation.
NOI leaders have also frequently referred to Jews as ‘bloodsuckers.’ In his Saviours’ Day speech in Chicago, Illinois, February 25, 1996, Farrakhan stated:
And you do with me as is written, but remember that I have warned you that Allah will punish you. You are wicked deceivers of the American people. You have sucked their blood. You are not real Jews, those of you that are not real Jews. You are the synagogue of Satan, and you have wrapped your tentacles around the U.S. government, and you are deceiving and sending this nation to hell. But I warn you in the name of Allah, you would be wise to leave me alone. But if you choose to crucify me, know that Allah will crucify you.

Khalid Abdul Muhammed
Khalid Abdul Muhammed

The flamboyant NOI minister Khalid Abdul Muhammed, now deceased, pointed out that Jews were prominent as slum lords to Black communities, and referred to Jews as bloodsuckers during a speech in Baltimore in February 1994:
I called them Jews bloodsuckers. I’m not going to change that. Our lessons talk about the bloodsuckers of the poor in the Supreme Wisdom of the Nation of Islam. It’s that old no-good Jew, that old imposter Jew, that old hooked-nose, bagel-eating, lox-eating, Johnny-come-lately perpetrating a fraud, just crawled out of the caves and hills of Europe, so-called damn Jew. . . and I feel everything I’m saying up here is kosher.
Muhammed also earned the scorn of the ADL and the SPLC for attacking the sacrosanct mainstream tradition of venerating the Jewish dead of World War Two when he stated:
You see, everybody always talk about Hitler exterminating 6 million Jews…but don’t nobody ever asked what did they do to Hitler? What did they do to them folks? They went in there, in Germany, the way they do everywhere they go, and they supplanted, they usurped, they turned around, and a German, in his own country, would almost have to go to a Jew to get money. They had undermined the very fabric of the society.
As in the case of Judaism, there is also a strong emphasis on racial purity. The NOI is concerned with biological segregation to the extent that interracial marriages are forbidden. There is also a keen sense of reproductive competition, and this mirrors the religious obligation to reproduce and multiply included in the Tanakh. In the Nation of Islam the family unit is encouraged, along with endogamy. Like other group evolutionary strategies, social controls play a large role in maintaining the strategy. In the NOI divorce is frowned upon and members are severely punished for adultery.[12] Martha Lee notes that “As in many groups who believe themselves the Chosen People, NOI women and children are exalted for their role in continuing the race.”[13] Concerns with reproductive success have led to the NOI becoming fixated on birth control as a conspiracy against Blacks. Elijah Muhammad, one of the NOIs first leaders during the 30s, wrote that “the Birth Control Law or Act of today is directed at the so-called Negroes and not at the American Whites. … They are seeking to destroy our race through our women.”[14]

This concern about reproductive success is part of the broader ecological aspect of this evolutionary strategy, and two of the main NOI priorities are “training women to be good wives and mothers, and educating youth.”[15] The NOI can been seen as an attempt to overcome Black degeneration through the introduction of strict social rules into Black life. One piece of contemporary NOI literature stresses:
We are in particular concerned with the direction of the youth especially in relation to education, law and order, health and the family unit.… The level of degradation within inner city communities is an alarming reality.
Although far from enjoying popularity among the mainstream Black population, the Nation of Islam represents a moderately successful attempt at a group evolutionary strategy. It offers positive social programs to its community, and its members are active in jails and prisons, recruiting prisoners into the group and dissuading them from a life of crime. NOI has a strong emphasis against drugs, against prostitution and pimping, and against violence and gang involvement. They urge Blacks to set up black-owned and black-operated businesses, thus working to raise the standard of living in poor neighborhoods. They also look with disdain on Black reliance on the government welfare system, which they perceive as often perpetuating the cycle of poverty.

The Nation of Islam has also made efforts at improving Black efforts at resource competition. NOI has invested in restaurants and the food service industry as one focus for economic growth. The Nation of Islam owns thousands of acres of Georgia farmland, and has operated a large number of restaurants, bakeries, clothing stores, bookstores, hair care shops, and other enterprises. In 1995, the NOI opened the Salaam Restaurant and Bakery on the south side of Chicago, at a cost of five million dollars. The delegates were entertained to dinner at the Salaam Restaurant and Bakery. Their fundamental ideology is to avoid reliance on government subsidies or white business partnerships.

One of their most successful ventures has been in managing to take advantage of Black lawlessness by providing building security at apartments and housing projects across America. Since 1991, the federal government has paid over twenty million dollars to NOI security teams in cities such as Baltimore, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, Chicago, and Los Angeles. NOI security guards will also hawk newspapers or proselytize while on duty. Despite NOI members being banned from possessing guns, NOI security teams have been generally effective at reducing crime and increasing tenant safety.  Generally speaking, the NOI can be said to offer Blacks an effective way to improve their lives and prospects.

What relevance does this analysis have for White advocacy? Firstly, it reveals that group evolutionary strategies are commonplace, and that new strategies can be devised and adapted by peoples in various circumstances. The Nation of Islam was essentially incubated among a low-IQ group in the degenerate slums of Detroit. It is now a moderately successful, tightly organized, and well-resourced community with a clear vision of itself and its future. Its membership is between 30,000 and 50,000 but its followers and supporters are suspected to number much higher. Secondly, it is helpful to have a broader understanding of perceptions of race and ethnicity in other groups. In White advocacy we have certain group goals — one of which must surely be to work towards the establishment of a White homeland untouched by multiculturalism. Sections of other groups have similar aspirations and these are to be welcomed. We should also welcome any recognition of racial realities by other groups. I’m not particularly fond of being called a ‘Devil,’ but there is an honesty in NOI depictions of racial competition, and it’s acknowledgement of Jewish influence, which I find refreshing. It is the same kind of honesty which led Garvey and Cox to find common group in the otherwise yawning gulf between them. The story of the Nation of Islam is the story of an ethnic group wanting to improve itself and stand alone. The SPLC has described it as a ‘hate group’ — it must be doing something right.

I certainly won’t receive an invite to a NOI dinner any time soon. Nor will I be extending an invitation to the nearest member of the Fruit of Islam. But nature, or perhaps Yakub himself, wouldn’t have it any other way.
[1] M. Lee, The Nation of Islam: An American Millenarian Movement (New York: Syracuse University Press, 1996), 19.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid, 20.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid, 22.
[6] E. Curtis, Black Muslim Religion in the Nation of Islam, 1960-1975 (University of North Carolina Press, 2006), 91.
[7] M. Gardell, In the Name of Elijah Muhammad: Louis Farrakhan and The Nation of Islam (Duke University Press, 1996), 36.
[8] C. Marsh, The Lost-Found Nation of Islam in America, (Scarecrow Press, 1996), 9.
[9] Y. Haddad, Muslim Communities in North America, (State University of New York Press, 1994), 152.
[10] Lee, The Nation of Islam, 29.
[11] Ibid, 24.
[12] Ibid, 30.
[13] Ibid, 31.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Ibid, 31.

Rivers, Rooted in the Aryan Blood Memory

via Aryan Myth and Metahistory

I have long been drawn to rivers for some hitherto inexplicable reason. It is only recently with my return to my native County Durham that I have begun to understand this attachment. The traditional county of Durham is bordered by the rivers Tyne in the north, which separates it from Northumberland and the Tees in the south which separates it from Yorkshire. I am by the way referring to the real and traditional English counties which date back to Anglo-Saxon times not their modern bastardised local authority administrative units. This is a subject which I will return to in a future article.

Of course between these two rivers we have another significant river, the Wear. There are of course many other rivers which act as tributaries into these three main rivers such as the river Skerne which runs throughout Darlington and feeds into the Tees, which Darlington's boundaries reach.

Rivers acted as natural territorial boundaries to our ancestors and were often defended to the death. When I compare how jealously our ancestors defended their tribal lands from invading enemies I am forced to compare these valiant heroes with the traitors who govern sacred England today and instead of repelling those who break into our land with force they agonise over 'quotas' as to how many more of these unwanted flotsam and jetsam that they let in (to our cost). The Church of England by the way is one of the prime agitators for yet more unwanted immigration. This demonstrates that only an indigenous and racial religion, Wodenism can provide our people with the necessary Weltanschauung to fight against our genocide as a folc. A folk which is proud of its ancestry and identity would and should never permit such a state of affairs to continue.

Many of England's and Germania's rivers were guarded by a Goddess. Indeed the Goddess came to personify the river. It is interesting that the deity which guards the river is always female. I know of no exceptions to this rule. An interesting secondary scource is Gardenstone's Gods of the Germanic Peoples. From Roman Times to the Viking Age which appears in two volumes. They contain a wealth of information about fairly obscure deities, many of whom are river guardian Goddesses.  Some of these Goddesses have a shared Celto-Germanic origin, being honoured by both the Teutons and Gauls. It is possible that some of these deities hearken back to a time when the Teutons and Gauls existed as a common folk after their separation from the Proto-Indo-Europeans (Aryans). An example of such a Goddess is Ambiamarca. Ambe meaning 'river' or 'stream' which is Celtic in origin and mark meaning 'borderland' which is clearly Germanic. Not only rivers but also fords had their protecting Goddess such as the Aumenahena from Köln in Germany.

Regarding the river Tees there is a water sprite, Peg Powler who is said to inhabit the river and has green skin, long hair and sharp teeth and is said to grab the ankles of those who walk too closely by the water's edge and drown them, especially naughty children! No doubt this is a later corruption of the original guardian Goddess. This type of water sprite is common throughout the Germanic, Celtic and Slavic lands.

Anne Ross in Pagan Celtic Britain states:

"Rivers are important in themselves, being associated in Celtic tradition with fertility and with deities such as the divine mothers and the sacred bulls, concerned with the fundamental aspect of life.
"Gaul provides numerous examples of the association of divine beings with streams and rivers and with the springs at their source,
"The Celtic mother-goddesses, who frequently also function in the role of war-goddesses and prognosticators, have a widespread association with water."
She quotes the example of the river Marne "taking its name from that of the Gaulish Matrona, 'Divine Mother'. No doubt there was at one time a cult legend in circulation associating the Mother with the river, which became the physical personification of the goddess, mirroring her own supernatural forces-strength, the powers of desruction, fertility."

In addition to rivers, stream and lakes being presided over by a guardian Goddess we know that wells and springs also have similar associations.

The amateur historian Alistair Moffat writing in his Arthur and the Lost Kingdoms makes the interesting observation that the oldest river names in Britain tend to begin with the letter 'T', eg the Thames, Tees, Tyne, Tweed and Tay. He explains that "this is because they were named by people who walked across the North Sea to Britain" and "Each time a band of these people came to a large river they called it the same thing: tavas is a Sanskrit root which means 'to surge'. All the names of the 'T' rivers come from the same word." He also makes reference to Tacitus calling the river Tay 'Tanaus' or 'Taus' which he believes is a "much clearer echo of the Sanskrit".

The inescapable conclusion which the author and we must come to is that "after the last Ice Age Britain was first populated by a people who spoke an Indo-European language but were not yet Celts". This is also a realisation that I came to a few years ago when reasearching the Indo-European (but not 'Celtic') origins of Phases II and III of Stonehenge.

The river Goddess is not only a protectress of our tribal lands but also acts a divine mother for her folc. We have an example of this in the Goddess Nerthus. (See Germania 40). The Angles were noted for their veneration of Nerthus, Mother Earth:
"Then come the Reudigni, the Aviones, the Anglii, the Varini, the Eudoses, the Suarines, and the Nuitones, defended by rivers or woods. There is nothing noteworthy about them individually, except that collectively they worship Nerthus, or Mother Earth, and believe that she takes part in human affairs and rides among the peoples." (Rives)
"After them come the Reudigni, Aviones, Anglii, Varini, Eudoses, Suarines, and Nuitones, all of them safe behind ramparts of rivers and woods. There is nothing noteworthy about these tribes individually, but they share a common worship of Nerthus, or Mother Earth. They believe that she takes part in human affairs, riding in a chariot among her people." (Mattingley, Handford)
The significance of rivers is that they are part of a vast circulatory system, not unlike the human body with its veins and arteries except they pump water around not blood, for the benefit of us all. However blood is often likened unto water spiritually and both are needful to us. This circulation of the waters reminds me of the great Eternal Return and the waters of the rivers flow out to the seas to return to us again.