Sep 23, 2015

An Invitation to Become Who We Are

via Radix

Become Who We Are

October 31, 2015 | Washington, DC

Of Economics and Gender Roles, Cabbages and Kings

via TradYouth

One of the biggest challenges that Traditionalists face is those who seem to “want to have their cake and eat it too” trying to get into our circles, change our talking points, and reap the benefits of all of our hard work, while undermining the progress we make at promoting the actual ideology of Traditionalism. These are the sorts who may agree with our talk about “Traditional Values” and even “Tradition” but a closer examination or serious conversation with them proves that they’re sorely lacking in ideals, virtues, or ideology, often seeking to replace the promiscuity of the modern day working and middle classes with the ritualized prostitution of the upper class, a society of marriages in which a man’s wealth matters more than the love between husband and wife. And this idea is not harmless. In the same vein by which conservatives often end up implementing the policies of the left, because they lack any real ideology to oppose it, women’s groups exist in which the ideology of ritual prostitution  and marriage for money is preached to vulnerable young women who might otherwise be inclined to the pious life of love and sacrifice which unites Nationalists and Traditionalists with genuine Christianity.  Sadly, this cancer of sexual neo-conservatism is something often preached from the pulpits. So what is the answer? We must re-iterate that we are not Conservatives, and examine the economic differences between our camps, between Marxists, Capitalists, and Third Positionists, in order to re-discover a better way.

For starters, Feminism can be seen as an expression of Marxism, and their classical forms are identical, when viewed through the lens of symbolic logic.   Let us take for example the terms Bourgeoisie and Proletarian, and replace them with humans and dogs, then define the ideology:  “X is the belief that throughout history humans have exploited dogs, forcing them to live, work, and reproduce for scraps, by controlling them and their resources, and that only through a global Revolution of the canine class can the Humans be destroyed and equality be brought about”  Now replace Dogs with Womyn and Humans with Patriarchy, or the two terms with Bourgeoisie and Proletarians again, and one will find that there is no real difference.

This is, of course, not by accident.  As Matt Parrot has explained clearly when identifying what Cultural Marxism is and isn’t, in order to promote the death of the west, Marxist intellectuals drew up a set of new ideologies that weren’t Marxism, but have the same destructive power.  Feminism is one.  The problem for us, is that just as once Marxism had drawn the contrast between traditional market economics and State Socialism,  the reactionary forces began to believe that oppression of workers was justified since “Capitalism is dog eat dog and I want to be on top”,  many modern reactionary “anti-feminists” or “traditional women” believe that the ends justify the means since we’re living under a feminist system “like it or not”, and that they should jump from sexual partner to sexual partner as teens and in their 20s for love, and then marry for money, since “love doesn’t pay the bills and it’s the only way to be a stay at home mom these days.”   Many men too participate in this debacle with reactionary logic: ” there aren’t good women these days so you just have to learn how to pick up bitches and avoid falling in love.” These men take the spiritual poison of jewish “pick up artists” as gospel truth, and engage in the same casual sex culture they claim to oppose.

Worse still,  in the same vain by which feminists create “women’s only safe spaces” to combat patriarchy,  whole networks have emerged, shadowy cabals of ostensibly traditionalist “safe spaces for white womyn to fight sexism, da joos,  and womyn haters” , in which these degenerate values are pushed on young women in the name of Nationalism, and in which those who are leading the fight against the current order are belittled for not being wealthy industrialists, rather than praised as heroes, and in which women learn that hiding secrets from all men, including their husbands and fathers, and limiting their loyalty to the men in their lives as part of a “global womyns aryan struggle” is a good, even admirable idea.  Then, to young men who would take part in the struggle for Tradition, for Faith, Family, and Folk, these same hags speak the notion that “dating is like the workplace and you need to have marketable skills.” In this notion lie the seeds of cuckoldry, and any man who makes a “purchase”  by putting a ring on any woman who participates in these Hera-worship inspired orders of ritual prostitution should have no illusions that he can expect the children of such a “marriage” to be his own.  He can expect even perhaps coloured “milk men” of old to Return, if we simply allow a return to the 1950s.  Well, Just as we Traditionalists want no part in the traditional “white power” scene, rejecting the White Supremacy of genuine race-hate as well as the White Supremacy of those who believe in a “White Man’s burden”  and in treating other races like Children, we want no part in this degenerate culture around us, rejecting both feminism and pickup artistry, and rejecting the reactionary elements who believe in this “battle of the sexes.”  We believe in Christian and Sacramental marriage, in which man and woman are joined not only in the flesh but in the spirit, motivated by love for one another.

So what is the Answer to our present dilemma? What would Traditionalists offer as an Answer? I’ll close with a few position statements on men and women’s roles and dating culture, which can be easily remembered and can guide young men and women in making better choices.
  • Just as we reject Class Warfare in favor of Class Cooperation for the good of the Community and Nation, We reject the Gender war, both feminism and pickup artistry.
  • We reject the way in which Materialism, both Capitalism and Communism, has reduced men and women to nothing more than interchangeable economic units.
  • We believe that Men and Women were meant to work together as pair-bonded couples and to express their Sexuality within the confines of a Marriage.
  • We believe that both men and women have a part to play in our Revolution, and that loving one another as comrades is essential.
  • We believe that Traditional Gender roles, while beneficial to a society in times of peace, living in freedom under one’s own rulers, must occasionally be broken in times of war or ethnic survival.
  • We believe that a Man’s masculinity and a Woman’s femininity are much more than the product of their sexuality and labor.
  • We reject the idea that a marriage should be an exchange of a man’s wealth for a woman’s sexuality, and abhor marriage for money. We uphold the teaching of the Apostles, Holy Fathers, and Saints, that man and woman, having become one flesh, should be martyred, the one for the sake of the other, in mutual sacrifice, and in sacrifice for their children.
  • While we do not believe that men and women are “equal”, we believe that both men and women are sanctifiable through God’s grace and we do not believe that one sex is better than the other.
  • We believe that promiscuity is spiritually harmful to both men and women, but we accept that most people make mistakes as a result of the society that surrounds them. Repentance and embrace of Christ is the answer.
  • Sexual Hatreds have come about as a result of this cultural sickness and the rejection, pain, betrayal, and sorrow it causes, and Compassion is the answer.  We should reach out always to the opposite sex and provide good role models, for our race is nothing if not an extended family, and what woman would not comfort her brother, what man would not comfort his sister? Further,  Man-Hating and Woman-Hating are the same illness, the same spiritual wound.
  • We accept that while the nuclear family is our ideal, our society is so broken that single parent and polygamous households may be better environments in certain exceptional cases. However, we reject firmly the notion that Homosexual households are better than normal ones.
  • We believe that our people’s freedom will come about only when multiple families begin sharing assets and pooling resources to build communities for mutual survival.
  • We believe that economic hardship is no excuse for abortion or even for a married couple to be abstinent, and to that end we seek to organize institutions and charities to help young and poor couples and families within our movement.
  • The end goal in life is not to act as a child and amass large amounts of toys into one’s old age, but to sacrifice for one’s family and loved ones.
  • We believe in Love, not prostitution.
  • We believe in love. Period.

Why Corporate Leaders Push for Immigration

via Henry Dampier

The obvious reason is just to enhance their bargaining power against their employees. Increasing the supply of potential employees enhances the relative position of labor’s buy-side. It’s cheaper to bribe politicians to open up the borders than it is to raise the prices that they pay to labor.

Furthermore, corporate leaders only bear some of the costs of increasing immigration and diversity: the state handles those costs. The gangster sons of immigrant fruit-pickers are the government’s problem — not so much the problem of the agribusiness which lobbied to import them.

Much of corporate culture — especially in the era of public companies with mandatory disclosure laws which emerged in the first half of the 20th century — is focused on short term performance. Managers are only temporary. Maintaining and encouraging the growth of a local community requires a long term alignment of incentives which mass-democratic-impersonal business culture discourages severely.

Entitlements and other taxes on labor effectively make buying that labor both more risky and more expensive. This puts employers in a position to which they need to find methods to counteract that political pressure on the labor market — and they need to pursue short term rather than long term solutions to keep their jobs.

Additionally, the artificially high cost of living caused by a perpetually bailed-out, credit-infused, state-supported housing market makes it so that companies have to pay significantly higher wages than was either historically normal or that would need to be paid absent all of those interventions.

The way that these institutions have adapted to these conditions, at least domestically, has been to work with the egalitarian state to push wages back down. There are a few ways to increase the labor supply: put children on the market, hire overseas laborers, push women into the market, improve the profitability of the existing labor force, encourage workers to have more children, invest in capital equipment to reduce reliance on labor, lobby for protection, and socialize some of the labor costs.

In practice, public corporate managers tend to push all of the most effective short term solutions to the hilt. They do this, or they get replaced — whether by another competitor, or another firm.

States, rather than individual corporations, create the competitive conditions under which those corporations live. If a government elects to import enormous numbers of new workers, that’s the new competitive reality to which all companies need to adapt to. If some companies cheat on immigration law and don’t get caught, it puts pressure on companies to either formalize the loophole or to join in on the cheating — because to do otherwise means losing out in terms of competitive positioning. Uneven enforcement of law encourages corrupt behavior.

Inflationary monetary policy also encourages companies to “run as fast as they can” just to stay in place. Because holding cash means effectively losing more than the prevailing interest rate on that cash, it encourages companies to aim to expand always. It’s easier to fuel that expansion when you can import more labor and have other people pay for the training of that labor — namely, your own heavily-taxed workforce.

To end the corrupting pressure which encourages business leaders to forego investment in local communities in favor of importing a new labor force, the sources of those pressures need to be addressed. While it’s a good idea to change the law, just changing the law would not have a magical effect — you’d also have to address the corrupting pressures that encourage the flouting of the law.
  • We have to rethink the entire concept of the ‘public’ company with its mandatory reporting requirements (encouraging quarterly short-termism) and insider trading laws (which encourages reliance on accounting snow rather than real investigation of companies)
  • Limit the extent to which companies can slough labor, training, & education costs onto the state
    • Scrap much of the education system — forcing parents, organized religion, community organizations, and businesses to bear the costs of education/training
  • Limit citizenship and immigration; change who can be a full citizen
  • End the short-termist approach to growing the labor supply (“Lean in” rather than following the only tried-and-true method of producing productive, law-abiding people)
  • Reform banking and the central bank
  • Permit civil society to re-grow
Is any of that likely to happen any time soon in the US? Nope. The US is utterly committed to a program of capital consumption — human, physical, and civilizational. Others will have to learn from the collapse.

"Paperboy of Auschwitz" to Be Prosecuted?

via Western Spring

Following the recent prosecution and conviction of 94 year old, ex-SS clerical worker, Oskar Gröning, the so-called ‘Bookkeeper of Auschwitz’, and the announcement of the impending prosecution by German authorities of a 91 year old German woman who worked as a radio operator for the SS at Auschwitz during World War Two, we can announce that two further prosecutions are also currently being considered.

The first is of 87 year old Fritz Knoll who at the age of 17 worked for a dairy close to the Auschwitz concentration camp and who was for the last 15 months of the war the dairy rounds-man delivering milk to the SS officers’ quarters at the camp. Known to inmates as the ‘Milkman of Auschwitz’, Knoll who is believed to have delivered 20 litres of fresh milk every day, is likely to be charged with complicity in the mass murder of as many 260,000 Jews, even though he never served in the armed forces and is not known to have committed any acts of violence.

Horst HennebergSimilarly, 80 year old Horst Henneberg is thought likely to face similar charges, having been employed by a local newsagent’s shop to deliver newspapers to a number of addresses including the notorious concentration camp. Henneberg, who was just 10 years old in 1945, and who has become known as the ‘Paperboy of Auschwitz’, is to be prosecuted, along with both Fritz Knoll and the as yet unnamed female radio operator, under new prosecution guidelines drawn up following the 2011 landmark ruling in which a court in Munich sentenced a SS voluntary assistant Ivan Demjanjuk, to five years in prison after he was found guilty of complicity in some 30,000 Jewish deaths in German-occupied Poland during World War II.

These same guidelines were applied in the successful prosecution and conviction of Oskar Gröning, in which no evidence needs to be produced by the prosecution of any specific wrongdoing on the part of the defendants. All that is needed for a conviction is confirmation that the accused were employed in support duties and therefore are regarded as jointly responsible for any heinous crimes allegedly committed at the camp. The defendants are accused of being involved in the murders of Jews, because no matter how trivial or innocent their contribution was, they are considered to have ‘helped the camp to function’.

Civil rights campaigners have described the current wave of prosecutions of elderly Germans who would be regarded as innocent under any normal rules of evidence, as obscene and vindictive. The majority of the wartime generation are now dead and those against whom there is any substantial evidence of war crimes are similarly long dead having been identified and executed during the post-war de-Nazification process. Individuals such as Demjanjuk, Gröning, Knoll and Henneberg are being made scapegoats merely in order to assuage an as yet unsatisfied Jewish lust for revenge. 

Western Spring Editor's Note: Our readers should be aware that this article is primarily a piece of satyr which is only partially true, but which has been written in order to illustrate the injustices that are currently being perpetrated by prosecutors in modern Germany. Fritz Knoll and Horst Henneberg are fictional characters, although Demjanjuk, Gröning and the 91 year old woman, and the groundless prosecutions against them, are very real indeed.

The Egregious Misallocation of European Financial & Intellectual Capital

via Majority Rights

Facebook file photo release:
Some mulatto, Zuckerberg, and Gov. Christie
Of and for those with a hyper-assertive and wholly undeserving sense of entitlement - e.g., blacks and mudsharks - to those who get what they want, when they want:

Zuckerberg misdirects 100 million dollars and educational resources - wasted on Newark, New Jersey public schools and its overwhelming black student bodies. Of course the talk now is: what happened to the money? Why didn’t 100 million dollars help?

Can you imagine?

The centuries of sacrifice that Europeans made to contribute to the scholarly corpus, the days and years that scholars like Gregor Mendel went without female touch and appreciation (while Negroes were accommodating harems).

The lonely suffering that many an intellectual quest entailed to yield knowledge ...
To endure the hatred of liberals, pointedly, White females whom he lives to love - miseducated to base instinct and anti-White interests, so typically making “anti-racism” a litmus test of initial interaction episodes with White males, whom she typically dismisses on slightest indication of circumspection as “wimpishness” or “nerdishness”, and after he “fails” her litmus test as “an alpha male”- viz. a liberal who shrugs-off all comers, from everywhere - as simply her prerogative, these females for whom he is starved for even talk of concern about heritage, now give their ultimate treasures to blacks, and empower those who take not only the economic capital of centuries, but even his last recourse, his intellectual quest, and force him to teach and educate those, such as blacks, who would torture and destroy him, turn his world into a science fiction nightmare, who take his ultimate treasure, his co-evoutionary women, taken by apes who have NOTHING to compensate him with, nevertheless proceeding as if they are entitled…  still, the powers-that-be and their gate-keepers would even take what remaining consolation, of monetary and intellectual compensation, means by which he may perhaps have found redemption in an exceptional wife, of merit for her commitment to a sovereign life in respect of our peoples.

Liberals try to dismiss his concerns with conciliatory advice: “she’s stupid.”

Hmm. “She’s stupid”...and “she’s stupid and she’s stupid and she’s stupid”.. before long “she” has become an uncountable noun.

Uncountable though the noun is, they are “all his fault, because he doesn’t man up.”
Not only does she need education become still more liberal, to become still more Judaized and negrotized.

He must educate the throngs of Negroes, and Muslims, etc. It’s “civil rights”: The involuntary, forced servitude to non-Whites and mudsharks. Everything that he sublimated and sacrificed-for must go to them. Including a trend of those White women of qualitative difference, who may not have appreciated finer intellectual quest, but may have been sufficient compatriots in a White Class. They’d take not only those of modest intellectual endowment, they would not only embezzle economic means, not only White women and public money to blacks, they would force him into directing his intellectual quest in their service. They would take the means by which he might even find and be found by the exceptions, and rather further equip those who would betray him and those, e.g. blacks and Muslims, who would enslave him and torture him to death, a techno-slave or a nerd slave of some sort wallowing in masochism of cuckold porn.
September 8, 2015
“Covering Innovation & Inequality in Education”

What happened with the $100 million that Newark schools got from Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg? Not much:

A new book delves into how the project went wrong.
Dale Russakoff spent four and a half years reporting about Mark Zuckerberg’s $100 million gift to Newark public schools for her new book “The Prize: Who’s In Charge of America’s Schools?”

“The goal of improving education in Newark is not a hopeless one” - Dale Russakoff
Yes, it is hopeless - and worse: it is to rob and rape Europeans not only of their birthright, but of their intellectual history and posterity..

Yes, “The Prize: Who’s In Charge of America’s Schools?”... as it was with Brown vs. Board of Education - school desegregation and “civil rights”, the prize continues to be wrested from Whites by means of cultural-Marxist coalitions, its most recent permutation with CAIR and its discriminated-against Muslim school boy.

Newark Mayor Cory Booker, left, and Mark Zuckerberg, center, founder and CEO of Facebook listen as N.J. Gov. Chris Christie talks about the states schools, during a press conference at the Robert Treat Hotel in Newark, N.J., Saturday, Sept. 25, 2010. Zuckerberg is there to talk about his donation of $100 million to help Newark public schools.
For the last 50 years, a combination of poverty and commonplace corruption has plagued Newark’s public school system. In 2010 fewer than 40 percent of students in third through eighth grade were performing at grade level. And most students did not graduate from high school.
That year, when journalist Dale Russakoff learned that Mark Zuckerberg, the billionaire Facebook founder, wanted to give $100 million to turn around the failing school system in Newark, she was amazed, “almost electrified,” she said. Hearing then-Mayor Cory Booker, Governor Chris Christie and Zuckerberg talk about it on “The Oprah Winfrey Show,” she thought they sounded like they knew exactly what they were doing. She soon learned they did not.
Russakoff spent four and a half years reporting and writing “The Prize: Who’s in Charge of America’s Schools?” which is being published this week. Her book, she says, “tells the story of Zuckerberg’s gift, how it came about and the forces that it unleashed, both intended and unintended.”
Listen to Dale Russakoff explain what happened in Newark
Russakoff talked with The Hechinger Report about “The Prize” and why Newark did not become an education success story. This interview has been edited for clarity and length.
Q: You write that New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Newark’s then-Mayor Cory Booker set out not just to fix the Newark schools, but to create a national model for how to turn around an entire urban school district. What happened?
A: Thinking that way was part of the problem. Education in any city is not something that you can bring a model to and fix it. It’s a very human, granular, history-based challenge. And to see it as something that you can have a startup model for, that you can create a proof point and then scale up nationally, is just a complete misconception. The goal of improving education in Newark is not a hopeless one.
But viewing it as something that can be imposed from the top down as opposed from the bottom up, or at least in combination, was really a very central flaw. Their idea of improving the systems that govern education was intelligent, because the district is antiquated and even dysfunctional. The system needed to change. But they did that to the almost exclusion of working with the incredibly human issues that children bring into the classroom every day because they live in a world of concentrated poverty. That was a serious problem.
Q: Zuckerberg pledged $100 million to the Booker-Christie cause, on the condition that city officials raise a matching amount. Where did that money go? Is it making a difference in students’ lives?
A: Almost $50 million went to the teachers’ contract. The idea was to make teachers more accountable for student performance and to shed the teachers who were ineffective. I’m sure that the reformers feel that money helped kids, but if you look at the classroom level, it’s hard to see an effect yet. And $25 million went to expanding charter schools in Newark. Some of those charter schools are excellent, which is good for kids. There was $20 million that went to consultants who received, in general, a thousand dollars a day for carrying out various management reform efforts. There was this notion that consultants had the answers, and you could hire expertise, and pay for it at enormous prices, on the assumption that this was going to bring the magic answer, the silver bullet to Newark. And it was an enormous amount of money that went towards something that really didn’t have a lot of returns. I don’t think you could find any way that consultant money helped children.
Related: The weakest link in Newark’s efforts to raise college completion rates.
Q: A lot of the controversy you describe is over former superintendent Cami Anderson’s One Newark plan, which required students to change schools and travel long distances to get there. What was the problem?
“There are tremendous numbers of parents and teachers in Newark who felt that the schools needed radical change, but there was no acknowledgement that those people should be playing a role in this One Newark process.”
A: There are tremendous numbers of parents and teachers in Newark who felt that the schools needed radical change, but there was no acknowledgement that those people should be playing a role in this One Newark process. I asked Cami Anderson about the lack of communication and she said the One Newark plan is, as she kept calling it, 16-dimensional chess, which was a way of saying it’s incredibly complicated. She said if you brought families in, of course every family was going to have some issue and if you fixed that issue you would create an issue for someone else. She felt it was important to make the decisions that she thought were the best for the families and the kids. In doing that, she missed a lot of input that was critical.
Related: At Newark school striving for turnaround, a 12-year-old’s fragile success
Q: What is the significance of the title “The Prize”?
A: “The Prize” ended up having many meanings to me. I learned early on that people who had been in Newark for generations talked about the Newark school district budget as the prize. It’s the biggest public budget in the city. At the time the reformers arrived there were 7,000 employees of the district and hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts. The patronage politicians, the political bosses and, of course, the elected officials all wanted to control the Newark public schools to enhance their own power.
But then there was Cory Booker, Chris Christie and Mark Zuckerberg. If, through their reform effort, they could take the Newark school district and turn it into a model for all urban school districts, that would be a prize for the education reform movement. And I saw the children and their right to an education as the ultimate prize.  The subtitle of the book is “Who’s in Charge of America’s Schools?” I think that’s the prize all those forces will keep fighting for.
This interview has been edited for clarity and length.
This story was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. - story by Arianna Skibell
“The goal of improving education in Newark is not a hopeless one”

I was born in Newark, on weekends visited my grandmother in one of its vestigial Italian enclaves and lived there at times. I saw what happened to those communities and to the city as a whole - and needless to say, its schools. Yes, it is hopeless and worse - it is to rob and rape Europeans not only of their economic capital, but also of their intellectual capital, its collective yield of history and for posterity.

Hitler’s Failure

via Counter-Currents

Andrey Vlasov
Translator’s Note: This article is drawn from Dominique Venner’s history of the twentieth century, Le Siècle de 1914 (Paris: Pygmalion, 2006), 318-320, under the heading “Les plans de Hitler pour l’Europe soumise.” The title is editorial.

Could the Reich’s new weapons, notably the extraordinary Me 262 fighter-bombers, reverse the trend [of the war]? A largely pointless question given that we know the answer. In fact, the only new weapon Hitler could have used was the “European revolution,” the liberation of the peoples, notably of Russians and Ukrainians, and not their subjugation. But Hitler was not a European revolutionary, he was a Pan-Germanist and a blinkered racist. By refusing to play the card of nationalism, he deprived himself of his only real asset in reversing the course of the war. Later, Marshal [Erich] von Manstein would write: “We lost the war the day we entered Kiev, by refusing to raise the Ukrainian flag over the Lavra.”[1] Attempts as promising a that of the Vlasov army were blocked by Hitler: “It constituted a rejection of his entire policy,” wrote Manstein. “The Führer wanted to establish a German domination over the spaces of the East and to definitively destroy Russian power, whatever its regime . . .” A deadly blindness.

In the summer of 1942, after the spectacular relaunching of operations in Russia at the end of the previous winter, German power reached from North Cape to the southern shores of the Mediterranean where Rommel’s Afrika Korps operated. From the west to the east, it reached from the Atlantic through the Volga up to the Caucasus. Even though Bolshevik Russia was not defeated, Hitler seemed to have managed to establish his empire over the larger part of Europe. His propaganda developed two themes, the offensive one of the “new Europe” destined to counter Anglo-Saxon capitalism and Bolshevism, and the defensive theme, against the same, of “fortress Europe.”

After the victorious campaigns of 1940, several plans were established by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with a view of defining the “new European order” and better still the Greater German Reich of the future.

These plans never got past the drawing board, Hitler having decided to commit to nothing before a decisive victory over Soviet Russia and England. Any projects to organize Europe were stalled by three obstacles stemming from Hitler’s ideology and personality. One was the figure’s mix of extreme racism and nationalism, the other to his exclusively domineering idea of relations with other peoples, finally, the third was related to the Hitlerian idea of living space.

[. . .] Having kept the memory of the collapse of the Habsburg Empire in 1918, he feared that granting the slightest autonomy would lead eventual allies to turn their weapons against the Reich. He conceived of relations with other peoples only in terms of domination and submission. [. . .]

Convinced of the inferiority of Slavic peoples, conceiving Ukraine and Russia as mere future colonies whose populations, if ever they were spared, would be reduced to a kind of serfdom, Hitler never imagined entering Russia as a liberator. And yet that was how his troops were first welcomed. The peasants which had welcomed them by offering bread, salt, and flowers, would soon be disillusioned. Nothing better shows Hitler’s blindness than the tragic story of General [Andrey] Vlasov.

1. Erich von Manstein, Victoires perdues (Paris: Plon, 1958).

Trump: Lessons for Traditionalist Christians

via Faith & Heritage

F&H has so far not discussed Donald Trump, the identitarian phenomenon of the summer. I personally support Trump, but I am not necessarily a true believer. I’ll just say that democracy is a farce, and Trump demonstrates this better than anyone. His immigration policy is the best of any candidate since Buchanan, and though his personal life and some of his other positions are regrettable, Ann Coulter is correct that ultimately immigration is the only issue that matters. If we lose that one, we lose every other issue.

Though Trump himself has not endorsed this explicitly, the attack by Coulter and others on the constitutionality of birthright citizenship has pushed the Overton window far to the right. For the first time, conservatives are talking about not only ending the anchor baby fraud, but also, and this is key, retroactively declaring the citizenship of past anchor babies as constitutionally invalid. As the demographic fate of the country is sealed even if we ended all immigration today, the only hope of restoring a de facto ethnostate – which I define as a ~85+% white USA, like we had in 1980 – is to attack the concept of abstract citizenship. That this is happening is a necessary but not sufficient step towards restoring a biblical concept of nationhood.

Trump may be lying to us to get votes, who knows. But I know for a fact that all other candidates, as whores for the donor class who support open borders, are lying to us. Trump might be lying, but we know the other ones are lying when they promise to “secure the border.” In the rigged game that is democratic politics, I’ll take my chances on Trump.

What’s more interesting than any hopes for Trump is the Trump phenomenon itself. Having recently finished Vox Day’s excellent book, SJWs Always LieI can see why Trump is successful. In fighting political correctness, one cannot use reason. One can only use emotionally charged attacks. Trump demonstrates that when dealing with enemies, the only approach is absolute self-confidence and an uncompromising, unapologetic stance. That Trump has made so many unforced errors, like his run-in with Megyn Kelly, and still sits atop the polls, demonstrates the power of such a stance.

In his book, Day reviews an important concept from Aristotle: some people cannot be reasoned with via dialectic (rational arguments), and must be manipulated into the correct positions through the use of emotional rhetoric. As human biodiversity realists, this makes perfect sense to us. Few people are going to have the self-control and IQ to listen to an argument and react rationally to it. A few will, and they are critically important as persuadable, but we can never expect mass success based on reason alone.

F&H is a heavily dialectic, reasoning website. The purpose is to provide an intellectual foundation for Christian ethnonationalism, a universal concept that respects the rights of all peoples to self-determination. At some point, if God has mercy, He will raise up a leader who will use this intellectual base to popularize these arguments in emotional, rhetorical terms. That person may be a current reader of the site, or may be yet to come.

If you are reading this and feel God may be calling you to this great task, remember the lesson of Trump. There is no downside to confidence and ruthlessly, but truthfully, attacking those who attack you. The great mass of people, to the extent they have virtue, need emotional motivation rather than reasoned arguments. The time is now to begin honing this skill, whether that’s developing your public speaking or changing how you deal with people to reflect an attitude of relaxed confidence – you might not even call yourself a Kinist or any other convenient label for rhetorical purposes – you will simply be the new Christian mainstream. The Christian world is begging for such a leader. When the most popular leaders are dough-faced cuck-Christians like Al Mohler, Rick Warren, Russell Moore, Doug Wilson, and John Piper, there is an excellent opportunity for a confident, masculine thought-leader to emerge. The former popularity of Mark Driscoll, a caricature like Trump if there ever was one, is proof that such demand exists. The silent majority of Christians awaits our next Martin Luther, a complex man, brash and bold, perhaps not the best theologian, but a man of action, rough around the edges, and exactly the man of the moment.

The Hammer of Thunor and Its Popularisation

via Aryan Myth and Metahistory

I have in the past discussed the significance of the Hammer of ThunorThonar/Thunar/Donar/Thor in previous articles, pointing out that it is not only a symbol which is holy to our folc but is an important means of awakening the Ario-Germanic peoples from their long slumber in order that they may ACT. See my articles Thor's Hammer: The Germanic Expression of the Aryan Swastika and along with my discussion with kinsmen on

The thorny issue (no runic pun intended) of Mjolnir becoming an icon of modern popular culture is something which I frequently meditate upon. The positive aspect of this is that our symbols become more widely known and this in itself helps to awaken the Blood Memory of Germanic and Aryan people. This is surely our aim? The negative aspect is that to a certain extent its poularisation lends to the sacrality of the symbol being diminished. There is no easy answer to this. It has been suggested or implied by some that the symbol become in a sense abandoned by us for everyday use whilst we adopt alternative sacred and esoteric symbols. This line of thinking is understandable but it would be a mistake.

Frequently when asked about the Mjolnir I am wearing at that particular instance (I have a predilection for collecting them) people assume that I am either a biker or a re-enactor! No doubt this is mainly due to my appearance, having a beard, long hair and a tendency to wear black. It is rarely assumed that I do so for political reasons-this is of course an advantage because the enquirer can be taken off guard as I then procede to implant our message-subtly into their unconscious mind! By appearing as a neo-nazi knuckledragger we achieve absolutely nothing and merely reinforce jewish Hollywood imposed stereotypes upon ourselves! This is a habit we must break! The more intelligent of our kinsmen are beginning to understand this.

What is important or should be important to us a practitioners of the Wodenist faith is what the Mjolnir symbolises to us on a personal and spiritual level, not just how others interpret it. For me the Mjolnir helps me to focus my concentration when communicating with the Gods, most especially Thunor who I regard as my personal guardian. (This fact was once communicated to me via a dream that someone conveyed to me 7 years ago). Mass produced Mjolnirs can be of variable quality but it is wrong to assume that ones made outside of Europe are necessarily of inferior quality. The reverse is often the case. With designs being copied left, right and centre it is extremely difficult to find out where and who made it. For those who appreciate Mjolnirs which are unique and have a known origin the website Etsy is an excellent place to go to. I recently had an iron Mjolnir of about 4 1/2 inches long crafted from old iron that had been struck by lightning and this came from a North American artisan. It can be worn as a pendant or used as a blot ritual Hammer.

Of course we can decide to wear other symbols in addition to the Mjolnir or indeed a Mjolnir that has other symbols, including esoteric ones crafted into it. These are not difficult to find and again Etsy is an excellent resource.

As discussed in previous articles Mjolnir is a representation of the Fylfot but one in which we can wear on a daily and open basis without concern or censure. The use of the Fylfot I reserve for secret rites and never use this openly. This most sacred symbol is largely misunderstood by 99.99 % of the masses and is also not fully undestood even by those who are concerned with the Aryan awakening. Its open and public adoption during the Third Reich had a powerful effect in the awakening of the Volk-an effect which had been considered and planned in advance but unfortunately it now has negative connotations in the collective hive mind.

Heinrich Heine in 1834 had this to say about our God Thunor and most certainly this was a prophecy regarding the coming Third Reich:
"(he will) terrible because he will appear in alliance with the primitive powers of nature, able to evoke the demonic energies of old German Pantheism-which there will awake in him that Battle-madness which we find among the ancient Teutonic races who fought neither to kill nor conquer, but for the very love of fighting itself.
".......then will come crashing and roaring forth the wild madness of the old champions, the insane berserker rage, of which Northern poets say and sing....The old stone gods will rise from long forgotten ruin, and rub the dust of a thousand years from their eyes, and Thor, leaping to life, with his giant hammer, will smash the Gothic cathedrals.
"German thunder is indeed German, and not in a hurry, and it comes rolling slowly onward; but it will, and when ye hear the crash as naught crashed before in the whole history of the world, then know that der Deutsche Donner, our German Thunder, has at last hit the mark....There will be played in Germany a drama compared to which the French Revolution will only be an innocent child.
"But once blood again begins coursing in the veins of the German people, once they again feel their heart beating, no longer will they listen to the pious chatter of the Bavarian hypocrites, or to the mystic murmours of the Swabian imbeciles; their ear will only hear the great voice of one man.
"Who is this man? He is the man whom the German people awaits, the man who will turn to them their lives and their happiness-the happiness and the life they have so longed for in their dreams. How much longer will you wait-you whom our old people have prophesied with burning desire-you for whom youth waits with so much impatience-you who carry the divine sceptre of liberty, and the imperial crown with the cross."(On the History and Religion of Philosophy in Germany)
What was accomplished in the past may be accomplished again but the Aryan Widerstand and Erwachung must be based upon a sound folkish footing.

The Death of Europe?: Europa Unbars the Gates to Her Ancient Enemy

via American Renaissance

The proliferation of other races dooms our race, my race, irretrievably to extinction in the century to come, if we hold fast to our present moral principles. —Jean Raspail, The Camp of the Saints, 1973

Forty-two years ago, the great French author Jean Raspail wrote a deeply prescient novel. A flotilla of rusty ships packed with beggars sets sail from the Third World. They head for the French Riviera, where a million wretched, brown-skinned people hope to storm the beaches and feed on the wealthy white West. Will the French army fire on the invaders or welcome them as refugees? In the end they do neither; soldiers throw down their weapons and run away as the mob stumbles ashore. Millions more follow, and Europe is snuffed out.

The Camp of the Saints has never gone out of print, and has been translated into all major European languages–and yet the coverage of the European “migrant” crisis goes on as if it had never been written. The masses pouring in from Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, and a host of African countries are doing exactly what Mr. Raspail predicted they would and, tragically, so are the Europeans.

The underlying problem–and one that cannot be solved–is that whites have built the most pleasant places to live in human history while, with only a few exceptions, everywhere else is a dung heap. In some cases, such as Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, Western meddling has made things worse, but even without that, hundreds of millions of non-whites in a hundred different countries would move to Europe or America if they could.

And now, they can.

The Camp of the Saints put the white man’s dilemma in the harshest terms: slaughter hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children or face oblivion. The flotilla sets sail confident that Europeans do not have the nerve to kill in order to survive. Today as well, the Third World is crossing the Mediterranean confident that whites don’t have the nerve even to turn them back. Every vagabond who gets a bed in a reception center in Dortmund or Malmo tweets the good news to a hundred people back in Somalia and Syria. They will come in endless waves until they are stopped, and if they are not stopped Europe will die, just as it does in The Camp of the Saints.

CampOfSaintsWhat Europeans are doing reflects something deep in their nature, which makes them capable of extraordinary levels of pathological altruism. But the present invasion also has a legal background that dates to the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. It defines a refugee as someone:
[who] owing to [a] well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country.
The convention required “non-refoulement,” which means refugees cannot be turned back at the border. It also prohibited countries from applying to refugees the usual punishments for illegal entry. The convention came out of the Second World War, applied only to Europeans, and gave signatories the option of limiting their definition of refugees to people who were displaced “as a result of events occurring before 1 January 1951.”

Refugees during the Second World War.
Refugees during the Second World War

In 1951, the world population was 2.5 billion. It is now 7.3 billion, and the overwhelming bulk of the growth has been in those very countries that are so miserable that huge numbers of their citizens want to leave.

The United States did not sign the convention. What it did sign, in 1968, was a protocol added to the convention, which removed the original geographic and time limits. This meant signatories were required to take in anyone from anywhere forever. Until 1968, however, the United States had no legal obligation to accept any refugees.

Virtually every member of the United Nations has signed both documents–Nauru signed in 2011–but countries like East Timor, Afghanistan, and Zimbabwe have little fear of being called on to fulfill their obligations.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) sets up camps for refugees and does initial screening. Except under crazy circumstances like those in Europe today, countries decide how many refugees they will accept, and dicker with UNHCR over who they will take. The supply is essentially unlimited: Last year, UNHCR said there were more than 50 million displaced people around the world, of whom about 17 million were officially designated as refugees.

Except for the countries right next to the places people are trying to leave, white countries accept by far the most refugees. China completely ignores the “non-refoulement” rule, turning back Burmese tribal people whom the authorities are driving out of the country. In 2014, Japan accepted only 11 out of 5,000 applications for asylum. Mexico, which sends us millions of people, accepts even fewer: It now has a total of 1,677 refugees to Japan’s 2,649. And it’s not as though no one applies to Mexico. Central America has produced plenty of “refugees” but Mexico won’t take them.

Countries just do what they please, because the conventions have no enforcement mechanism. The only price for spurning refugees is accusations of heartlessness, and so long as a country isn’t white, there isn’t much of that.

There has been some clucking about Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the rich Gulf States, which are selective and let Syrians in only on work visas. In fact, they are the most honest players in the game; they haven’t signed the conventions so they don’t have to accept refugees. At the same time, they have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on camps for displaced Syrians in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. The United Arab Emirates alone have splashed out more than half a billion to house their fellow Muslims. The UN and Western countries have also spent several billion dollars on those camps, where about 3.7 million displaced Syrians have been living safely–though not luxuriously–for years.

Syrian refugee camp in Turkey.
Syrian refugee camp in Turkey.

And that is what makes this “refugee crisis” not just a calamity for Europe but an absurdity. News reports routinely talk about Syrians “fleeing war and turmoil in the Middle East,” but it’s not as though the Syrian civil war suddenly turned brutal, and shell-shocked families are fleeing war zones with only the clothes on their backs. Many have decided they are just tired of refugee camps–and the ones in Lebanon have cut back somewhat on handouts. Those coming straight from Syria just want a chance at Europe, too. As one 35-year-old woman who brought two young children with her from Aleppo explained at the Hungarian border, “I decided to leave Syria because I want my kids to have a comfortable life, to study.”

In any case, it’s hardly the poor who are making the trip. Smugglers charge as much as $2,000 per adult to ferry people just a couple of miles from Turkey to a Greek island. It takes money to travel on to Germany or Sweden–though some European countries are laying on free travel, food, and shelter. These newcomers are not the needy; they are the greedy.

Finally, this “refugee crisis” is not just an absurdity; it’s absurdity on stilts. Syrians don’t qualify as refugees under the conventions. As noted above, a  refugee has to have a well-founded fear of persecution. Being caught in a civil war is not persecution.

A government can choose to treat Syrians as if they were refugees, however, and most European countries have promised them special treatment. People are therefore throwing away their identity papers as soon as they get to Europe and are claiming to be Syrian. There is now a brisk market in fake Syrian passports; German authorities have confiscated hundreds of blank passports. A Dutch journalist in Syria paid $850 for a very convincing-looking custom-made fake, and they are now offered on the Internet. Syrians have been getting into fights with imposters who, they think, make it harder for real Syrians to register as refugees.

Syrian passport: fake or real?
Syrian passport: fake or real?

In any case, it is wrong for the press to call these people “migrants,” as if they were Canadian geese. Every one of them, wherever he came from, is an illegal immigrant. Israel calls such people “infiltrators.” It would not be incorrect to call them “invaders,” since they are an army of aliens come to occupy and transform Europe.

Liberals are scratching their heads, trying to figure out what set off the current flood. They note that the Syrian war hasn’t gotten worse, and that conditions in Turkish and Jordanian refugee camps are the same as ever.

The answer is simple: Waves of illegals are coming because they can. They saw hundreds of thousands of Africans from such places as Senegal and Nigeria–without even a fantasy claim to being “refugees”–swarming across the Mediterranean from Libya. Not only did the Italian Navy save their lives when their boats sank, it turned them loose on the continent to go wherever the handouts were most generous. Firm treatment early on–towing the boats back where they came from as the Australians do–would have stopped them right away. Instead, Europe foolishly opened the door and is shocked that more have followed.

Germany, especially, has been letting in anyone who wants to come, and people from wrecked countries all over the world know a good thing when they see it. That is why only about one in five of the people pouring into Europe over the last three months are even Syrian. The rest come from South Sudan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Eritrea, and every other hell hole.

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany made things much worse by announcing that she expects to take in 800,000 waifs this year. Now the government says it could be more like a million. Mrs. Merkel has even been so stupid as to say that “the right to political asylum has no limits on the number of asylum seekers.” Technically, she’s right–the conventions say nothing about limits–but this is an open invitation to every basket-case country everywhere. Here is an interactive graphic from the New York Times that gives a very dramatic sense of what some of these numbers mean.

Mrs. Merkel’s invitation explains why nearly a million illegals have already come to Europe, and countless more are on the way. It explains why 3,000 arrive every day on the tiny Greek Island of Lesbos. And why nearly 4,700 boat people were rescued off the coast of Libya just last Saturday (Sept. 20). And why the crush of “migrants” has so overwhelmed European transport systems that train service had to be stopped between Budapest and Vienna, and between Munich and Salzberg. It explains the mountains of rubbish, food, and feces the “migrants” have left behind wherever the gather.

Life jackets and rubber boats left as trash on the beaches of Lesbos.
Life jackets and rubber boats left as trash on the beaches of Lesbos

It explains why we can look forward to such piquant ironies as 75,000 Muslims showing up in Munich just in time for Oktoberfest. Will they spoil the fun for the 6 million locals and tourists who are expected to swallow 1.7 millions of gallons of beer?

Trying to feed, house, clothe, mediate, and teach German to these illegals won’t be cheap, either. Current estimates are that if Germany takes in one million foreigners a year for two years the bill could run to €25 billion ($28 billion). Germany had been running a budget surplus of a few billion a year; it will go back into the red.

The German Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel, who is Mrs. Merkel’s deputy, has said what may be the most idiotic thing yet: “If we manage to quickly train those that come to us and to get them into work, then we will solve one of our biggest problems for the economic future of our country: the skills shortage.” Germany already has an indigestible mass of Turks who are a recognized scourge, and if Germany needed skilled immigrants it could select them rather than let in masses of whatever shows up.

But Germany is burnishing its credentials as officially post-Nazi. Polls show that a majority of Germans welcome the refugees and can’t get enough international praise. Meanwhile, officials in the German Länder, or states, that have actually have to handle the crowds, worry that they are already stretched to capacity.

The United States, which has so far let in only a couple of thousand Syrians, wants praise, too. Secretary of State John Kerry just announced an increase from 70,000 to 85,000 for next year’s refugee quota, with a goal of 100,000 for 2017. He explained we can’t let in more because it takes time to vet Syrians for terrorism. What does that say about the potential two million Germany could be in for?

The spinelessness of the Europeans is perfectly matched by the arrogance and aggressiveness of the illegals. One might think people who show up without permission in a foreign country would be grateful simply not to be turned back. Not these people. On the Greek islands they fought each and rioted because they didn’t think they were being treated well enough. On Kos, a tourist mecca, they blocked the main street of the town chanting, “We want papers. We want to eat.” On Lesbos, with 20,000 surly young men camping in streets and squares, locals were afraid to leave their homes or send children to school. “They have stolen our lives,” said one.

Africans in Italian reception centers in Belluno, Sicily, and Rome went on hunger strikes because they were tired of Italian food and wanted African food. The strikers in Belluno slashed the tires of Italians who worked at the center.

At the Serbian/Hungarian frontier, migrants massed at a border fence, chanting “open the door.” They gave the Hungarians two hours to let them in, and then launched human-wave attacks on the fence to try to tear it down. When the Hungarians fired tear gas and water cannons, the illegals threw rock and sticks at the border police. There was a running battle of several hours before the illegals finally gave up and headed for Croatia.

How the Hungarians solved the problem.
How the Hungarians solved the problem.

Rail service from Germany to Austria through the Freilassing border crossing had to be suspended when illegals hit the emergency break to slow down the train so they could jump off. They then walked around the border crossing so they wouldn’t have to show papers. On all the rail routes leading to Germany, thousands of illegals have been sleeping in stations, filling the restrooms and platforms with filth, and cramming themselves onto any train that was passing through whether they had tickets or not. Mobs at the Keleti railroad station in central Budapest shouted “Fuck you,” and “Allahu Akbar” at Hungarian authorities.

All aboard!
All aboard!

Most of these illegals are young Muslim men who have never seen a woman in a bikini. There have already been reports of women and children being raped in some of the migrant centers, where Muslims consider unaccompanied women “fair game.” Even when they have segregated dormitories, women sleep fully dressed, and are afraid to walk around the centers. So many have been forced into prostitution that a social worker at a Bavarian shelter called it “the biggest brothel in Munich.” It’s no accident that in immigrant-happy Sweden the majority of rapists are immigrants–overwhelmingly Muslim. These are the people Mrs. Merkel’s deputy thinks he will make good Germans.

This is what Europe gets for its spinelessness. The illegals sense weakness, and they are right. They exploit that weakness, and their success inspires yet more hundreds of thousands–no doubt millions–from every wretched country. Only force will stop them, the force that any healthy people would have used immediately.

Fortunately, not all of Europe has gone insane. Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto pointed out that if Germany is worried about the plight of Syrians it could use a tiny fraction of the money it has budgeted for “migrants” to improve conditions in the camps in Jordan, Turkey, and Lebanon.

Hungary’s Prime Minister, Victor Orban has been the most consistently clear-headed European head of state throughout the crisis. He has warned that Muslims will destroy the Europe’s Christian identity and that Europeans have a right to refuse to become minorities on their own continent. His determination to keep illegals out has made him a hero to his people.

Slovakia said it would let in 200 Syrians but they had to be Christians. Interior Minister Ivan Netik explained that Slovakia doesn’t have a single mosque and that Muslims aren’t welcome.

Dutch political leader Geert Wilders has warned of an “Islamic invasion:”
Masses of young men in their twenties with beards singing ‘Allahu Akbar’ (God is greatest) across Europe–it’s an invasion that threatens our prosperity, our security, our culture and identity.
He’s right. Sheikh Muhammad Ayed, speaking at the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, encouraged the illegals to pour into Europe and mate with Europeans. “We will breed children with them, because we shall conquer their countries,” he said. “We will trample them underfoot, God willing.”

Ironically, it is former Communists, who lived under an overtly anti-religious, anti-nationalist ideology, that are still able to think in terms of national and religious identity. When Mrs. Merkel said she wanted to assign mandatory “refugee” quotas to every EU member, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic refused. Communism protected them from something much worse: “tolerance” and “diversity.”

Perhaps the greatest irony, however, is that emasculated West Europeans are accusing East Europeans of not being European. French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said that Hungary’s efforts to keep out illegals shows it does not “respect Europe’s common values.” It is only because Europeans fought Muslim invaders for 1,000 years–from 732 at the Battle of Poitiers to 1683 at the gates of Vienna–that Europe as we know it even exists. Incredibly, Mr. Fabius wants to throw it all away in the name of what he calls “Europe’s common values.”

Laurent Fabius: A figure right out of Camp of the Saints.
Laurent Fabius: A figure right out of The Camp of the Saints

Laurent Fabius could have stepped right out of the pages of The Camp of the Saints.
As Jean Raspail wrote in 1985:
[T]he West is empty, even if it has not yet become really aware of it. An extraordinarily inventive civilization, surely the only one capable of meeting the challenges of the third millennium, the West has no soul left.
He put it even more pithily in The Camp of the Saints: “The white race was nothing more than a million sheep.”

Israel Keeps Making, Not Taking, More Refugees

via American Freedom Party

Israel won’t accept Syrian refugees because it was only by turning the majority of the Palestinians into refugees that a ‘Jewish state’ was created
Long before Syrian refugees found their way to Europe, the war-torn country’s neighbours have been hosting a staggering number of displaced persons – with one notable exception.

Syria has five neighbors: Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Israel (with the latter occupying the Golan Heights since 1967). According to recent figures, Turkey currently hosts 1.8 million Syrian refugees, Lebanon a further 1.17 million, Jordan around 630,000, and Iraq some 250,000.

Israel, however, with a GDP per capita almost double that of Turkey and five times as much as Jordan, has not accepted a single one.

This is unlikely to change any time soon. On 6 September, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected the idea of accepting any Syrian refugees, stating: “Israel is a very small state. It has no geographic depth or demographic depth.”

The day before, former finance minister and Yesh Atid chair Yair Lapid expressed similar sentiments, arguing that Israel “cannot afford to get into the matter of the refugee crisis” since to do so, he added instructively, could “open a back door to discussing the right of return for Palestinians”.

Senior Palestinian officials, meanwhile, are urging Israel to permit Palestinian refugees from Syria to come to the Occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip.

An estimated 3,000 Palestinians have been killed in Syria since the start of the uprising. Around 80,000 of the 560,000 UNRWA-registered Palestinian refugees in Syria are no longer in the country. Yarmouk camp, once home to some 200,000, now has 5-8,000 civilians remaining. In the devastated camp, many still rely on food parcels, and over-stretched doctors are treating cases of typhoid.

On Monday, the PLO’s Hanan Ashrawi reiterated a call made by Mahmoud Abbas for “the international community, in particular the United Nations, to support our efforts to bring the Palestinian refugees to Palestine”.

Netanyahu’s comments at Sunday’s cabinet meeting were sparked by an intervention on Saturday by Zionist Camp head and Labor chair Isaac Herzog. Speaking on Channel 10 television, Israel’s opposition leader said it was “incumbent on Israel to take in refugees from the war”.

“Jews cannot be apathetic when hundreds of thousands of refugees are searching for safe haven,” Herzog added. Except, of course, if they are Palestinian refugees.

Herzog has been very direct about his desire to “keep a Jewish state with a Jewish majority.” Speaking at a conference in June, he stated: “I don’t want a Palestinian prime minister in Israel. I don’t want them to change my flag and my national anthem.”

Tzipi Livni, his Zionist Camp partner, sings a similar tune, defending the creation of a Palestinian “state” (read Bantustan) in order to “preserve the Jewishness of Israel’s Jewish and democratic state model” and “avoid the statistical demographic issue of Palestinians outnumbering Israelis”.

Many were recently appalled by Hungarian PM Victor Orban’s well-publicised remarks that the Syrian refugees “represent a radically different culture” and, purely because they are mainly Muslims, constitute a threat to “European Christianity”.

Few are aware, however, just how routine such rhetoric is in Israel, amongst cabinet ministers, lawmakers, academics, commentators and others. One Israeli journalist, explaining why “Israel can’t take in refugees,” put it like this:

The demographic threat is real, and the need to preserve the Jewish nation state’s character as a democracy doesn’t allow for large minorities. The current numbers of Muslims pose a complicated challenge even without additions.

For Israel’s Palestinian citizens, this discourse is par for the course, from newspapers discussing a “demographic intifada” to political leaders, like Netanyahu in 2010, declaring that a Negev “without a Jewish majority” would pose “a palpable threat”.

Israel’s settler-colonial anxiety goes largely unquestioned in the West. While The New York Times was scathing about Orban’s rhetoric, the paper uncritically noted the perception of “most Israeli Jews” that the Palestinian refugees’ return would be a “demographic death warrant”.

It is not just Palestinians. In 2012, after African refugees had entered Israel via the country’s border with Egypt, Netanyahu warned that “illegal infiltrators” could threaten the country’s existence “as a Jewish and democratic state”. Tel Aviv saw anti-African mob violence.

Even if, as some acknowledged, the new arrivals meant no harm, their continued migration had “the potential of destroying the State of Israel.” Israel, it was frankly explained, is “a country living in constant worry over its demographic balance, and determined to maintain its Jewish character”.

A “steel and barbed-wire fence on the Egyptian border” has since reduced the number of Africans entering Israel “from several thousand a year … to almost zero”. Meanwhile the 50,000 refugees who remain, mostly from Sudan and Eritrea, are targeted for removal.

Lapid’s comments point us in the right direction: Israel is unable to accept (non-Jewish) refugees because it was only through turning the majority of the indigenous Palestinian population into refugees that a “Jewish state” was established – and it is maintained by their continued exclusion.

Earlier this week, Netanyahu told European Council President Donald Tusk that Israel is the region’s “only vanguard of liberty,” adding: “We are the guardians of civilisation here in the heart of the Middle East against this new barbarism.”

This colonial ideology of exceptionalism, exemplified by the oft-repeated “only democracy in the Middle East” cliche, finds an uncomfortable echo in Israel’s refusal to accept Syrian refugees, even as its neighbours host them in their millions.

On Sunday, Netanyahu announced the start of construction of a 29-kilometre stretch of fence along Israel’s border with Jordan, just the latest barrier for a state of external and internal borders, segregated spaces and settlements.

Just as the Syrian refugees are the result of an international political failure, so too the Palestinian refugees’ exclusion from their homeland, an absence created and enforced by the barrel of a gun and a bureaucracy of apartheid, is the result of the failure to confront Israeli ethnocracy.

Scott Walker Syndrome

via Radix

Scott Walker, or “Harley,” as he would have liked to have been called, seems like a pretty traditionally Wisconsin guy. His political rise though, was actually made possible by the decline of traditional Wisconsin. 

The official center of Downtown Madison is a pedestrian-only, shopping/dining district called, fittingly, “State Street.” It runs for about a mile, and at one end is the State Capitol, while at the other end is UW-Madison, Wisconsin’s flagship university. Locals probably associate the area more with Halloween parties and homeless people than anything else, but State Street is obviously designed to be the symbolic cultural center of the state, physically linking the two great institutional expressions of its people.

It is a nice touch, I think, and it has long been much more than symbolic. Many readers, I am sure, are at least somewhat familiar with the “Wisconsin Idea”—the idea that “the boundaries of the university are the boundaries of the state.” This means that the university is to expand the benefits of its knowledge to every citizen of the state. First articulated by UW President Charles Van Hise in 1904, this mission took form in extension programs to bring useful arts and technology directly to the people, in Wisconsin Public Radio (“The Ideas Network”), and, of course, in working closely with the state government. The Progressive Era legislation resulting from the latter is undoubtably the most famous legacy of the Wisconsin Idea. As the UW website explains:
[Van Hise] also took advantage of his friendship with Governor Robert M. La Follette, a former classmate at the university, to help forge closer ties between the university and state government; during the early part of the 20th century, faculty experts consulted with legislators to help draft many influential and groundbreaking laws, including the nation’s first workers’ compensation legislation, tax reforms and the public regulation of utilities.[Emphasis added]
For the Wisconsin Idea to work, though, Wisconsin has to remain Wisconsin. While much of Wisconsin’s unique character remains, there have been some important changes in the state since “Fighting Bob” La Follette’s days, changes that threaten both of spirit and the specifics of the Wisconsin Idea. Population wise, the Great Migration of Blacks to the north hit Wisconsin less than it did many others, but those who did come have formed a community that—how to put this delicately—has failed to thrive, at least by conventional socio-economic measures. Nationally, Blacks have higher levels of social dysfunction than others, of course, but the problem is worse in Wisconsin. It may be, as Steve Sailer suggests, that Wisconsin’s historically generous welfare system—a legacy of the Wisconsin Idea—is the very thing that lured the more underclass-sort of blacks. Maybe, maybe not, I make no certain claims on that, because for my point, all that matters is that they are there. The real problem for the Wisconsin Idea though, comes from the White reaction to this Black population and from the nationalization of politics—both of which stem from the fact that Wisconsin is not its own Particularist country.

The culture in Wisconsin is a fairly unusual combination of socially conservative and egalitarian. It is a land of co-ops and labor unions, and of course, until recently, it had one of the most generous social welfare programs in the country. It is also a place of deep continuity, for the United States. Relatively few people from other states move to Wisconsin, and relatively few people from Wisconsin move to other states. Wisconsinites are even less likely to move away from their small towns. It is also somewhat religious for a state outside the Deep South.

Wisconsin is everything Nietzsche loathed about the Germany of his day, only more so. As it happens, Wisconsin is to a large extent directly descended from that Germany. Half of all Whites in Wisconsin claim German ancestry, which is four times greater than the next largest ancestry. No other state’s White population is so dominated by one ethnicity. The vast majority of these people’s German ancestors immigrated to Wisconsin during Nietzsche’s lifetime, and the culture of the state still bears that stamp. The Wisconsin Idea is essentially derived from the Social Democratic movement of Germany’s late nineteenth century.

Besides the legacy of progressive politics, the Wisconsin Idea, helped by the ethnic similarity of all corners of the state (in many states, the ethnic balance varies by region), has made Wisconsin into what I call a “state” state, like Texas or Minnesota (Wisconsin’s slightly more couth sibling). While people who live in Metro Boston are from New England, and people who live in Chicagoland are from Chicago, people who live in metro Milwaukee are from Wisconsin. The state itself is the foundation of identity—and, as mentioned, “the boundaries of the university are the boundaries of the state.”

New Glarus Brewing, a local beer favorite, does not allow its product to be sold outside state lines. Many of you have seen the maps of favorite sports team by county, based on Facebook “likes.” One of the most striking things about those maps is that, whether it is the Badgers, the Brewers, the Bucks, or the Packers, the state of Wisconsin is a solid block; if Wisconsin has a team, that team has Wisconsin. The Packers, the state’s most beloved team, are about as Wisconsin as it gets—an extremely well-run football team that is owned collectively by the community, as a non-profit.

A virtuous cycle of nature and nurture seemed to be moving Wisconsin ever closer to its Particularist ideal, but now the bubble has been pricked by the outside world. As I said above, it started when a black population that was/is highly dependent on public welfare was added to to White population that was/is hardly-at-all-dependent on public welfare (not directly, anyways). The Black/White difference in food-stamp dependency and violent crime is far higher in Wisconsin than in the rest of the country. There was bound to be a White reaction, and it came out of the Milwaukee area.

Wisconsin’s Black population is concentrated in the city of Milwaukee, which is seen as an irredeemable mess by much the rest of the state. Metro Milwaukee has the highest White/Black segregation in the country, and the metro area is now one of, if not the most, politically-polarized in the nation. This is fueled by the deep distrust and distain that the White-flight counties have for the city. In most of the country, the cities are blue, the suburbs are purple, and the countryside is red. In Wisconsin, the cities are blue, the countryside is purple, and the suburbs are deep-red (in Milwaukee). Milwaukee’s collar counties went for Romney by two or three to one. These are people whose grandparents and great-grandparents elected three different socialist mayors. Regional cooperation in the Milwaukee area has practically become an oxymoron.

While demographic change was upsetting Wisconsin politics, American politics was becoming much more nationalized. As the ethnic mix of the country has diversified, the Republican and Democratic brands, especially among officeholders, have become all-but standardized nationwide. Also, my guess is that ambitious politicians are more likely to come out of places that are more interested in politics, and Milwaukee area counties are among those with the highest voter turn-out in the country. Governor Scott Walker, who comes from the world of Milwaukee politics, is the confluence of all these national and local trends. Walker, the only incumbent governor in American history who has ever won a recall election, is that rare Republican who stands his ground, and wins. Walker was first elected during the Tea-Party wave of 2010, and his brand of politics is the same Tea-Party type found from coast-to-coast; there is nothing particularly Wisconsin about it at all. And Walker has (or maybe had) national ambitions.

For now though, Wisconsin is Walker’s stage. The Wisconsin Idea is firmly entrenched, but he has been hacking-away at it with ruthless efficiency. Walker rose to national fame just one month into his first term when he proposed, and the Republican legislature eventually passed, a bill stripping public union workers of their collective-bargaining power. (Wisconsin was the first state to grant collective-bargaining to state workers.) More recently, Wisconsin has become a right-to-work state. And now Walker is trying to strike at the absolute core of the Wisconsin Idea, at the state university system. Walker is proposing a $300 million cut in state funding for the University system over two years. This 13 percent cut would be one of the largest such cuts in American history. Meanwhile, owing to a law passed in 2013, tuition will be frozen for those two years. This year’s state budget even eliminated the Wisconsin Idea as the university system’s mission statement; after a public uproar, this “drafting error” has been corrected, and the original language is back in the budget. The mission statement may have been restored, but the mission itself has, undoubtedly, been gutted.

Perhaps the Tea-Party-ization of Wisconsin’s middle- and working-class politics was bound to happen, as both Left and Right have been “nationalized” over the past two decades. Nevertheless, it was Wisconsin’s Black population that served as an indispensable component of this evolution—despite the fact that it is rarely mentioned explicitly. Blacks, and the White reaction to them, effectively polarized Milwaukee and created the "Scott Walker syndrome." In some sense, the Wisconsin Idea, and certainly its progressive elements, is the author of its own doom. When a foreign element was introduced, the idea collapsed. Put simply, Wisconsin’s model of parochial, communitarian egalitarianism is an outgrowth of a particular people, without which it cannot function.