Sep 21, 2015

Illegal Immigrants Given Handbook (Written in Arabic) on How to Break Laws More Efficiently

via The European Guardian

Recently, migrants left along with their rubbish, a copy of a “Migrant’s handbook” written in Arabic. Its contents include phone numbers to Red Cross and many other organizations, maps, migration routes, and tips and tricks on how to get to the welfare states of Europe.

One organization behind the book is “W2EU” or “Welcome to Europe” and was discovered by a Sky News reporter. 

Sonia, a volunteer for W2EU, told Sky News that the organization distributes copies of this book for free to migrants and refugees in Turkey hoping to make it into Europe. She stated that the group is roughly 100 members large and that they are based in Europe and North Africa. The organization has set up a hotline for “refugees” to call when finding trouble on the open sea. A volunteer for the organization will answer when called and contact the appropriate coast guard to help the “refugees”.

Maps in the handbook detail the best locations for boats to come ashore along with red pointers showing migrant reception and detention centers. Several pages express welcoming messages and beautiful pictures of Greek islands with captions such as: “We welcome all travellers on their difficult trip and wish you all a good journey - because freedom of movement is everybody's right!”.

The organization's website provides images and information on how to migrate to almost any country within Europe not limited to the European Union. It features many pictures of migrants making the journey and arriving with smiling faces into Europe. There are nearly 40 guide books and pamphlets available for free on the site. The full book that was discovered is available on the organization’s website as well. People who are encouraging the illegal passage to Europe should be considered accomplices for people smuggling.

David French: Another Cuck Begs for Mercy

via American Renaissance

David French, a staff writer for National Review, is the latest “conservative” to yelp after being called a “cuckservative.” It’s hard to think of anyone who deserved it more. Mr. French managed to father two white children but then adopted an Ethiopian girl. Here she is with Mrs. French, who uses the photo as her Twitter profile picture.

Nancy French, who also claims to be a conservative, is just as unhappy about “cuckservative.” She wrote her own complaint that found its way into that famously conservative publication, the Washington Post.

Being called a “cuck” hurts because it cuts close to the bone. The word cuckold comes from “cuckoo,” the bird that lays its eggs in the nest of a different species. The other mother bird can’t tell the difference, and feeds the cuckoo chick along with her own. The chick rewards her by pitching the other babies out of the nest, so it gets all the food. A cuckold is a man whose wife had an affair, had the baby, and the poor sap thinks it’s his. The cuckold is a figure of derision and contempt because he’s been tricked into lavishing care on a child that’s not his.

The Frenches haven’t even been tricked. Instead of having another child of their own, they deliberately decided to adopt someone who is as alien to them–genetically, racially, culturally–as possible. Adopting African trophy babies is what addle-headed movie stars do. Madonna has a little African. So does Charlize Theron. Angelina Jolie, Sandra Bullock, Jane Fonda, Michelle Pfeiffer, and Nicole Kidman are all raising black children. It’s what you expect from people who crave the limelight and don’t want to conserve anything. That’s why they’re not “cuckservatives.” They don’t know any better; they’re lefties.

True conservatives understand that race is the bedrock of culture, and that virtually nothing they love will survive in an America without white people. “Cuckservatives” are chasing phantoms if they think small government, rule of law, Western culture, the Bill of Rights, good sportsmanship, WASP manners, or incorruptible institutions will survive in an Afro-Hispanic-Caribbean-Asiatic America. At a time when whites are not even having enough children to replace themselves, to adopt Africans instead of having more white babies is deliberately to shove the country towards the Third-World mishmash the Left actually wants. It is a betrayal–especially of one’s own parents and grandparents–but also of everyone who is part of the greater extended family of Europeans.

This is how Mr. French ends his yelping:
We defend a culture, not a race. The foundation of that culture is a faith that makes no distinction among races but rather declares, unequivocally, “All are one, in Christ Jesus.”
If he had written “Allah” rather than “Jesus Christ,” Mr. French would sound just like Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi of ISIS–except that Muslims have a different idea of how to spread the faith and what to do afterwards. But the culture goes back well before Christianity; the Greeks started it. And blacks are the most church-going, Bible-believing people in America. Does that make Detroit and East Saint Louis the citadels of Mr. French’s culture?

How can anyone who is not deliberately blind write as if race were irrelevant? How can Mr. French fail to see that his culture sprang from one race and that others reject it as alien? Africans have been in America for 400 years, yet wherever Africans gather together the culture Mr. French claims to defend is almost nowhere to be seen. Does he really think his little Ethiopian will embrace and strengthen what millions before her have despised?

Look around the world. Wherever you find whites you find a common culture. Wherever you find non-whites you find something different. It is their special talent for failing to see that that makes “conservatives” cuckservatives.

Mr. French’s tactics are as lamentable as his delusions. He wants to banish the word “cuckservative.” He doesn’t want to banish “racism” or “xenophobia” or “white privilege” or any of the other insidious formulations that have tricked whites–included Mr. French–into thinking white racial awareness is wrong. No, it’s “cuckservative” that’s got to go, and it’s easy to see why: It reminds him that culture is flesh and blood and centuries of struggle. It reminds him how bloodless and futile his own “conservatism” really is. He wants the word to go away so he can close his mind to biology, history, common sense, and even his own experience, and go on “defending” a culture while betraying the very people–the only people–who make it possible.

Ur-Fascism: The Concept and its Meaning

via Ur-Fascist Analytics

Author's Note: The following is a reworking of an essay I first published in December 2012. It is based on Umberto Eco's piece, "Ur-Fascism."

Ur-fascism is both a unity and a multiplicity, just as we find within life as a phenomenon, itself: Unity in its embodiment of a single phenomenon and multiplicity because of the diversity and disparity of form within that phenomenon. 'Ur' means primal or primordial: For example, in the form of Heidegger’s ur-grund ("primal ground") or ur-volk ("primeval people") as well as Goethe’s "ur-phenomenon" ("archetypal pattern" or "primordial pattern").

'Fascism' comes from the Latin, fasces, meaning "bundle": in political connotation: unity in a community. Ur-fascism is the primordial wellspring of every fascist aspiration or movement. This has many roots: Nation, race, ethnicity, heritage, lineage, culture, tradition, language, history, ideals, aims, and values. When a group has emerged, organically and historically, with its own identity, fate, and interests, a community has come into existence.[1]

A community integrated genealogically, linguistically, and institutionally at its apex forms a people; a people and its land forms a nation. When different peoples are united under one ruler, they may form an empire. Similar peoples that are historically coalescent may form civilizations; the core of a civilization is a race, just as the core of a people is a race, around which language, tradition, and culture coalesce. Every man and woman is, in a sense, "dual bound": He or she is bound first to service in the interest of his or her nation, and second to the interests of his or her race and civilization. At lower levels, a community could comprise many different unities: some that are spatial in extent, such as institutions, firms, or academies, and some that are genealogical in extent, such as families.

It is left to theoretical biology, ecology, zoology, sociology, and anthropology to inform our conception of how hierarchies emerge, why they emerge, and the scale of their durability; but there are many different sorts of "communities": In different scales and scopes.

Ur-fascism is the primordial foundation of all fascist movements, historically or potentially, that have the potential to unify communities at distinct levels. A nation is the metaphysical apex of community. 'People' is the modern English folk or the German Volk. The former comes from the Old English 'folc,' meaning "common people." 'Folk' was diffused through the introduction of the compound word, 'folklore,' by the antiquarian and demographer, William Thoms. Peoples are distinct and diverse biological entities, and the history of fascism reflects this diversity. Ur-fascism is the primordial source from which archetypal fascistic patterns emerge, and this is rooted in organic tendencies ingrained in living things: The inclination toward hierarchy, the fact of inequality, and suppression of autonomy. 

In human communities, including peoples and the nations that house them, such tendencies may give rise to myriad political systems. Of all such systems, fascism is the most natural, as it identifies and manifests tendencies that predate and structure humans.

Ur-fascism metaphysically elevates the group over the individual, the community over the member, the nation over the citizen. While Marxism stresses the conflict of interests between classes, ur-fascism builds on the unity of class interests in a group.

The founder and leader of the Romanian Iron Guard, Corneliu Codreanu, said: "A people becomes aware of its existence when it becomes aware of its entirety, not only of its component parts and their individual interests." [2] Ur-fascism is the primal root of the reality of the interests of a community in relation to the member. It transcends both revolutionary socialism and reactionary conservatism; it seeks neither to elevate workers over employers nor entrench unjustified privileges in outmoded castes. Instead, ur-fascism builds on the interests of a community in its entirety. That is, it is both revolutionary and conservative: Revolutionary in its willingness to overturn structures toxic to a community, but conservative in its insistence on preserving what is vital or essential to the life of a community.

In his contribution to the "Doctrine of Fascism," Giovanni Gentile said the state "interprets, develops, and potentiates the whole life of a people." [3] A nation, as an organic community, is much like a social organism that is directed by the vital social organ of the state. Under fascism, the community as a whole is sovereign. How that community is defined, and what its components are, is a function of its historical development and integral patterns that emerge within it. A community that forms a people, and the fusion of a people and its land that is the nation, has a natural composition, and this grows out of distinct historical, racial, ethnic, geographic, and genealogical patterns; the NSDAP defined national communities in racially homogeneous terms, while the Italian Fascist Party defined it broadly.

The relations between members of a community or citizens of a nation are political, social, economic and racial-ethnic. Inevitably, economic relations become integral to defining the objective interests of members, which must become a vital matter of the state.

However, the state, as conceived in most fascist systems, is not an instrument for the elimination of inequality; some social castes or classes might justly be overturned, but not the very idea of class or hierarchy itself. Ur-fascism forms and builds the conditions by which a community benefits from hierarchy and classes within it. It stands in opposition to the Marxist aspiration to end inequality, in and of itself, and dissolve hierarchy: This goal is as futile and destructive as the elevation of the interests of every cell in an organism's body to a plane of equality. Equality among the parts of a complex organism would mean death for the organism, just as a community, people, or nation cannot have a wholesome, healthy life without inequality. Ur-fascism utilizes inequality to benefit a whole community.

As such, the destruction of inequality is not an end in itself, even if the continued existence of certain classes is undesirable. A fascist United States would end speculation and abolish financial parasitism, but not because fascism opposes profit and gain. Ur-fascism taps into the primal impulse for gain and profit while ensconcing it within the context of the interests of a community as a whole. Ur-fascism is rooted in the primeval impulse of living things toward acquisition and the context that such aspiration manifests in with respect to communities and their interests that form an integral part of biological existence. As such, ur-fascism seizes on hierarchy and inequality to build communities, rewarding hard work and penalizing laxity. It opposes aristocratic entrenchment and revolutionary egalitarianism.

Ur-fascism is the primeval basis of all fascistic political patterns, rooted in a will to life that is as much a part of the fabric of communities as it is individuals. If it is authentic in embryonic and developmental stages, it will grow and enable a whole community to persist.

Fascistic movements or governments arise out of ur-fascistic wellsprings. These first begin a) in embryo, as nascent political organisms, whether as movements or as governments, and once they b) reach mature development, embellish explicit aims and policies.

(a) Umberto Eco's view of fascism is limited to the first stage, offering a conception of how fascism originates. In embryonic form, fascist movements and governments originate as phenomena that arise from within a community. This emergence may take the form of one, two, or several of the properties listed below, each originating separately or together, and either one after another or all at once. Eventually, these properties, however many happen to manifest, coagulate together. Imagine how a complex organism originates: It can start with only one cell or as a handful of cells: "It is enough that one of them be present so as to allow fascism to coagulate around it." Whether at the local or national level, and whether as a new movement or tendency in an existing government, fascism can be signaled by:
  1. Syncretic revival of tradition: a reawakening of identity by an integration of distinct traditions, symbols, icons, and ideals within and across cultures.
  2. Rejection of modernism: a reaffirmation of primordial ideals and values and rejection of the universalism and egalitarianism central to the Enlightenment.
  3. Necessity of action: a sudden realization of the limitations of the parliamentary process and a rejection of its emphasis on discussion and prolonged debate.
  4. Necessity of unity: awareness of the need for agreement on primeval values and aims, and rejection of endless discussion and dissent conceived as rights.
  5. Rejection of difference: seizing on the reality of national, ethnic, cultural, and linguistic identity, and opposition to alien values and mass immigration.
  6. Appeal to class interests: rejection of class conflict and dissent in a community, and an affirmation of the authentic interests of distinct groups and classes.
  7. Reality of internal and external threats: attention to actual or perceived threats to the community, and its ethnic, social, cultural or global character.
  8. Inconstancy in the enemy: conflicting images of enemies and changing perceptions; for ex., Jews presented as victims in film while seen as financially powerful. Often, the contradictory character of enemies is a key to threats they pose.
  9. Reality of life as struggle: rejection of perpetual pacifism that threatens the durability of a community, accepting the reality of perpetual struggle and vigilance.
  10. Populist elitism: realizing that it is a privilege to be a member of a community, raising higher over lower elements, the desirability of authoritarianism.
  11. A regard for death: grasping the agency of death, placing individual life in service to a community, and the intimacy of heroism and stoic embrace of death.
  12. Reaffirmation of traditional life: elevation of traditional families and social roles.
  13. The primacy of community: awareness that it is the community that has "rights" over the individual, and a leader, or leaders, who embody and manifest this.
  14. The mobilization of language: the desirability or necessity to reshape language to mobilize a community, and novel uses of terms, words, and phrases.
(b) Though Eco's analysis is limited to embryonic conditions in which fascism grows out of traits, ideals, and instincts within a movement or government, fascism also involves forming of explicit aims, goals, and policies. For example, a fascist movement may emerge from the reality of internal and external threats and a reaffirmation of traditional life, above, from these roots this novel fascist movement will develop particular policies that it would pursue if it attained power. Historically, there were many fascist movements and governments and these developed very diverse political aims, goals, and policies. This concern is separate from whether they are successful. While the particular goals, aims, and policies can and do vary, in many cases, both past and present, they often involve and include:
  1. Agrarianism and a preservation of rural life, usually related to ethnic identity partly rooted in a unique place; the NSDAP policy of Blut und Boden ("blood and soil"), for example, which was also linked to policies of demographic growth.
  2. Anti-capitalist policies that reject economic materialism and oppose the view that profit should be the primary aspiration of those involved in the economy.
  3. Anti-communist policy that opposes class conflict. Anti-capitalist and anti-Marxist fascist policies reject economic reductionism, which is the view that human life and social realities are in fact driven primarily by economic aspirations.
  4. An anti-liberal domestic policy opposing individualism, permissiveness, fragmentation, and a view of the state as an economic steward of atomized persons.
  5. Autarky, or autonomy, at all levels: aspiring to self-sufficiency in material, natural, and economic resources at the individual, local, state, and national levels; this includes to individuals, families, local communities, states, and entire nations.
  6. Class collaboration, class reconciliation, and harmonizing of class interests, combining worker rights and interests with the protection of private property.
  7. Economic policies based on corporatist, syndicalist, and "Third Position" views, as were advanced in Fascist Italy, Germany, Falangist Spain, and elsewhere.
  8. Environmentalist policies and advocacy of animal welfare, often aligned with agrarian policies, sustainable agriculture, renewable energy, and ecological policy; modern "Green" politics owes itself and its discourse to fascist environmentalism.
  9. Familial policies advocating protection of the interests of families, but also promoting the legitimate gender interests of men and women in social contexts.
  10. Fecundist policies and pro-natalist aspirations, particularly in contexts of demographic decline, but sometimes linked to irredentist and imperialist policies.
  11. Irredentist policies and the extension of "living space," such as the NSDAP's policy of Lebensraum; relatedly, some fascist regimes adopted explicitly imperialist policies, such as the policy of spazio vitale, or "vital space," of the Italian Fascist party.
  12. Mass mobilization and the creation of institutions that harmonize the interests of society and its members; for ex., the NSDAP policy of Gleichschaltung.
  13. Policies supporting creation of youth movements, and support for the young; fascism embraces the young as a vital part of the nation and the basis of its future.
  14. Public aesthetics, and the aestheticizing of social, national, and community life, often with social symbols, mass spectacles, rallies, and public ceremonies; sometimes, this is linked to syncretic traditionalism and the revival of archaic traditions.
The relationship between the embryonic and developmental stages of a fascist movement or nascent government is organic. Eco's analysis emphasizes the first stage, but implicitly leaves open the realities of the second. The first list above is a rewording of Eco's list of fourteen properties, with an attempt to summarize the essential nature of each. Eco's own approach forms a sort of preventative diagnosis: He is concerned to detail properties that allow others to identify a fascist movement or government before it matures. That is why he leaves out the later, mature developmental stages; he is less concerned with those. His analysis is intended to identify a fascistic political organism in infancy. My analysis expands on his by including an account of both embryonic and developmental phases.
 The two phases are not always temporally separated. A fascist movement can emerge in embryo with its policies fully formed. The NSDAP began with a party program. But there is a clear distinction between how a movement starts and what it aims to achieve.
 Furthermore, fascism is not always strictly national in character. Fascism is a system that can manifest at any level of community organization. Because it originates in the human heart, and spans human relations, it can arise at any level or type of community.

The historical diversity of fascism is profound. Franco's Spain eschewed expansion, but the pursuit of living space, or space within which a biological community can pursue prospects, was a central facet of German fascist policy. Italian fascism differed in its stress on vital space, which as a policy is principally cultural and spiritual. Mosley's British Union advocated preservation of the Empire and its closure within protectionist and isolationist policies. Hitler, Mosley, and Mussolini all sought autarky. But while racial policy was central to German fascism, it was not a central facet of Portuguese, Spanish, British or Italian fascism. Perón’s postwar Argentina developed a pluralistic fascism, and while Catholicism was central to Falangism, Quisling's National Gathering looked back to its pagan roots.
 Ur-fascism is the common wellspring of all of these, and other, historical fascist movements and governments. It is a family of living worldviews, including both concrete movements in the past and all possible future movements, each springing from a similar impulse to identify and actualize the essence of a community. The essence of fascism is not the marches, parades, and public spectacles by which it is commonly conceived, but the transformational character by which it seeks to revitalize a particular community and extend its life and the synergy that results when that community's members converged at a common juncture, in terms of their perception of themselves, individually, and that of their community. Historical manifestations of fascism in almost every instance bear out this conception.
 Eco's analysis, though intended to identify and expunge fascism before it reaches political maturity, affords us an instrument by which to view and to use fascism to inculcate genuine nationalistic responses to actual and possible sources of decline. Because ur-fascism is a family of worldviews, there is a sense in which the different properties and features at both the embryonic and developmental stages form a causally related clustering of elements. To promote any one element in the embryonic phase encourages, stimulates, and excites the other elements; for example, to encourage the syncretic resuscitation of tradition also tends to encourage the rejection of modernism, a traditionalist view of families, and a fascistic mobilization of language. These elements are causally bound up with each other.

Viewing ur-fascism in this way also avails us of a resource by which to articulate efforts to ensure the continued decline of our nations and of Western Civilization. When our enemies attack one nationalistic aspiration, they are also encouraging the denigration of another. To assail a traditionalist view of families tends, implicitly, to tear down any overt opposition to modernism or the constructive, nationalistic use of language to mobilize traditionalist ideas and sentiment. "Antifa," unreformed Marxists, and others who count themselves our enemies are aware of this, and that is partly why even the most subtle expression of positive ethnic, racial, or nationalistic sentiment arouses their vitriol. The deconstruction of the West proceeds precisely by branding itself "anti-fascist" and attacking fascistic values.

Seventy years of incessant deconstruction of the West has largely been based on attacks on the very elements that Eco lists as integral to embryonic fascism. It follows that authentic efforts to salvage our nations requires rehabilitating and resuscitating these values.

It again follows that to an actual revival of our nations requires a fascistic response, an open and vital, explicit and unapologetic, reliance on fascistic aims, ideals, and methods. Without it, we are principally engaged with avoiding the vile indictments of our real enemies.

Ur-fascism is a unified family of distinct fascistic worldviews, which in their authentic growth and expression are, in every case, native in character. All are rooted in primeval biological tendencies that have historical roots in evolutionary history. As an authentic prescription of political mobility, they are rooted in primordial organic permutations that drove the history of life and the diversification of biological communities over time, unfolding in a variety of distinct lineages. Novel biological communities emerge in the history of life, and exhibit themselves in distinct ways, arising from underlying mechanisms that work to ensure their preservation and persistence: The primacy of community over individual, the necessity of hierarchy, and an authoritarian character are vital elements in the persistence of life.

Viewed in this way, we can grasp Eco's claim that ur-fascism is "primitive": fascism, as a political system, is deeply rooted in primordial patterns that had been exhibited throughout the history of life, leading to the diversification and preservation of communities.

Understood as such, Eco's characterization of ur-fascism as "eternal fascism" now comes into focus: While fascism always manifests in certain times and places, it can always come back again in unexpected forms and guises, and can never truly be eradicated.
1. Wiktionary defines “ur” as proto-, primitive, original. There have been several other explicit uses; Goethe employs “ur-sprung” (“origin”) in his Ueber den Ursprung der Sprache.
2. Stephen Fischer-Galati, Man, State, and Society in East European History (Pall Mall, 1971), quoted on p. 329.
3. Giovanni Gentile and Benito Mussolini, The Doctrine of Fascism.

Ann Coulter’s Faux Pas: Calling Attention to Jewish Power

via The Occidental Observer

Ann Coulter understands that immigration is the greatest question of the age, not only for America but for the Republican Party. After all, as she tweeted:

If you really think that immigration is the big issue — and it is, you are understandably upset when so many Republican candidates want to make the big issues Israel, abortion, and their worship of Ronald Reagan — even including Israel in visions of what America will be like if elected. Reagan and abortion may indeed tap into the GOP base but, let’s face it, obsessing about Israel is first and foremost an attempt to appease Sheldon Adelson and the rest of the Republican Jewish Coalition. Trump is succeeding precisely because he is not seen as needing to pander to anyone.

And when the pundits say that Carly Fiorina did really well, what they really mean is that she made an impassioned condemnation of Planned Parenthood which they hope will change the focus of the campaign to issues like abortion that are really sideshows.
For those of us who see immigration is the one and only real issue, this is a red herring. The real issues are the political, economic, and cultural effects of immigration that amount to a morally untenable assault on the traditional people and culture of America. It’s no surprise that Republican elites are happy for anything that changes the subject away from Trump’s populist appeal on immigration even if they have nothing but disdain for the attitudes of the Republican base on abortion, gay marriage, etc.

Claiming Coulter is an “anti-Semite” is ridiculous. As John Derbyshire notes, all of the references to Israel in ¡Adios America! praise Israel because Israelis are intent on keeping Israel Jewish, expelling non-Jewish migrants, etc. This is simply a fact, but somehow when one advocates a similar policy aimed at preserving the demographic, political and cultural status of Whites in American and elsewhere, one is subjected to the most vile terms of abuse. If she were really an “anti-Semite,” she would be noting the hypocrisy of American Jews, including the entire organized Jewish community, in favoring Israel as an ethnostate while simultaneously promoting mass immigration, multiculturalism, and the proposition nation idea for the West.

In fact, Ann has studiously avoided discussing the role of Jewish activist organizations, Jewish intellectual movements, Jewish influence in the media and Jewish political clout via financial contributions in the transformation of America that she deplores. Instead she has repeatedly referred to “Teddy Kennedy’s 1965 immigration act” as the ultimate cause. The demise of America as a European civilization is the result of the evil machinations of a freshman senator?
This is typical analysis of the immigration disaster one gets from mainstream conservatives. Coulter acts as if, despite all the best efforts of Republicans over the years, immigration happened anyway. And if it hadn’t been for that evil liberal Teddy Kennedy, all would be well with the Republic. The fact is that the real force behind the 40-year campaign to overturn the 1924 Immigration Restriction law was the organized Jewish community, not the freshman senator from Massachusetts.  And it couldn’t be further from the truth that Republicans aren’t equally to blame.
Republican presidents,  including the sainted Ronald Reagan, have been complicit in the immigration disaster. Reagan agreed to the huge immigration amnesty of 1986 and did nothing to curb the real problem, legal immigration. Those chickens have come home to roost. “Ann Coulter: The Republican demise is all Teddy Kennedy’s fault”)
In attempting to deflect some of the hostility, she has reaffirmed her support for Israel:

Obviously it is one thing to support Israel and quite another to make it central to presidential politics and the future of America — a simple distinction that her critics seem unable to grasp. She is quite right that, like abortion and Reagan, the focus on Israel detracts from immigration as the central issue which she correctly sees as far more important for the future of America. She has cleverly turned the argument around to argue that immigration is bad for Israel:
Coulter is obviously doing her best to remain part of mainstream conservatism where Israel has a sacrosanct place.

One of Coulter’s best tweets implicitly called attention to the irony of the uproar on her comments by outraged Jews:
Jewish influence is indeed the main issue, but it is a topic that is not supposed to be discussed. This was her real sin. Her complaints about the focus on abortion and Reagan were completely ignored by the media, but there is no end to discussion or comment on the Israel-o-centric bias of so many of the Republican candidates. Her tweet “How many f—king Jews do these people think there are in the United States?” could only call attention to Jewish influence, and that is something the Jewish community is loath to discuss.

As usual, the guardians of this media blackout do not feel any need to actually point to evidence or data to back up their claims:

Exhibit A: Emily Shire in The Daily Beast: “Anti-Semites Flock to Ann Coulter’s Side
The anti-Semitism in Coulter’s tweet came through loud and clear as she painted American Jews as some all-powerful force manipulating the Republicans. As The Daily Beast’s Tom Sykes wrote, “The whole argument echoes a historic libel against Jews that they hold secret influence.”
Obviously, no one, least of all Coulter, was presenting Jews as all-powerful. And, despite what Sykes claims, Jewish influence can be easily documented and is hardly a secret. My effort to document Jewish involvement in transforming US immigration policy ran to 68 heavily referenced and footnoted pages and has never been seriously challenged. (And if you don’t believe me, take it from Prof. Otis Graham  or Prof. Hugh Davis Graham.)

Shire is offended by a claim on Twitter about Jewish media influence:
“#IStandWithAnn because six Jewish companies control 97% of the global media. She will be demonized for speaking out,” tweeted Nick Joseph, a man who describes himself in his Twitter bio as “morally obligated to raise awareness for the increasing racism against white people.”
Shire feels no need to back up a claim about what she thinks is a better estimate of Jewish media ownership. No need to discuss actual media ownership by different ethnic groups and how ethnic identity might influence media messages. No need to even link to a well-researched discussion of media ownership that would support her views.

Whatever the exact percentage, there is no question that Jews have a far larger share of the media than any other identifiable group, and it would be naive to suppose that Jewish attitudes on issues like immigration and Israel are not reflected in the media as a result (my discussion is here, p. xlvi). Hence the huge uproar about Ann’s comments on Israel and next to nothing on abortion or Reagan.

But instead of making a real argument, Shire falls back on the assurance that her audience is in complete agreement that such claims are outrageous and the product of a diseased mind: “It’s dangerous to dismiss their anti-Semitism because it seems almost laughably outrageous to anyone with the slightest sense of human history or decency.” Somehow “decency” should preclude finding out what is really going on. The “argument” is that it’s so obviously wrong-headed and crackpot that it doesn’t need a rational rebuttal. Nutcase stuff.

Instead of arguments and evidence, we have simple assertions. And for good measure, she throws in a guilt-by-association “argument” that depends on producing a knee-jerk reaction to David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan.

The reality is, of course, that people in a position of power do not have to defend their statements rationally. They can simply rely on decades of conditioning and propaganda combined with the threat of job loss and social ostracism to do the job. As a Mel Brooks character famously said, “It’s good to be king.”

Exhibit B: “How Ann Coulter Made It Kosher to Hate Jews” (yes, that’s really the title!) by Karol Markowicz in the Forward.
Whether or not Ann meant to be insulting to Jews — the Anti-Defamation League called her comments “borderline anti-Semitic” — the fact is that Jews in America always have to straddle the line between wanting Israel to be mentioned a lot by politicians and hoping they won’t mention it too much.
Anti-Semites already believe that Jews have too much influence in American politics. A so-called friend to Israel like Ann Coulter pointing out the importance of Israel to the candidates in a presidential debate isn’t a positive thing. Her tweet implied the long-running canard that while Jews represent a small percentage of the population, their role in influencing policy is outsized. And, of course, why is it outsized? The dark undercurrent in the answer is that it’s due to money.
Again, there is no attempt to present or link to a rational discussion of the role of Jews in American politics that successfully argues that Jewish influence is not in fact “out-sized.” Just considering the Republicans, the amount of money Sheldon Adelson and the Republican Jewish Coalition are willing to contribute to pro-Israel candidates is staggering — $100 million in the last election cycle alone by Sheldon Adelson. Shouldn’t Markowicz be discussing why all this money isn’t important and that candidates who are bringing up Israel in the hopes of tapping into this money are delusional? One need only recall the parade of Republican candidates who grovel before Sheldon Adelson’s billions and the angst among the RJC donors that, alone among the candidates, Trump is not subject to their influence.

The fact is that anyone not living under a rock or prone to pathological self-deception is quite aware that Jewish influence is indeed out-sized and, yes, it has to do with Jews being willing and able to make huge donations to candidates that support the policies they favor, particularly, in the case of the Republicans, Israel and neocon war mongering combined with liberal social positions on immigration, gay marriage, etc. Their ideal candidate is Jeb Bush, the consummate cuckservative.

 *   *   *

I suggest that Ann Coulter be viewed in much the same way as Donald Trump. They have both said things that are right on the money on the most important issue confronting White America, immigration. But like politicians, writers who want to remain in the mainstream have to pull their punches and can’t always say what they really think. We who have been relegated to the fringes don’t have a lot of other choices. It’s not like one can just change the channel from MSNBC to Fox News to get sound patriotic discussions of immigration — unless Ann Coulter happens to be on Fox. And there is simply no other candidate besides Trump that presents any hope at all on immigration.

At this point, we have to be thankful for Ann Coulter and hope that this latest affair will not get her banned from the mainstream. Beggars can’t be choosers. We remain in an incredibly weak position compared to the power arrayed against us.

It’s important that rational thinking about Jewish influence continues on the internet even though it has been banished from mainstream discourse (yes, Virginia, it’s because of Jewish influence!).  And deep down we can even hope that Coulter and Trump really know the score — that their real thoughts would be entirely at home at American Renaissance or even The Occidental Observer.

#IScamWithAhmed: Defusing the #IStandWithAhmed Viral Pity Bomb

via TradYouth

I designed a computer program in QBasic when I was in fifth grade which provided a crude visualization of a car driving down a street. We provided several scenarios involving intersections and opposing traffic, with the idea that it could be a driver’s education tool. I invested several months and tens of thousands of lines of code in the project, and it took me all the way to the state media fair competition…my first trip to the “big city” state capitol of Indianapolis.

I blew away all but one of the competitors, an Indian kid with a blank steely-eyed expression who stood next to his father and refused to talk to the rest of us. His computer program blew mine away, as it was a chess program written in C++ which was able to handily defeat the judges who went up against it. It was rather improbable for an eleven year old, but the gullible, trusting, and non-confrontational Hoosiers were no match for the cutthroat competitive culture of immigrant elites.

I ain’t even mad. I’m totally over it. And how dare you suggest that this first real interaction with a non-White has anything whatsoever to do with my political views. Shame on you.

When I first saw #IStandWithAhmed bubble up from the sewer of contrived leftist media feel-good campaigns, I paid it little mind, assuming that the administrators probably overreacted and that the dad had probably performed all of the advanced electronics work. On closer examination, the dad didn’t have anything to do with the electronics, either. The people responsible for designing and implementing the device are all either retired or dead of old age, as it’s just a seventies alarm clock dumped out of its casing and placed inside a pencil box. There’s absolutely no original work or thought behind the device.

It’s as if I were to unwrap a perfectly good cheeseburger, then slap the patty, cheese and buns haphazardly inside a pencil box and declare that I invented the cheeseburger. To quote Barack Obama, “You didn’t build that.”

Before I get to the political implications of the family’s actions, the school’s response, and the nation’s hysterical reaction, I wish to touch on a very important point which doesn’t seem to have been addressed, yet. Presuming that the teenager had anything whatsoever to do with this project, the actual danger here isn’t racism, terrorism, or Islamophobia, or school administrator buffoonery. The actual danger here is that a child was potentially dealing with 120V AC electronics, which can be lethal.

Step outside of politics for a moment and consider what a terrible idea it is for children across America to be encouraged to take apart and fiddle with consumer electronics. I’m all for encouraging scientific curiosity and independent learning, but electricity kills, and many of the consumer electronics lying around the typical house contain capacitors guaranteed to ensure that your child prodigy gets a free ride to the RIP rather than the MIT.

Probably around the same time in my childhood that I went to media fair, I also stuck a pin art toy against an electrical outlet and got thrown back a few feet, melting the pins together and requiring mom to reset the breaker box. Even smart kids can and will do incredibly stupid things, and what Microsoft should have sent Ahmed wasn’t a pile of free electronics but a voucher for a course on electronics safety and one of the many nifty electronic kits which are safe for inquisitive minors.

Ahmed With Free Shit
Ahmed -- happy that anti-Whites "stand" with him

We’ll probably never know whether the suspicious briefcase was an edgy bit of performance art designed by the boy to troll his teachers or whether his dad put him up to the whole thing to achieve the political goal of instigating a viral pity campaign for Islamic immigrants. I suspect the former, as a father intelligent enough to foresee how this could win big politically would have been intelligent enough to construct something that looked more like a legitimate science project and less like a child’s prank.

Most of the Left simply dropped the issue to move on to the next big viral outrage thing when the story began to unravel, but a few are hanging back to defend the discredited narrative. Their big “gotcha” now is that if the administrators actually thought it was a bomb, they would have evacuated the school. They work with Ahmed every day and immediately concluded that it was a harmless but malicious hoax which merited a legal tap on the wrist and nothing more.

For the first time in all of recorded history, a school’s administrative staff have been confirmed to have responded to a child’s harmless prank with balance and sensibility.

Perhaps the dad set this all up as an elaborate political ploy. And perhaps the story will unravel even further than it already has and we’ll get to the bottom of the story, but I doubt it. One thing is certain, though. There’s no evidence whatsoever of anti-Islamic bigotry in the school’s response or the very brief and gentle law enforcement response. White American kids get suspended and expelled all the time for harmless essays, poptart pistols, water guns, and other offenses to the hyper-sensitive safety-obsessed modern public school system, and none of those children received anywhere near the popular or institutional support, adulation, or piles of consumer bling.

Dr. Duke's Talk at the International Conference on the Future of European Mankind


Listen Now

An international conference is being held in Moscow. Hear David Duke’s dynamic, heartfelt paper delivered at the conference. He is pictured along with the famous author, Gulliame Faye of France, were two of the leading speakers at the conference.

You can hear David Duke’s speech in its entirety with this link. It is certainly one of the most important addresses he has ever made and it has important meaning for all European and American activists everywhere.


An Overview of the State of Western Man: From the Edge of the Abyss to the Farthest Star

First let me thank the esteemed organizer of this conference, Pavel Tulaev, for being such a gracious host to all of us from around the world, and we must thank the Russian people for producing such a man as he and for the warm hospitality given us in this city. Few people are aware of the fact that the city of Moscow has the largest number of White people of any city in the entire world.

I have many German friends and I could never dismiss the crucial battles fought by the Teutonic knights in protecting Western Europe from historical invasions of the Mongol hordes. But with all due respect and reverence to the Germans, it not Germany who has most earned the moniker, Bulwark to the East, for the Russians fought a hundred battles in defense of European mankind over the centuries for every one fought by the Teutons.

And now, in some ways they take the lead in this fight for the freedom and heritage of our European Genotype all over the world. All of us must feel quite humbled to be here. We must also send our hopes that your President and his successors will resist the non-Russian powers of nihilism and deracination and that of the traditional anti-Russian, alien power that has always threatened mother Russia. May he lead this great nation to its vital role as a prime defender of not only the Russian ethnicity but defender of European and American interests wherever we may dwell.

Our prayers are sincere that he will act as a true son of his people who honors his mothers and fathers. We send him our respect and many of our hopes. Finally, we here are not only to honor the Russian people but we must also honor each other, for all the speakers and delegates from around the globe are true patriots not only for their own nations but for our genetic treasure and cultural heritage from which has sprung our individual national expressions. It is a great honor for me to be in the company of each of you ladies and gentlemen and I appreciate the opportunity to share my perspectives with you.

Our people are at the edge of the abyss.

Our people have scaled the highest mountains, plumbed the depths of the oceans, and crossed great voids of space. We have unlocked the secrets of the Genome. Our medicine has saved hundreds of millions of people from innumerable perils of nature and disease. We have carved sculpture and brushed paintings as beautiful as any scene found in the natural world, written words that evoke the deepest of emotions, the greatest inspiration. Our technology has created a new world. We have even left our footprints on that silver orb at which man has gazed up at for millennia with awe and wonder.

Yet, simultaneous of the fountain of achievements of our people, we have seen our people driven to the brink of nonexistence. We have seen them driven to fratricide since 1914 and are we are now only 8 years shy of 100 years of intermittent war, warfare that has now turned into terrifying proportions by technology now manipulated by non-European minorities in our midst, ancient foes who historically were occasional thorns in our feet, but who now plant and nurture malignant tumors in the innermost chambers of the Western heart and brain.

There is a shadow lengthening across the European and American continents. It represents the destruction of all that we love, the eradication from the earth of a people that represent the epitome of beauty to each of us, a folk whose magnificent history, and works and art, culture, science that stirs wonder in our hearts and inspiration in our souls. That specter represents degeneration, decay, and destruction of our freedom and ultimately even extinction of our genes. It is aptly called genocide and represents just that: the killing of our genes. For our people, the people of Athenia, and Rome, of Russia, and Italy, Spain and Norway, Germany and Greece, France and England, and of North America, Australia and New Zealand, we now are hurtling toward the precipice of genocide, a precipice that leads to the abyss below.
Today, every nation of people of European descent faces a crisis not only of identity but even existence.

Our birthrates are averaging about 1.2. Translated it means that we are liquidating more than 40 percent of our population each generation. It is the greatest world wide genocide in our history, even exceeding the plagues and invasions of the Middle Ages. Even the Black Plague worked its way through each nation for one generation and then subsided. For in the face of the ancient pathogen of Black Plague, our people worked up immunity to this threat.

In regard to this new threat the government and media of the so-called West have worked overtime to suppress our natural immune system, our love of our heritage and nations, and to imprison, kill, suppress in everyway possible (excuse the coarse analogy) the White blood cells who have struggled heroically against the invaders. The current pathogens that decimate us have now worked their destructiveness through one generation and they only gain momentum with time.

Make no mistake. It is genocide.

The birthrate of our people is now only 1.20 world wide. What does this mean in real terms?

It means that every 100 European American men and women will only give birth to fewer than 60 children. The next generation will bequeath fewer than 36 children, and the next generation less than 22, the next fewer than 13, and in only the fifth generation, that original hundred will be less than 8!

In other words, in the long existence of our people, stretching back for tens of thousands of years and thousands of generations, it will take only 5 short generations, an historical blink of the eye, to wipe over 90 percent of our population off the face of the earth.

There are many reasons for the low birthrate, probably the most dynamic factor is the alien media emanating primarily from Hollywood and New York that promotes soulless materialistic consumerism and solipsism, that attacks our deepest perceptions of morality and decency, which leads to rates of disease that in turn lead to infection and sterility, even homosexual self destruction and non-reproduction.

Hollywood’s Brokeback Mountain for instance was not only an attack on the icon of my country’s most heroic and masculine image, the American cowboy, it’s message attacked all of our values and standards wherever it played to audiences of European descent. Every homosexual couple whether male or female is another couple of Europeans whose genes are extinguished forever.

Radical Feminism, also driven to prominence by its non-European progenitors such as Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem, as well as the non-European media that I have mentioned earlier, has driven far too many beautiful and brilliant women from giving those wonderfully expressed genes new life and new beauty. We must not forget the political sources of this low birthrate, the fact that so many of our people cannot afford to have children while they are forced to subsidize a high non-European birthrate among minorities at home and massive aid to the growing non-White human sea that wraps around the earth.

As our population implodes, that of the Third World explodes, and that mass is surging, pressing at our borders and pouring over them like the endless ocean that pours over the rails of a floundering ship. As our ships of state sink lower the rush of the sea comes faster and faster. And my friends there is another facter critical factor: an ancient supremacist group that proudly boasts its non European origin that has infiltrated the halls of power in our White kingdoms. Through their economic, political and media influence they have been the primary force behind dynamiting our dikes and seawalls in the face of the immigration tsunami.

More on the nefarious effects of immigration in a moment, but as we discuss the immediate disasters wrought by mass immigration, we must never forget that there is no immigration problem in the West without the deep subversion that has taken place within our societies. Today we have with us representatives of Spain and Greece, two nations painfully aware of the role of this non-European minority opening the gates to the invaders in Spain and Constantinople. And now they have for the last 60 years, since the end of the Second World War, led both the both the political mechanisms and the media propaganda for the current invasion.

When we were healthy at home there was no insidious immigration threat. Routing out this alien force within our societies must be our first task. For just one of these subverters bending the ears of kings, presidents and counselors, or broadcasting to our folk — is more dangerous to us than a million of the ragged barbarians pounding and tearing at our gates.

This non-European supremacist group have through a hypocritical team effort deceitfully gained control over our major communication media and mesmerized many of our people into believing that the extinction of our people will not be the greatest human catastrophe of all time, but somehow will be a blessing to the earth, and that it is somehow noble for us to commit racial suicide.

Ironically, the same people who tell us extinction of European mankind is good, are the same ones who tell us that the greatest crime of all time was the alleged attempt in World War II of the Germans to drive the Jews to extinction. Yet, somehow our impending demise is not only not considered a crime of immense proportions, but this greatest of all human catastrophes is hardly even mentioned by press or politicians. For instance, what a scandal it is that this is one of only a tiny number of conferences held anywhere in the world that simply addresses the imminent disaster facing our folk.

It is not just a reduction of numbers we endure, for in every European nation, great waves of non-European immigration conquer our mores, our faiths, our politics, even our serenity and security. In Europe, the east now has penetrated with its agents in every capitol, making once serene and secure streets, neighborhoods and subways places of pregnant fear and aborted freedom.

In America, illegal and legal immigration, differential birthrates and European American sterility have transformed a overwhelming 90% European American majority with an almost 100 percent Western mindset into a nation where the 200-year overwhelming European American majority will be a minority in but a generation. Such demographic change is so terrifyingly fast, it is but a blink of an eye of historical time, only a single second in our historical hour, but a second that can end a race as surely as a second of time can still the heart of a living man.

It is not just our aging population that is dying. It is us. Our history is dying, our present, our future, our dreams, our hopes, and that of all that came before us, all those that sacrificed to give us material well being, freedom. And now, the most elemental of all, our very Life of our people itself, is seriously in question.

For are we are a unique form of life on this planet no less distinct than the breeds of fish, or dolphins or whales. Should we not be allowed to live? Our expression of life in our very existence is being eradicated, erased from the earth. We can see many examples of this disregard for our own European life.

Let me quote from the Associated Press of November 4, 2005
Paris Rioters Set Woman Afire as Violence Spreads
Friday, November 04, 2005
Associated press
AUBERVILLIERS, France — Marauding bands of Muslim youth set fire to cars and warehouses and pelted rescuers with rocks early Saturday, as the worst rioting in a decade spread from Paris to other French cities. The United States warned Americans against taking trains to the airport via strife-torn areas.
A savage assault on a bus passenger highlighted the dangers of travel in Paris’ Muslim-filled and impoverished outlying neighborhoods, where the violence has entered its second week.
The African immigrant attackers doused the woman, in her 50s and on crutches, with an inflammable liquid and set her afire as she tried to get off a bus in the suburb of Sevran Wednesday, judicial officials said. The bus had been forced to stop because of burning objects in its path. She was rescued by the driver and hospitalized with severe burns.
All over the world the mainstream media describes the rioters as quote “youths.” At every opportunity, the TV news well only show the scattered and rare White Trotskyite throwing a firebomb while ignoring the overwhelmingly clear fact that these riots are driven by racial hatred for all things European.
But, once in while a little truth leaks out in the controlled media. The Associated Press article quoted makes clear who the rioters are and it shows the brutality of the savages who are turning centers of European refinement, culture and civilization into examples of the darkest horrors of Africa.

Listen once more to the words of the following paragraph from the Associated Press:

The African immigrant attackers doused the woman, in her 50s and on crutches, with an inflammable liquid and set her afire as she tried to get off a bus in the suburb of Sevran Wednesday, judicial officials said. The bus had been forced to stop because of burning objects in its path. She was rescued by the driver and hospitalized with severe burns.

“African immigrant attackers” throw gasoline on a handicapped White woman and set her on fire!

Now, you tell me, how the mainstream press would treat this if White attackers doused a crippled, middle-aged Black woman with gasoline and set her on fire? Tell me please, would not every newspaper from Paris to Vladivostok, to Sydney be screaming about this horrible racist hate crime as proof of the evil and racism of European mankind?

Would not there be universal condemnation by the politicians against the racial dynamics of this vicious racist attack against a defenseless African woman? But, there has been only deafening silence.

There has been world wide news that I may face hate crime charges in Sweden simply for telling the truth about the downside of immigration and about the crimes of the Jewish supremacist Israeli State.

My moderate exercise of free speech gets world wide publicity as a “hate crime.” but not one major media in the world has condemned as racist the racially-motivated of burning alive a crippled White woman!

No hate charges have been filed against those who burned this handicapped French woman.

What happened in France is a similar story that happened in my once lovely, home city of New Orleans in the African mayhem unleashed by Hurricane Katrina. And by the way, I see some here who contacted me with concern over the Katrina damages to my home and office, thank you all so much for your heartfelt support.

The world heard of roving gangs of looters, but they weren’t told that these gangs racially abused and targeted White people resulting in our people suffering hundreds of victims of rape, robbery and murder.

In New Orleans not only did the African savage gangs shoot at rescue helicopters and boats, they actually went into and terrorized children’s hospitals and nursing homes for the old and infirmed. Mobs of Africans hurled racial abuse and attacked White men, women and children.

But again, no major media or politicians condemned these racially-motivated physical, violent attacks. And most of you never even heard of the plight of those who share your genotype in the forlorn, ravaged city of New Orleans.

Do these events of savagery sound like America or France? Hell no. It sounds like Mogadishu not like New Orleans and not Paris, at least not the New Orleans and Paris of our fathers and mothers! And indeed, New Orleans and Paris and London and host of other European cities are rushing headline toward becoming Mogadishu. And, unless things change, even the largest concentration of White people on the planet, the city of Moscow, is heading toward the same.

Only the brain-dead in Europe and America cannot help but realize that opening our borders to millions of non-Europeans is the most insane, traitorous action in perhaps all of European history, yet it continues in all of its manifest evil.

Millions of Europeans have sacrificed their lives over the centuries to protect the freedom, culture and very life our European people. The politicians and media have literally given over our nations to the invaders at the gates and now our people pay the price. The price will first be our freedom, and then be our very existence. We will be driven to extinction under the attack of this ruthless hatred.

Europe and America are under the lie of Democracy when in truth it is an oligarchy of money, privilege and alien loyalties that rule us. Every poll in every European nation has consistently shown that the great majority of our people have consistently opposed the immigration policy that now leads us to this apocalypse.

But, still governments do far too little to stem the rising dark tsunami of immigration and differential birthrates that threatens to wipe out our people. The media tells us that multiracialism only gives us blessings. Rising crime, gang rape, teeming ghettos of hatred and barbaric riots are the real blessings of immigration, blessings that really are only curses to every decent impulse of our civilization.

Only brain can fail to see the bloody and bleak horizon for Europe and America in the ethnic cleansing going on right before our eyes. We are being wiped away in our own homelands. Most Europeans and Americans already see this through the fog of media disinformation and political dissimulation — they rightfully oppose immigration and want the interlopers sent home as fast we can find the boats and planes to do so.
But now, Europeans and Americans must come to realize that simply wanting the protection our nations, our children, our future – is not enough! Our cheers, our agreement, our hurrays mean but precious little.

We must become active in the Movements all over the world that will give our governments back to our people, that will establish a true democracy of the people’s will rather the alien oligarchy of media and money that rule us. Those of you who here are scholars, you must continue your research, but the time comes rapidly when you must put down your pencil and man the picket line, the campaign parade, the barricades if need be. You must also stand in the political arena and raise your voice for the survival of your people.

Those of you who are businessmen, must make your ultimate business the survival and freedom of your people.

Those of you who are priests and clergy must save not only souls of your flocks, but the holy genes that God and his design of Nature has sculpted.

I will address for a moment the frame of our approach to our own masses and to the people of the world. For we are in battle for the heart and mind of our folk. Here are some realizations I have come to that I will share with each of you.

1. Our problem is ultimately internal not external.
A free and wholly White Russia and Europe and North America, face no insurmountable security issues from abroad. It is not the clash of civilizations between Europe and Asia and Africa that threatens us, it is the clash of racial and ethnic realities within our nations. It is the dynamics of non-European influence over media and government that compose our true Trojan Horse.

Our enemies want us to focus on external threats, In America and Europe they want us concerned about Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Iran and various groups that pose a supposed threat to America and Europe outside our borders. All this while millions of non-Europeans who constitute in large numbers serious threats to our folk and civilization continue to sweep over our borders in a dark tsunami that will drown our respective nations.

At the same time we must resist immigration with all our might and ability and intellect and courage, it makes sense for Europeans to be consistent, fair and just. Arabia for Arabs, India for Indians, China for Chinese, and our European, American, and Russian Homelands for ourselves and our expression of life.

It is only an evil man, one who seeks the destruction of a whole people who would oppose such sensibility and justice, who would oppose the rights of European mankind to live. Make it clear that it is our enemies who are the supremacists, the oppressors, the genocidal forces of history. And it is not just us over whom they seek supremacy but over the Mideast and indeed, over all the people of the earth.

We must in our own movements support an agreement with foreign lands whereby we pledge to stop interfering with their societies and stop supporting their enemies such as Zionism. If their leaders had that kind of commitment from the West, they would agree to the return of their nationals in Europe and America. For our military power is indeed supreme, it is only our will that is suspect.

2. We must show that we represent justice and not become caricatures of our enemy’s media image of us.
Our people are a moral people, they will sacrifice everything, even their own lives to be moral. They must know that we represent what is good for our own people and indeed good for all nations and peoples on the earth. We will not preach one thing for ourselves and something quite different for others. We seek no empire, just the preservation of our homelands and the people that make our homelands truly home.

We are not the promoters or harbingers of hate, it is those who seek to destroy the very life of our people who are the true masters of hate. They are masters of war and oppression. It is they that bring on the so-called “clash of civilizations” and the bloody future they hope for in what they call “World War 4.”

3. Lessen ideological dogmatism over issues not critical to our survival.
We who desire the preservation of our race, the very life of our people must keep only one ideology at the unifying foreground, that principle is simply, “What is good for our people we support, what is bad we oppose.” What is good for our survival is our ultimate moral standard. It is this concrete goal that must motivate us not some abstract principle.

We have brethren here that are Socialist or Libertarian, Democrat or Monarchist, Communist or Capitalist, Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant and even Atheist. We can argue with our brothers and sisters as we would a family member on the merits of his or her beliefs, but we as a group must be one family, one phalanx, one faith against the enemy arraigned against us. Abstract principle is not important here, it is our concrete survival that is our overwhelming principle.

Let me share with an example of the devastating devotion to an abstract principle.

As you scholars are keenly aware, Greece and the Balkans suffered under long periods of tyrannical rule by the Ottoman Turks. At the end of the 18th century the Ottoman regime forbid the publishing of books seeking the national and ethnic freedom of the Greek people and other people of the region repressed and controlled by the brutal Turkish regime. They suppressed the many books supporting the Christian religious beliefs of the European people of these lands. Even books of science and mathematics were forbidden publication to keep the Greek people down and at heel.

A handful of Greek patriots began a publishing operation in the neighboring Vienna, led by Rigas Velestinlis Fereos and a couple dozen leading personalities.

The Ottoman Sultan opposed this and appealed to the Hapsburg Monarch on basis of the principle of legitimacy, the watchword of the Napoleonic era. It was the idea the crown heads would support each other against democratic and national movements. It is similar today as the Neocon led globalism in their defense of so-called democratic principles around the world. Too many Whites get obsessed with ideological abstract principles sometimes follow to them in complete disregard of concrete reality.

To the eternal shame of the Hapsburgs, the Monarch who was challenged on this abstract principle of legitimacy, that sovereigns should have control over their own subjects, bowed to the Sultan and closed down the Greek press and turned over Fereos and his European, Christian compatriots.

They were taken to Ottoman occupied Belgrade and promptly tortured and murdered. The body of Rigas was thrown in the Sava on June 24, 1798.

(Read The Greek War of Independence by David Brewer, 2003 overlook press.)

Luckily, Rigas’ last words were preserved and carried down and I share them with you now. He said, proudly with head held high,

“This is how brave men die, I have sewn the seeds and the time will come when my country will gather the harvest.”

Abstract debate must be cast aside. What matters now is the concrete. We have a guide by the Roman example. Many democrats gratuitously quote the supposed Roman motto, Vox Populi Lex Suprema , or the voice of the people is the supreme law, but in actuality the motto that dominated the Roman psyche and government for hundreds of years was actually, Salus Populi Lex Suprema Est – all power to the health or salvation of the people. This was the original Roman maximum.

Although I as an America revere our original Constitution, if our controlled congress and the states legally passed a constitutional amendment that ordered a policy of the end of the White race, I would not allow endorsement of an abstract principle, constitutional law, keep me from defending our people from a concrete threat.

My friends, there is no abstract principle worth the destruction of our people. Our people’s welfare must always be the issue, abstract ideological questions of governmental form or religion must always be second to the well being of our people. This is especially true in these times where the question of “to be or not to be” supersedes all other questions all other principles, all other considerations.

4. Clean our Augean Stables.
As I alluded to earlier, our first task is to remove the enemies of our people who are behind our gates, those who sow defeatism, self-hate, self-doubt, weakness, and degeneracy. Not to clean our own Augean stables will condemn us to feel the hooves of our enemies’ horses on our own necks. Tell our young not to go to volunteer on the foreign fields of wars born for alien insanities. Dedicate your lives to the battle for freedom and survival right here. This is where our great battle lies not on foreign fields but right here on frontiers and in the hearts of our own homelands.

5. We must call forth the passion in our people.
In every way we must celebrate who we are. We must nurture the love of our people, stop condemning them for their failings; evoke the latent courage that is in the very spiral of DNA in their every cell of our folk. We must wash our hearts and minds with love of our people, devotion to them that makes meaningless even the threat of imprisonment or death.

We must sow the seeds as Rigas said, that is our task, wherever we live, by whatever means at our disposal. No sacrifice is too great, no threat to us too intimidating, no disappointment too daunting.

And, we who are still asleep in the nightmare for our people in the early years of the 21st Century, we must fight our way awake, claw our way to the dawn. Shake off the shroud of defeatism and despair, and know that we, European mankind, shall go from the edge of the Abyss to the farthest Star.

Let every man and woman at the conference leave here on Friday with the words of Rigas ringing in our hearts and minds:

“This is how brave men die, I have sown the seeds and the time will come when my country will gather the harvest.”

Racial Weapons

via Radix

The Hungarian Free Press . . . which is neither Hungarian nor free nor a press . . . reports that something radical is happening in Budapest:
Zsolt Bayer, a co-founder of Hungary’s ruling Fidesz party, a long-time friend of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and the right’s most prominent publicist, sees the current refugee crisis in Hungary and Europe as a racial war intended to annihilate white people. Mr. Bayer shared these thoughts at a rally in Budapest this past Sunday, attended by an estimated 1,500 people, and organized to protest a magazine cover in Hungary, which portrayed Mr. Orbán with a mustache that resembled that of Adolf Hitler. In this paper, I have suggested before that Fidesz and the far right Jobbik party are indistinguishable. Perhaps I was wrong, because based on Mr. Bayer’s speech, Fidesz is now more extreme than the ominous opposition party.
The author, Christopher Adam—who reports on intolerant Hungarians while safely ensconced in Ottawa, Canada—is right, in a way. From an identitarian perspective, Orban and his party are far sounder ideologically than Jobbik, whose leaders believe, perhaps accurately, that Turks are their brothers and sisters. Orban, on the other hand, has spoken of “Europe from Europeans.”

Adam goes on:
Mr. Bayer’s premise, that dark forces are conspiring against white people throughout the world, is framed in a quote from controversial author, historian and race theorist Noel Ignatiev. Mr. Ignatiev has long seen race as a social construct, something that Mr. Bayer fails to mention to his audience, who he left thinking that the American theorist wants to annihilate white people. Mr. Ignatiev has spoken about wanting to “abolish the privileges of the white race” and added: “The key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race, which means no more and no less than abolishing the privileges of the white skin.”
And here are the key quotes from Bayer’s speech:
“There are all kinds of weapons: traditional, chemical, atomic. And now we see that there are also racial weapons. This is the weapon that they, the invisible hands, have employed against Europe and against the white race,” declared Mr. Bayer in Budapest. The term “invisible hands,” within this context, is coded language, easily deciphered by everyone in that audience and on the Hungarian right as a reference to liberals, left-wingers and Jews. (Mr. Ignatiev is, himself, of Jewish origins.) “Why has everyone, from everywhere and all at once, decided to start heading towards Europe? Why? Let us declare loudly and level-headedly: this is an artificial, manufactured mass migration. And its goal is the final and irreversible transformation of Europe’s ethnic and religious composition. And for this, they have already produced the necessary ideologies. According to the Harvard professor, the white race must be made to vanish,” said Mr. Bayer. At several times in his speech, the crowd, fired up by the orator, interrupted him.
Intriguingly, Bayer’s reference to Noel Ignatiev, as well as his whole line of thinking, makes me believe that he (and, perhaps, Orban, too) has been reading the “alt Right”—in other words, reading the dispatches from the heart of the decadent New World. The least we can say is that Bayer does not speak the language of your standard European “ethno-nationalist.” And it is Hungarians—and not us . . . at least not yet—who are in the position to realize the ideals of idenitarianism. The great irony of the Cold War is that Communism protected Eastern and Central Europe from a far worse rotting of soul—Americanism and Western liberalism.