Nov 16, 2015

Becoming a People Again

via Radix

Yesterday was World Kindness Day. It was also a “Black Friday,” not the kind when people fight each other to get a discounted item at Wal-Mart to offer their relatives for Christmas before they put it on eBay for sale. Instead, it was the kind when the 13th of the month happens to be a Friday.

Between kindness and bad luck, it seems that Fate has chosen the latter. “Fate,” here, took the shape of Islamic terrorists.

As everyone knows by now, there have been six shootings and bombings in Paris yesterday evening, leaving over 120 dead people, and counting.

Unlike the Charlie Hebdo attack last January, these people were not engaged in any kind of fight, whatever we might think of the one Charlie Hebdo cartoonists believed they were committed to.

The deadliest of the six shootings took place at a trendy concert facility, “Le Bataclan,” where a rock band was performing. As we know, rock is a musical genre mostly enjoyed by Whites, and the significance of it should not escape us.

As I usually do when I have time on my hands, I came back from work by foot, and when I walked by the “Bataclan,” there were already many people waiting at the entrance. Among them were likely people who found death a couple hours later.

It all started like a normal evening though. At the Saint-Denis stadium, there was a football (yes, football, you can allow me that at a time like this) game between France and the incumbent world champion, Germany.

During the game, several explosions were reported. But the show had to go on, as it had in 1985 at the Brussels Heysel Stadium, when 39 football fans died during the European Cup final opposing FC Liverpool to Juventus Turin. Despite the tragedy, the game was allowed to proceed, to the end.

Yesterday, likewise, the French national team was allowed to defeat Germany (2-0) and thus take its revenge for the 2014 World Cup quarterfinal match. But France's Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, François Hollande, had already fled. Napoleon at Berezina.

It's only when I checked the game's result that I discovered what had happened all over Paris. Among the six shootings and bombings, one occurred at the terrace of a restaurant located only four blocks from where I live. I used to go there a few years ago. I'm not mentioning this to look like a hero that I'm not, but to explain that it affected me more than the Charlie Hebdo massacre.
“So you came back to die with your city?”
“So you came back to die with your city?”
My first reaction, though, was similar to the one I had after the Charlie Hebdo shooting: “Keep Calm and Ride the Tiger,” with a finely tuned mix of Schadenfreude, “I told you so” and Stoicism.

But my inner Epictetus was soon silenced by my inner Howard Beale, who reminded me that “First, you've got to get MAD!” I was angry, and I was mad, because what happened yesterday was entirely predictable, and was actually predicted by many experts.

The “invade the world, invite the world” policy initiated by George W. Bush and followed since then by his Parisian satraps (with the bygone exception of Iraq in 2003) killed yesterday. And it will kill again if drastic action is not taken, first to protect legitimate regimes in the Near East, then to shield Europe's borders against the tsunamic wave of so-called “refugees,” inside which some of yesterday's shooters were embedded.

Writing this last paragraph, I have the humiliating feeling of waving a Buckleyite fist at a world I no longer fit in. But as humiliating as it looks, I am not alone in that respect. As a matter of fact, we're all powerless to oppose the suicidal policies of Washington, Berlin, London and Paris. We are all powerless because we are no longer a people.
Freedom Failed.
What we are, instead, is a collection of atomized monads, ready to be scattered by the first collective force, however primitive, that it encounters.

It is this atomization that explains that no organized opposition took place when the atrocity of Rotherham was exposed. It is this atomization that ensured that in 2009 no one shut down the U.S. Army Chief of Staff General when he had the gall to say that “it would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty” after Fort Hood's massacre in Texas (13 dead).

Three years ago, when I reported on the French Identitarian Convention that happened just after Génération Identitaire's storming of the Poitiers mosque, I mentioned a round-table titled “Refaire un peuple” (“Remaking a People”). As promising as the title was, none of the speakers dealt with the fundamental issue: if we have to ask ourselves how to remake a people, it's because we are no longer a people to begin with. The same way that if NPI's last conference was titled “Become Who We Are,” it's because we are not who we are, or rather who we should be.
... strong!
... strong!
As I write, I doubt the heartwarming solidarity of the Western world with yesterday's victims is going to allow us to become a people again.

Last January, after a first major warning, hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets to show that they were Charlie. But it wasn't clear then whether it meant that they were ready to resist, or that they would willingly accept a similar fate as the cartoonists'.

Later this year, roughly the same people were ready to “welcome refugees,” and it's clear now that what we suffered yesterday is only one of the many outcomes that this pathological outburst of altruism is going to lead to.

But hope is what makes us human. I don't want to exaggerate the significance of people adding a tricolor filter to their Facebook profile pictures, but at this very moment, I have the feeling that we—we French, but also we Europeans worldwide—are a people again.

Let us not miss this historic opportunity to make that momentary feeling a permanent one.

"New World Order" Pledged to World Jewry in 1940

via Ur-Fascist Analytics

From The New York Times, 6 October 1940;
a "New World Order" promised
Ur-Fascist Analytics Editor's Note: In 1940, an article appeared in the New York Times, vowing that a postwar "New World Order" would be created. World Jewry would be central to the building of this order, said Arthur Greenwood, who was a member of Churchill's War Cabinet at the time.

Arthur Greenwood was a Labour Party leader and member of the House of Commons. He played a crucial role in shifting government momentum toward war with Germany. It was Greenwood that rose in Parliament on 2 September, 1939, after Prime Minister Chamberlain gave a speech that his enemies construed as ambivalent. A Conservative backbencher, Leo Avery, exclaimed, "Speak for England, Arthur!" Greenwood then delivered a speech in favor of following through with a declaration of war against Germany the next day.

In 1940, Greenwood was appointed Minister without Portfolio in Churchill's War Cabinet. In 1940, his influence again proved decisive in Britain's war with Germany. After France had declared war on Germany and was swiftly defeated and occupied by Germany in summer of 1940, Greenwood was the strongest and loudest supporter of continuing the war. Churchill received the slim majority vote that he obtained because of Greenwood's vote. As such, Hitler's peace offer was rejected and Britain continued its war on Germany.

Having been arguably the most important figure, next to Churchill, in producing and sustaining a war, it was also Greenwood who openly declared the aims and goals of the war: A postwar "New World Order" in which "Jews everywhere" would "make a distinctive and constructive contribution." His pledge to world Jewry appeared in The New York Times, on 6 October 1940. In it, he also declared that "the freedom and emancipation for the Jewish people are tied up with the emancipation and freedom for people everywhere."
This last line was among the most important lines in Greenwood's public pledge: It meant that the sovereignty of a nation, after the war, would be pushed aside if necessary to force nations to accept the legal entitlements of not only Jews but of non-Europeans. After the war, Jews would not only be "emancipated," but elevated, and given a central role in the elevation of non-Europeans. Today, Europeans see the concrete effects of this policy in the inundation of their nations by foreigners and criminalizing any opposition to it.

Madness at Mizzou: The Usual Combination of Black Hysteria and White Cowardice​ in the Face of Black Belligerence

via American Renaissance

Jared Taylor of American Renaissance dissects the racial power play that forced out the president and chancellor of the University of Missouri. He notes that blacks at other campuses are using the same tactics and will keep doing it until whites learn that every concession leads only to more demands.

Far Left "Center for American Progress" Hosts Netanyahu, Leader of the Israeli Ethnonationalist Right

via The Occidental Observer

When Israeli PM Netanyahu visited the US at the invitation of then House Speaker John Boehner in March, the take-home message was that support for Israel had become a partisan issue, with strong Republican support and relatively weak, dwindling Democrat support. Indeed, the Democrats have an analogous split between the donor class and it base that we  see among the Republicans, but for different reasons.
The Democratic Party establishment and donor class are strongly supportive of the Jewish state and are seeking to find new ways to increase U.S. military aid for Israel following the Iran deal. But recent polling shows that support for Israel among rank-and-file Democrats has fallen by 10 points in one year. A Gallup poll released this year found that fewer than half of Democrats, 48 percent, report sympathizing more with Israelis than with Palestinians as it relates to the Middle East conflict, while 83 percent of Republicans sympathize more with Israel. (John Hudson, Foreign Policy: Netanyahu Visit Sparks Internal Backlash at Powerhouse D.C. Think Tank
The White Republican base is more supportive of Israel (at least partly because of a large, terribly misguided Evangelical component) and thus more in tune with the donors on that issue. But it is famously out of step with the donors on social issues—immigration, gay marriage, abortion, etc. On the other hand, the Democrat base is far less supportive of Israel than the donors but, as a coalition of the ascendant non-White majority, it is entirely in step with them on social issues.

The common denominator is that in both parties the donors are substantially Jewish, and these wealthy Jews are pursuing a Jewish diaspora strategy of favoring Israel and leftist stances on social issues.

So in his recent trip to the US, in addition to dunning the Obama administration for a hefty increase in military aid in return for the US not bombing Iran (at least until the Republicans are back in charge), Netanyahu was invited to give a speech at the Center for American Progress, a powerful left-wing lobbying group. The result was that Netanyahu, dedicated to ethnonationalist policies of apartheid and ethnic cleansing vis-á-vis the Palestinians and expelling African migrants in Israel, spoke at CAP which is dedicated to the dispossession of White America via immigration and multiculturalism in the name of universal human rights and empathy for the oppressed. There were some tensions, but in the end, the strength of the Israel Lobby on the left in the US was reaffirmed — and CAP bigwigs burnished their credentials for high-level positions in a putative Hillary Clinton administration.

The tensions among CAP staffers were real—after all, not everyone on the left is dedicated to double standards and hypocrisy. A dissenting statement that received broad support at a staff meeting included comments on the 2014 Gaza bombing that resulted in the deaths “over 2000 people — many of them children” and the incongruity of supporting Ferguson protesters while turning a blind eye to Israel’s treatment of peaceful protests by Palestinians. (Ali Gharib and Clifton, The Nation, Dissent breaks out at CAP“).

CAP had already been under pressure for some time from neoconservatives and AIPAC for whom controlling the media narrative via censorship and intimidation is standard procedure.
The internal dissent at CAP comes after a report by Glenn Greenwald at the Intercept that exposed CAP’s conduct following a smear campaign against several of its staffers in 2011 and 2012, including us (Gharib was quoted in Greenwald’s report). After being attacked by Israel lobby groups and neoconservatives for critical writing about Israel, [CAP president Neera] Tanden implemented a protocol to monitor our writing, including setting certain subjects—such as criticism of AIPAC—off limits and, in one instance, censoring our work after publication. According to the Intercept, CAP imposed the measures as a means of currying favor with right-leaning pro-Israel groups and figures.
It’s therefore no surprise that the decision to invite Netanyahu required some intellectual gymnastics. Winnie Stachelberg, CAP’s Executive Vice-President for External Affairs, justified the decision by stating that Netanyahu would be subjected to hard questioning, and
she noted that as a think tank, “we believe we need to be open in engaging with people we don’t agree with.”
“Had we said no [to Netanyahu], there would be no public forum where he would’ve been asked tough questions, and quite frankly, we would’ve been hypocritical,” she said. She noted that the Israelis reached out to CAP in the first place and that in the past, CAP has been “highly critical of the prime minister for only dealing with the right.” (John Hudson, Foreign Policy: Netanyahu Visit Sparks Internal Backlash at Powerhouse D.C. Think Tank
So I guess CAP will be inviting me soon to discuss immigration policy and White ethnic interests.

CAP officials may well be motivated by the possibility of high positions in a new Clinton administration—yet another example of how Jewish lobbying groups are able to provide very tangible, career-making rewards for being on board with their agenda. All you have to do is sell your soul. The anti-White revolution is massively incentivized.
The controversy at CAP has gained attention given the organization’s close affiliations with the Clinton family. CAP’s first president and founder, John Podesta, was Bill Clinton’s chief of staff and is Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign chairman. CAP‘s current president, Tanden, served as policy director for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign in 2008. If Clinton manages to win her bid for the White House, a number of CAP staffers are well positioned for plum jobs in the next U.S. administration. In Clinton’s bid for the White House, the Democratic front-runner has delicately sought to convince Jewish voters that she would be better for Israel than Obama. She has expressed this to wealthy pro-Israel donors in a number of closed-door discussions, with varying levels of success. Some Obama administration officials and left-leaning activists resent such overtures. (Hudson, linked above)
But besides personal ambition of CAP officials, Philip Weiss correctly blames the power of the Jewish establishment in the US:
The answer is not a conspiracy of donors. Though, yes, donors matter. The answer is the importance of Zionism inside the US establishment. It is the sincere belief among empowered Jews like Dana Milbank, Alan Dershowitz, and Matt Dorf that the establishment of Israel was the redemptive end point of a tragic European Jewish history, and that American Jews are equal partners in the fulfillment of that redemption. This is a sincere, core belief on the part of countless Jewish politicians, journalists, donors and thinktank officials, many of them liberals.
In the event, it was a cake walk for Netanyahu:
Yesterday was a display of the Israel lobby’s strength in the Democratic Party. Netanyahu’s audience was obtained by the American Israel Political Affairs Committee — AIPAC — and the room was rigged, the questions were rigged, every moment from start to finish was scripted to make Netanyahu seem acceptable in Democratic circles. The crowd in the room looked like it was drugged. [In fact, the crowd was by invitation-only, guaranteed to be supportive of Netanyahu.] There was no animation, little audible response, no effervescence. The room was stocked with pro-Israel Jews. The only questions from the audience were from stalwarts of the Israel lobby: Morton Halperin of J Street, David Makovsky of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and Greg Rosenbaum of the National Jewish Democratic Council. The arrangement of these three questions, two of them putatively adversarial (a Jewish publication quotes J Street saying it was the first time that J Street had ever had a direct encounter with the PM), was straight out of the history of the Soviet Union.
Max Blumenthal said Tanden was auditioning for her job in the forthcoming Clinton administration, and nailing it. Adam Horowitz said, It’s not entirely surprising that Tanden was unimpressive, given that it’s not her area of expertise, but she cowered and Netanyahu loved it. And by the way, the awkward chairs displayed the Prime Minister’s sizeable gut. (James North and Philip Weiss, Mondoweiss, Nov. 11)
North and Weiss conclude, a bit optimistically:
Yesterday was also a display of the downfall of the Israel lobby. This is what it’s reduced to: show-conversations, with a rigged room, inside the Democratic Party. Just about everyone in that room was old and just about everyone was Jewish too. It’s not American democracy on display; it’s the dead hand of an old order.
The entirely Jewish audience at an event hosted by an organization avowedly committed to a rainbow vision of America reminds us that this is all about narrow Jewish ethnic interests, and not at all about what’s good for the US.

Actually, the claim that the meeting was nothing more than “the dead hand of an old order” is a bit optimistic. Netanyahu also spoke at the neocon American Enterprise Institute, with the likes of Dick Cheney and Richard Perle in attendance. The neocons are still “the dominant foreign policy force in the Republican party,” and when it comes to donors, it’s not possible for any but the wealthiest Republicans to even think about running for president unless they receive the support of Sheldon Adelson and the Republican Jewish Coalition.


Jewish power is not going away soon in either party, despite the gaps between the donor classes and their bases, because, after all, the really big money provided by the donor class is essential to the success of any political party, and politically motivated Jewish money is not going away any time soon. Philip Weiss notes that “it’s been estimated that on the Democratic side at the congressional level on up, Jews account for half to two-thirds of the funding,” and it’s doubtless at least that high for presidential elections. On the Republican side, it may be slightly less overall, but it’s obvious that Sheldon Adelson’s $100 million for the GOP in 2012 and the other billionaires in the Republican Jewish Coalition simply can’t be ignored.

From Vox

As Norman Podhoretz noted, Jews fund the left in America. As I have noted several times, Jewish wealth would be unimportant except that Jews are very effective at using their wealth in ways that promote issues in both major parties that oppose the interests of the traditional American White majority, whether on Israel or on the social agenda of the left (immigration, multiculturalism). Indeed, it’s hard to imagine any candidate for president being successful without the support of pro-Israel Jews who are liberal on social issues—right now their favored candidates are Hillary Clinton and Marco Rubio. Unless they have their own money.

And that is a major attraction of Donald Trump.

Trump, Paul Try to Pry other Candidates Lips from Jew-Butt


In a classic scene from Jean Shepherd’s A Christmas Story, a school boy is “triple dog dared” to stick his tongue to a metal utility pole on a frozen day. The tongue gets stuck, and nothing the gang does can free the boy from the pole. Similarly, Rubio, Fiorina, Kasich, Bush, and the rest of the Zio dwarfs are orally fixated to the hind parts of Jewish megadonors. If Dr. Carson was such a great surgeon, how come he doesn’t separate these candidates from their conjoined Zio paymasters?

Rubio, who literally cut and paste his campaign slogan from the Jewish Neocon think tank “Project for the New American Century,” called Putin a “gangster” and promised a no-fly zone over Syria, which is for all practical purposes a declaration of war against Russia. Kasich said Russian planes could fly into the zone but would “not fly out.”

Carly “Crazy Horse” Fiorina topped them all. Not only would there be a no-fly zone, but also more troops in Germany, a missile defense system in Poland, the Six Fleet just of Russian shores, and “very aggressive military exercises” in Russia’s Baltic neighbors.

Trump joined in the bad mouthing of Putin and Assad, but brashly reiterated his support for Russian actions in Syria against ISIS, and even exclaimed “Why is she always interrupting?” when Fiorina tried to talk over Rand Paul.

Senator Paul not only made a case against a no fly zone, but distinguished himself from all the other candidates by rejecting an increase in military spending. Of course, as long as America is under Jewish supremacy and our military is a mercenary force for Israel, increasing military spending is as retarded as continuing to deposit paychecks in an account after a junkie has stolen your debit card.

While it was heartening to see Trump double down on his support for Russian action in Syria and to hear Paul finally speak his mind on the matter, the sad thing was the audience was clearly on the side of the Ziomaniacs. Maybe Dr. Paul can perform some surgery of his own to open people’s eyes.

Europe Is on Fire: Non-White Invaders Attack Paris

via TradYouth

My mind can’t help but be boggled by the horror unfolding in Paris. For my entire adult life, I’ve joined my identitarian comrades in warning that unlimited immigration from the Global South will unleash unimaginable horrors in our Western homelands. My theoretical reach exceeds my visceral grasp. I can confirm aloud that the very fate of the French people is imperiled, but I can’t wrap my heart around the weight of it.

I can’t help but be a bit conservative at heart, yearning for some agreeable and polite way to muddle through things in a careful and patient manner. My mind knows that only a strident reassertion of our White identities and Western traditions can save us. Only an unprecedented modern mass deportation of invasive populations regardless of their paperwork, pious patriotic platitudes, and pleas for mercy, can save our future generations. It will get worse, and only a radical departure from society and politics as we’ve always known them will reverse it.

The hour for half-measures and muddling has long since passed. We must all guard against our degenerate impulse to cower and quibble in the hour of decision.

Even now, even among those who allegedly oppose the invasion, our language remains intolerably conservative and passive. When you complain about the religion of Islam being “aggressive” in moments like this, you’re achieving worse than saying nothing at all. You’re walking into a frame which has been carefully established by our enemies. Already, mere hours after the carnage erupted, the GOP candidates are demanding that we step up the “war on terror” rather than deport the invaders. Every time you seek to win over your cuckservative bridge partner with some facile boilerplate about “Islamism,” another invader gets his German residency permit stamped.

When you carry on about how the religion of Islam isn’t “a religion of peace,” you’re implicitly confirming that having a religion of peace and submission in a time like this is a virtue to be praised and prized. It’s not, and if we keep insisting that we’re the peaceful ones and they’re the aggressive ones, our youth and our women will gradually slip out from behind us and into the enemy camp…as they should. Women and normies instinctively understand power dynamics better than we ideologues do. And they’re not going to stand behind men who are whining about peacefulness and theology in the time for aggression, threat displays, and decisive action.


Philosophy and theology both matter, of course. But this isn’t study time. It’s test time. The philosophies and theologies which compel men to stand and fight will be separated from the chaff of philosophies and theologies which call for quibbling, complaining, and conceding when the invader’s slaughtering our men, raping our women, and threatening our children on a systematic and civilizational scale. Let our crusaders crusade, our berserkers go berserk, and our atheists disprove the foxhole adage.

Aggression is key, here. We keep trying to figure out some refined and logistically feasible institutional solution to the problem. If the people of Europe can shake off their conditioned and innate niceness and simply be rude, unwelcoming, and unaccommodating to the invader, the invader will leave on his own accord. We don’t need to arrange for their deportation, as most will self-deport when faced with a European people who make it clear in routine daily life that Europe is for Europeans and Europeans alone. The “migrants” (and all other non-Whites) are invariably surly and territorial when they have the upper hand, even when it’s over a mere neighborhood or Midwestern college campus. It’s time for us to get surly and territorial over the entirety of the Western world.

The American situation is different from Europe’s. Our crises in Ferguson and Mizzou are the same problem in a microcosm, …nay, a nanocosm. They’re both at root symptomatic of the White man’s failure and refusal to defend his territorial claim and push back against the aggressor. It’s just that our threats remain, erm… micro-aggressions, compared to what’s happening right now in the Motherland. With millions of invaders flooding into Europe, thousands of Europeans being viciously raped and assaulted, and hundreds (they’re just getting started) of Europeans dead and dying as we speak in distributed acts of fourth generation warfare, Europe is on fire.

Natural law will not be denied, and a weakened degenerate people will be brushed aside.

Our role as American nationalists is to support our brothers abroad with supportive propaganda. We must maintain a targeted focus on guaranteeing that the backlash at home be against Europe’s immivasion, not in favor of some World War III for Israel in the Middle East. Those in the kosher cliques of the New Right pushing their “clash of civilizations” and Islam-specific talking points must be met with the same disdain as their neocon fellow-travelers. Our time for outright battle hasn’t arrived, yet. The preconditions don’t exist here, yet, and we must patiently await that hour.

The secularized immigrants from the Global South aren’t as overtly menacing as the Islamic radicals, but their mission and the effect of their invasion will be the same. Islam is merely a stalking horse for what’s essentially a tribal and racial struggle for the heart of Europe. Whether they’re shouting hip-hop or Quranic verses (and typically, it’s both), they should be shouted down and driven out all the same. This is an hour of truth for Christian men of the West. Will we charge into the lead in defense of our faith, family, and folk, or will we sniffle and kvetch about how very peaceful, harmless, and bloodless we are?

Democracy Must Die so Our People Can Live

via Cambria Will not Yield

The men of Walter Scott’s Europe would not sit idly by talking about economic systems and universal panaceas to end discrimination, while their people were slaughtered right in front of their eyes. They would act as Christian men should act in the face of a barbaric, aggressive invader devoid of the slightest trace of humanity. This insane, horrific, murderous attack on white people will continue unabated and in fact will intensify until white men acknowledge that the bardic Europeans of the past who loved and hated with all their hearts were the true men of the right. They believed in Christ risen and they believed that the first rule of charity, the charity that never faileth, is the love of our own people. At the moment that such love, the love of our own racial hearth, became a matter for rational debate, the white man was lost. Only he who remains faithful, faithful to all the instinctive promptings of a heart that still loves, will be able to help his people survive the dark night of Liberaldom and live to see His light descend, once again, over Europe’s green and pleasant land.Our Race is Our People

The movie Iron Curtain (1948) was based on the life of Igor Gouzenko. Gouzenko was a Russian national working in the Canadian embassy, who was a spy for the Communists. The movie depicts, in a very moving and convincing manner, Gouzenko’s gradual disenchantment with communism and his efforts to expose the communist cabal working against the Canadian government. At the film’s end, Gouzenko has successfully placed incriminating evidence into the hands of the Canadian officials, which results in the prosecution and conviction of a large number of Canadian communists. The one flaw in the movie was its ending. The narrator tells us that Gouzenko is now living secretly in Canada with the full rights of a Canadian citizen. That’s all well and good. But then the narrator goes on to tell us that Gouzenko’s greatest protection is the democratic way of life. And the movie ends on that very discordant note.

That one discordant note in the movie has become a liberal symphony of death for the white man. Gouzenko was able to defect to Canada because the Canadian people still had a remnant of Christian charity in their souls, not because of the West’s democratic way of life. The West was committed to a slower transformation from Christian Europe to Satanic Europe than the Russian communists, but the Canadian democratic system and the Russian communist system were rooted in the spirit of the French Revolution, regicide and atheism.

I recently saw a show that features the pro-abort, anti-capital punishment “conservative” Bill O’Reilly. O’Reilly was quite rightly railing against Harry Reid for refusing to allow the Senate to vote on “Kate’s Law.” Kate Steinle was the young woman who was murdered by an Aztec cannibal who had come back into the United States for the zillionth time in order to commit murder. His last crime was the murder of Kate Steinle. O’Reilly, to his credit, was incensed with Reid and the Obama administration for resisting a bill that simply called for the enforcement of our immigration laws in order to try and prevent murderous Aztec thugs from coming across the border to kill white women. O’Reilly kept asking, “Why would anyone object to this bill?” The answer is quite obvious to anyone who has not been blinded by the democracy myth. O’Reilly does not see that our “democratic way of life” is a system set up by Satan to destroy the white race. Obama and Reid are simply being true to their creed – “People of color must be protected, and the white race must be destroyed.” Until “conservatives” such as O’Reilly grasp that essential truth about our democratic system, nothing good will ever come of talk show blather from conservatives. I’m not holding my breath in anticipation of a great awakening from the conservative-liberals. The democratic way is their faith.

Reid, like all liberals, lied about his real intentions. He did not say that he opposed “Kate’s Law” because he hated whites and wanted to hasten the Aztecs’ conquest of the United States. Instead he said that the incarceration of Aztec murderers and rapists would be too expensive! I agree; that is why I think we should spare the expense of incarceration by executing the Aztec murderers right at the scene of their murders. One bullet would not be very expensive.

The belief in the democratic way that was supposed to save Gouzenko and is supposed to protect us will not save us from the wickedness and snares of the devil. Democracy is a fiery furnace that the satanically inspired liberals use to exterminate the white race. So long as the democratic way rules the West the fiery furnaces will continue to consume the white race. Every day more whites walk sheep-like into the fiery furnace.

Why are whites unable to read the signs of the times? Is it not crystal clear, particularly after the Angela Merkel declaration of war, that the democratic leaders of the West have launched their final assault on the white race? Does anyone think that the Merkels and Reids of the West will be defeated through the democratic process? War is not something a Christian European longs for. But a war in defense of home, race, and faith is certainly superior to a cowardly surrender to satanic liberals, heathens, and colored barbarians. Even if you prefer a surrender to the enemy in order to save your life, that will not be permitted. The forces of hell – the liberals, the Jews, the Moslems, the organized Christian atheists, and the colored barbarians – are all determined to kill the whites down to the last man.

The great obstacle preventing white self-defense is the white man’s lack of a sentimental attachment to his people. That was the main reason for the success of the French Revolution, and that is the main reason the white race faces extinction. The liberals in church and state, especially the liberals in the organized churches, preached a cosmic love of a generic mankind which was supposed to be superior to the love men used to have for hearth and race. “To be attached to the subdivision, to love the little platoon we belong to in society, is the first principle (the germ as it were) of public affections. It is the first link in the series by which we proceed towards a love to our country, and to mankind.” (Burke) The result of a cosmic love of mankind is a hatred of particular human beings. And what race of people has demonstrated a most particular and distinct humanity? It was the people who bound themselves to our Common Hope. What have the Europeans done to warrant the hatred of the liberal apostates and the entire non-European world? They loved much – “If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.”

The liberals could not live with Einstein’s cosmic faith. They needed a people, so they turned to the heathens and the colored barbarians whose collective face bears the imprint of Satan. The unspeakable, merciless cruelty of the Moslem, the colored barbarian, and the technological liberal is the result of their intense hatred of Christ whom they strike back at through His people. We can’t coexist with such an unholy coalition. They seek our blood and will always seek our blood until the end of time. Are such monsters of inhumanity to be stopped by an appeal to our democratic way? No, it is to the Hope of the hopeless that we must apply for aid. If the Europeans walk away from democracy and its attendant ecclesiastical systems they will find themselves in tremendous peril, but they will also discover that they have the spiritual force to fight the satanic forces of Islam, liberalism, and colored barbarism that once made them feel hopelessly overwhelmed.(1)

The problem with the “democratic way” as a source of salvation is that the democratic way celebrates the statistical aggregate. And a statistical aggregate has no charity. It’s easy to kill statistics, whether they are the sick, the infirm, the elderly, the babies in the womb, or the white race. The ethos of the colored hordes, to overwhelm by numbers, dovetails with the liberals’ ethos of the statistical aggregate. “Let’s count the numbers; we now have more colored barbarians and Moslems in Europe, so let’s vote for the extermination of the white race.” Will the white grazers then go willingly into the furnace? They will if they still retain their belief in the democratic way. What the white everyman always fails to grasp is the fact that liberals have left Christian Europe and its attendant ethos behind. The liberals have become metaphysicians, and there is nothing “more hard than the heart of a thoroughbred metaphysician. It comes nearer to the cold malignity of a wicked spirit than to the frailty and passion of a man. It is like that of the principle of evil himself, incorporeal, pure, unmixed, dephlegmated, defecated evil.” To place one’s hopes in the liberals and the democratic way is to seek redemption from the devil.

When our Lord left this earth He promised to send us a Comforter: “But because I have said these things unto you, sorrow hath filled your heart. Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.” Can there be any doubt, when we look at the totality of our people’s history, their Christian history, that our Lord kept His promise? He did send us a comforter. But what if we forsake that comforter, because he did not bring us a Kingdom of God on earth? What if he just enabled human hearts to know and love the Divine Heart? Isn’t that worth all the kingdoms of this world? Europeans have a great battle on their hands. If we go into that battle with the platitudes of democracy – “Have mercy on us because we are not racist, because we too are multicultural” — we will lose. If we go into the battle with the love of our people and our God, we will win. And by ‘win’ I do not mean it is written that our armies will triumph. But every battle fought in His name is a preparation for the final battle, in which Christ and those who call on Him by name will triumph. The farther we get away from the European hearth fire the farther we get away from that essential truth. Stay close to that hearth fire and all will be well.

(1) Nothing will be done in Paris, London, or any other white European city to prevent the type of massacre that just took place in Paris. The people slain in Paris were sacrificed on the altars of multiculturalism and democracy. The blood red tide can only be halted by people committed to one race and one faith. The French President called the Paris massacre an act of war. Indeed it is. Then, Mr. President, act like you are in a war. Remove every single Moslem from France. The murderers are not bad Moslems, they are the ‘good’ Moslems; they practice their faith. I recently read of a small college that called their sport team “The Crusaders.” The President of the college decided it was time to get rid of such a violent image; it was not multi-cultural.

Enough said? If you jettison your white Christian past, the heathens will jettison you.

The Coming Pedophile Rape Epidemic

via Counter-Currents

From the (Saatchi) collection
I first drafted this essay back in June of 2012 after reading an article on CNN by a Jewish homosexual named James Cantor entitled “Do Pedophiles Deserve Sympathy?” In it, Cantor argues that pedophiles should not be morally condemned as people who fail to do the right thing, but pitied as people who are born with abnormal brains.

Pedophilia is not, however, simply a sexual preference, just one more kinky thing that consenting adults might do behind closed doors. Pedophiles by definition are not attracted to adults, and non-adults by definition cannot consent to sex. Therefore, pedophilia is by its nature a desire to rape, and rape is a crime.

Of course Cantor points out that being inclined toward pedophilia is not the same thing as actually molesting children, which is true. So trying to set aside the emotional revulsion and moral stigma attached to pedophilia, and instead looking at it as a mental illness, is not necessarily a bad thing. Indeed, it might help us find treatments for pedophilia, which might actually save children from being raped. It all sounds so sweetly reasonable. And in a well-ordered society, it might actually be a humane and workable policy.

But then a cold chill of horror went through me when I realized that, on the contrary, Cantor was actually laying the groundwork for a pedophile rape epidemic. Sympathy for pedophiles will lead to an epidemic of child rape merely by becoming a politically correct liberal cause. All that is required for an epidemic of rape is for a particularly rape-prone class of people to become a protected politically correct victim group. And pedophiles are by their nature rape-prone. For once the liberal mind decides that a particular cause is morally imperative, it is willing to evade reality, to lie, and to defame, censor, and even persecute truth tellers when confronted with the negative consequences of their policies.

I never finished the first draft, however, because the argument became complicated. Racial egalitarianism is the great moral crusade in modern America. And its consequences are a catastrophe that beggars imagination when one begins to add up the enormous increase in crime and social alienation, the destruction of great cities, the collapse of education, and the sheer amount of lying, corruption, and hypocrisy required to maintain the fiction of racial equality.

Political correctness is nothing more than lying and injustice. The basic lie is that people are equal, and the injustice follows from the lie: false excuses for the guilty, false blame upon the innocent, penalizing those who did nothing to compensate those who suffered nothing, etc. But it does not stop with mere rent-seeking. For political correctness demands that whites accept predatory non-whites into their societies and then covers up the inevitable consequences: tension, hatred, and violence, in which whites are disproportionately the victims. When liberals lie, people die.

But my argument was specifically about rape. I needed a historical example of a rape epidemic caused and protected by liberal political correctness. Of course we know that the amount of interracial rape, specifically black men raping white women, has gone up considerably over the last 100 years, from the time when such a crime would often trigger the swift and deadly deterrent of a lynch mob and when the only people who had any sympathy for black rapists were Communists trying to stir the pot — to the present day when blacks mingle freely with whites, when white girls are programmed to suppress their feelings of caution around black men lest they seem “racist,” and in which the media works to conceal black crime and describes hulking black thugs and rapists as “gentle giants,” lest people start thinking that integration is a mistake.

Raping white women has not been legalized. But it has been massively enabled nonetheless, simply because blacks are a politically correct protected group. But statistics supporting this argument are hard to come by. In 2007, Laurence Auster cited some shocking 2005 statistics about the massive disparity of black-on-white and white-on-black rapes and sexual assaults. But I could find no statistics to illustrate rape levels before and after desegregation. So I set the draft aside and went on to other things.

Then, much to my horror, an eloquent proof of my thesis that political correctness leads to mass rape appeared just last year: Rotherham, a town of 250,000 in Sheffield in which 1,400 English girls were raped, prostituted, and otherwise sexually exploited during a 16-year period between 1997 and 2013. The victims were mostly white. The perpetrators were mostly Pakistani.

Of course the police were informed of these crimes, but parents who objected to the rape of their daughters were treated as potential racists. Reports on the rape epidemic in 2002, 2003, and 2006 were suppressed by the local police and government, who judged that it was better that English girls continue to be raped by non-whites than the English to feel fear and hatred toward outsiders.

When the story went public in 2014, what happened? Did the streets of Rotherham run with “rivers of blood” as Englishmen avenged their daughters and punished gangs of rapists and the police and bureaucrats who covered up and enabled their crimes? Of course not. Some of the criminals have been punished, but none of the police and bureaucrats have been arrested.

Furthermore, since the same causes give rise to the same effects, there is nothing unique about Rotherham. Thus wherever Pakistani men have access to English girls, we have to conclude that systematic rape and sexual abuse are taking place. This is, in short, a national crisis. There are many more than 1,400 victims. And the crimes will continue until their racial, religious, and cultural roots are address rather than obscured and evaded.

From start to finish England’s Muslim pedophile rape epidemic is the product of liberal political correctness. Pakistanis are in Europe because of multiculturalism; they mix freely with the local population because of multiculturalism; the locals were taught not to fear and shun them lest they commit the sin of “racism”; and when the pattern of rape first emerged, it would have been widely publicized and ruthlessly suppressed were it not for the overriding PC imperative of white race replacement.

Pedophile rape was not made legal in England. All that was required for a pedophile rape epidemic is for the rape-prone Paki population to become a politically-correct victim group. Then a networks of liars, excuse-makers, and crime concealers embedded in the press, academia, and bureaucracy sprang into action. Liberals lie, and your children are raped. Then they lie to cover it up, and still more children are raped.

And now the same evil bastards are at work trying to make pedophiles into a PC protected group. In the last couple of years, there has been a flurry of articles in the American press, the message of which is summed up in the title of Margot (((Kaplan’s))) New York Times article, “Pedophilia: A Disorder, not a Crime.”, however, has become the flagship publication for pedophile advocacy. (Evidently, journalists fear no blow-back from whites. Only Muslims pull a Charlie Hebdo.)

But the same causes produce the same effects. The Left is now extending its protection from Pakistani pedophiles to the whole pedophile population. Not every town has Pakis, but every town has pedophiles. Thus the movement to make pedophiles the objects of PC pity will make every town a Rotherham.

Why the Migrant Invasion of Europe? Truth Unveils Treason by European Leaders to Genocide White People

via Renegade Tribune

Greetings to the readers who desire to know why Europe is under duress of invasion by the foreign peoples that seek to sack, ravish, pillage and plunder the cities, towns and villages.

To discover the truth of why and how, look up the name of the late elitist political organizer and Europhobic philosopher Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi. He authored the obscure manifesto book Practical Idealism (original title is “Praktischer Idealismus“), which details his desired plan to destroy Europe by engineered and induced dissolution of the European White race. This serves as the pathway to fulfill the Oded Yinon (Greater Israel) Plan. This man is the founding father of a precursor to the European Union, the International Pan-European Movement.


He is the namesake of the Coundenhove-Kalergi European prize awarded every two years, reserved for the elite group of leaders and influence peddlers instrumental in the support of and for the European Union as the unilateral and potentially extralegal supreme authority overseeing Europe with the member states that willingly extinguished their sovereignties for myriad reasons, including monetary, economic and political leadership.

merkel__angela-europa_prize_6-21-12One of the recipients of the Coundenhove-Kalergi European prize is Angela Merkel (née Kapner). By the virtue of this award reception, Chancellor Merkel implicitly or explicitly endorses the secretive and obfuscated genocidal plan—as outlined in the anti-White Europa subversive’s book Practical Idealism—to decimate the white peoples of Europe through mongrelization, displacement by force, violence and disenfranchisement, relegating them to serfdom.

This new serfdom will be overseen by the designated “lords” serving the powerful rulers as the democratic powers are usurped to form the tyranny by the minority rule, which must rely on the enormous mass of the inferior and hatefully vengeful subpar I.Q. colored peoples. They are often overtaken by the viral fever of religious fanaticism of Islam as the counter-Crusade after some failed conquests of Europe centuries ago (such as the humiliating defeat at the Battle of Vienna in 1683 that stymied Moslem invasion for centuries until now)—recollecting the warlike barbarians of the Mongrels and the Huns—as the battering ram of the White people to uproot their homes and livelihoods, confiscate the children for sanctioned rape and abuse by indoctrination towards self-hatred, rape and sexually exploit White women and children by forced intermixing and enslavement, and batter and murder White male for lark and resistance—even demolish the slight remnant of the ethnic-cultural pride.

maxresdefault-1Of course, Merkel is a traitor of the highest order to the Federal Republic of Germany, which disgraces Western Europe with the violent, demanding and unassimilable subhuman abomination enabled by Comrade Merkel. But Merkel is one of the innumerable treasonous politicians, financiers, economists, organizers, government officers and other moneyed circle of elites, and all of them are in deference—whether cowardly acquiescent or totally servile—to the real reason for the engineered ruination of Europe and eventually North America and the candid world. The true, veritable, and geopolitically and internationally extant reason is Jewish Supremacy.

The purpose of the permissible illegal migrant invasion of Europe is to genocide and democide the native European peoples and their phenotype (genetic code for various ethnicities that form light skin pigmentation, blue eyes, blonde hair, attractive features, etc) with enforced miscegenation by rape and pressure, sanctioned massacre and violence and modes of oppression to control the indigenous white peoples by the rule of terror and totalitarianism to eventually abolish the entire White European race (or at least Western portion).

This is in accordance with Babylonian Talmud Zionist Jew and Illuminati plan, fomented by the trillionaire (with a T) central banking cartel, overseen by the all-seeing top of the pyramid—the banker, financier and global affairs political mover the Rothschild dynasty.

This dynasty’s secret control of the developing and civilized world is buttressed by the network of the various powerful and wealthy persons and groups, such as the United Nations (originated as Comintern [Communist Internationalism] to absorb and replace the League of Nations), George Soro’s Open Society Foundations, The Bilderberg Group, Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission (David Rockefeller), Club of Rome, The Committee of 300, Institute for Jewish Policy Research, Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Chatham House (Royal Institute for International Affairs), Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, the now-defunct Jerusalem-based Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (author of the 1996 Israeli foreign policy manifesto “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” that preceded 9/11 with invasions that led to displacement and massive outmigration as the direct result of U.S.-Israel foreign policy), and now-defunct Project for the New American Century (one of the main instigators of the September 11 inside job coordinated and executed by the Mossad with the enabling traitors within the shadow government; the organization is now  re-established as “Foreign Policy Initiative” with the same criminal cabal members that only serve Israel and Jewish interests in disguise). They all seek to fulfill the agenda of the Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan by enforcing the deliberate and violent genocide of White Europa, which facilitates the creation of Greater Israel (Oded Yinon Plan), with all Jews of the world called to migrate to the expanded Jewish homeland following the persecution by angry host populaces of the collapsing once-wealthy and once-stable nations now overwhelmed by the undesirable non-White races.

This is why the Judean tribe, with a significant percentage possibly of Ashkenazi Khazar descent and not really Israelite by blood, is called the nation-wrecker. They are carrying out the agenda to destroy the diversity of the world in order to mongrelize the races to rule over from Greater Israel, their seat of unilateral totalitarian hegemony, with the abolishment of the White race as one of the major goals.

The Jews continue to practice activities such as subversion and treason, usury and fraud, ritual murder, blasphemy, sexual immoralities and treachery to honor their “God”, who many would identify as being “Satanic”. Jews, along with their shabbot goy and sayanim traitors, serve as designated agents to carry out the plan of Hell on Earth, featuring wholesale genocides and destruction.

GreaterIsraelOdenYinonMeme1At the center of the plan is the conquest of Europe, which also serves to give birth to the expansion of Greater Israel’s boundaries. It has been in progress since Germany was “destroyed” with the death of Hitler and violence against the Germans (see the book and the documentary film “Hellstorm“) to follow with the artificial creation of the State of Israel in 1948.

Jews tried to accelerate the goals of the Oded Yinon plan with the attacks in the incident called Lavon Affair, 60’s border wars and USS Liberty attack, etc. Their plans have not been entirely successful. 9/11 served as the catalyst for this plan as the second stage (1st stage was establishing Israel state as the exclusively ethnocentric Jewish nation) of their mission.

The New World Order is the final stage of the mission, shared by the traitors that work for the Jew, to enact global Communism. Communism springs from Judaism through Marxism and similar ideological precedents such as the French Revolution (Communist-egalitarian Jacobin faction that celebrated the slaughter of the French white colonial people by the revolting Negro slave in St. Domingo, now known as Haiti).

Europe, America and majority white nations, now transitioning to the minority status by deliberate design with regressive laws drafted and advocated by Jews, will either fight back or perish.

Obviously, Jews and their useful idiots (i.e. communists, misandric feminists and anti-fascist/anarchist agitator factions) want white countries to flounder and collapse as some sort of atavistic hatred and revenge in envisaging the divide-and-conquer strategy to balkanize the communities, regions, states and nations for exploitation and control by political empowerment of Europhobic and anti-nationalist/patriotic antagonists.

The fate is left up to the white peoples, who may already be brainwashed to subservience status by Cultural Marxism, which is another insidious force developed by the elite group of intellectual German Jew subversives (Frankfurt School and then Columbia University), weakening the secretly despised populace of White bloodline, whose progeny and posterity are subjugated to relentless and vicious ethnomasochistic propaganda, with conflict, disharmony, irreligiosity, apathy, degeneracy, guilt and complacency leading to race suicide.

The express and explicit purpose of Cultural Marxist agenda, designed and implemented through social engineering (called predictive programming), is to corrode the spiritual, just, moral, unified and homogeneous racial and ethnic cohesion towards the partial or complete collapse of the Western Civilization to benefit the conspiring hegemonic rulers served by the equally depraved traitors. They mandate that White race (self-) destruction be achieved through the outcome of the induced advent of enforced political correctness, rigid censorship of truth and free thought, oppositional feminism, crass materialism, irrational egalitarianism, debased and nihilistic libertinism and forced integration of non-white Third World immigration.

This mandate of modified behaviors through self-loathing and propaganda culminate in the fractured same-race relations amid social, political, spiritual and economic discordance that inevitably lead to the below-level population replacement through the collapsing birthrate of the untainted race towards the program of wholesale race annihilation masterminded by Jewish Supremacists and their like-minded traitorous allies.

europe awakeThe conspirators have a selfish and evil agreement to meddle in European, American and global affairs through the treasonous think tanks and covertly controlled (shadow) governments, hiding behind the facade of republicanism and democracy to inflict the sadistic pain of oppression and violence on the confounded and deceived white populace. They impose retrogressive, nefarious and obscene policies as the irrevocable law designed to demoralize, divide, degrade, disfranchise, disempower and destroy the targeted race, caring for nothing but the consolidation of power, wealth, prestige and self-preservation at the expense of the dying and balkanized nations of White Europeans.

The final solution for the awakened white peoples of the stricken host nations is to expel almost ALL Jews from Europe as the first step to stopping the insane plan of Coudenhove-Kalergi, complimenting the Oded Yinon plan towards the globalists’ plan to establish New World Order, which serves no one but the obscenely wealthier and power-mad oligarchy with their evil ‘God’ as the principal guide.

Bad Faith: Islam, Liberalism, and the Inauthentic French State

via Alternative Right

In the wake of the Friday the 13th terrorist attacks in Paris by Jihadist Muslims, the details of which are still emerging, I want to avoid writing another "I told you so" response, swathed in sentimental solidarity with the French victims, or deal with obvious "fall out" talking points, like Mossad's possible involvement, the question of restricting civil liberties or allowing citizens to carry guns, possible military responses in the Middle East, the effect on French Jews considering aliyah (emigration to Israel), the effect on the electoral fortunes of the Front National, and so on.

Instead I want to reflect on what the city means as a symbol, and consider how some very ‘Parisian’ currents of thought have led innocents directly to this slaughterhouse.

Now, a bit about the title of this essay. In French "Bad Faith" is mauvaise foi, an expression which is more than capable of serving as a double or even triple entendre. It refers to both the "bad faiths" of Islam, the primary religion of French immigrants, and of Liberalism, the poisonous secular faith of France and the West in general. But mauvaise foi also has an additional existentialist sense, the one employed by Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir to describe a situation in which societal pressures cause a person or state to act 'inauthentically.' This idea of us 'acting inauthentically' was recently expressed by Richard Spencer in his adeptly titled NPI conference speech, "Becoming Who We Are."

Panic attack: the boulevard of broken dreams.
For us, the whole of the post-WWII world is about instilling inauthentic patterns of communication between peoples and groups. Political correctness is one outward manifestation of such a system of control, which produces inward censuring of speech and action. Non-European immigration and integration, that is, the pushing together of divergent races, is a physical aspect of inauthenticity as it produces inorganic communities.

As Alain de Benoit writes:
"Ancient democracy was based on the idea of organic community; modern democracy, as an heir to Christianity and the philosophy of the Enlightenment, on the individual. The meaning of the words ‘city,’ ‘people,’ ‘nation,’ and ‘liberty’ radically changes from one model to another."
Benoist, The Problem of Democracy, p.28.
De Benoist is not entirely correct in his overarching assessment of Christianity. Protestantism is individualistically inclined, not Catholicism. The Enlightenment and the Liberalism that derived from Protestantism represented a break with Catholic social and political organization. Another point of reference for the opposing universalisms of Liberalism and Islam is Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations thesis, which will no doubt become an increasingly used tool of semi-superficial analysis of the recent happenings.

Napoleon's exotic mameluke bodyguard.
For the English, the presence of heterodox elements within their social order has always been justified in utilitarian terms: e.g. the Jews were beneficial to economic growth, Blacks from the Caribbean were needed for labour. For the French, however, the justification for "the Other" has long been a moralizing one: i.e. Jews and Muslims may become Frenchmen and adopt the universal Enlightenment values of liberty, equality and fraternity.

It is this moralizing tendency – “neither Jew nor Gentile, all are one in égalité” – by which the French attempted, via a  moral crusade, to turn "the Other" into an image of themselves, without realizing that in the exchange they themselves would be changed by groups who rejected their open society principles – praise be to Allah!

 France and "the Other"

Existentialism was extremely concerned with the notion of "the Other." This stemmed from Enlightenment thinking, which proceeded from the individual to those beyond the self, rather than conceptualizing the subject as part of a collective. In Liberalism there was "self" and "other," and mutual interests, which could be facilitated through the market, with nothing more existing outside this rationalized exchange of common interest, except épater la bourgeoisie or épater.

Sartre criticized the modern mass of "alienated humanity" with his concept of seriality:
"the series is a gathering of men in which every man is alone because he is interchangeable with every other man."[1]
Another way he viewed it was as a "unity based upon separation," not just separation from each other, but an internal separation in which one is alienated from one’s own being. Alain Badiou, the Marxist philosopher, used this concept in for his formulation aimed at promoting class consciousness:
"How can men who have been passively brought together in their impotence and separation by large social collectives suddenly call into being an active unity in which they recognize one another? It is worth noting that Sartre borrowing an expression from Andre Malraux, calls this event an apocalypse. The apocalypse means that the series dissolves into a fused group." 
Actually Malraux’s "apocalypse" is rooted in real historical revolution, coming from his lyric poem L’Espoir (Hope), about the Spanish Civil War, where he celebrated the men who fought to "organize the apocalypse" on the left-wing or Republican side.

This apocalyptic inference from the Left was brought into French intellectual discourse by the expat Spanish novelist, Juan Goytisolo, a critic of Franco, through his novel Landscapes after the Battle and his essay Paris, Capital of the Twenty-first Century? The Situationist Guy Debord, drew on Goytisolo for his own apocalyptic left-wing vision:
"the destruction of the European city, at least in symbolic terms, is a necessary prelude to the creation of a new society. This is why and how the prevailing atmosphere of Landscapes after the Battle moves from something like a comic apocalypse to something like the atmosphere after a terrorist attack…. Goytisolo has consistently described his primary literary motif as that of ‘betrayal’… which applies to his political convictions as well as his aesthetic method." [2]
In this passage we see the bacillus of Europe – its BETRAYAL! Not the betrayal by the Jihadists, who have not betrayed our trust so much as taken advantage of our complacency and the Left's need for an agent for their own treachery. Nor do we see a betrayal by the Jews, who are simply loyal to their own particularism and their strategies for maintaining their privileged positions. No, instead what we see here is the betrayal of Europe to these groups by Europeans!

In his book The Flaneur: A Stroll Through the Paradoxes of Paris, Edmund White an American expat homosexual details this destructive process:
"Goytisolo wrote of the slow de-Europeanization of the capital...He goes on to assert that the only way France can continue to function as a beacon of civilization, as anything more than a custodian of its great heritage, is by embracing the international, hybridized culture that is already thriving within the city limits." (p.54)
White explained that at the time he was writing about, the 1980s, Paris had "become a cultural backwater" and that some gay friends he was staying with in May 1981 in the Arab quarter, had chosen that locale because "it was affordable but also because the location appealed to their progressive politics." This helps to explain Michel Foucault and Jean Genet's campaigning for the "rights" of Arab immigrants in 1971.

One-way love for Arabs, Michel Foucault.
From this it becomes clear that France, in its effete homosexual decadence, and dominated by the rise of the New Left with it obscurantist leanings and Jacobin politics of apocalypse and betrayal, has been the essential agent of its own atrocities.

Betrayal runs through French history, like a motif in a bad novel. In 1962 Charles de Gaulle betrayed the French people and the electorate by pulling out of Algeria in the face of international pressure and the stresses of an entirely winnable war. Over a million pied-noir colonists, left for France, and thousands were left stranded and slaughtered as a result.

At about the same time, a few million Arabs were allowed to immigrate into France. When an economic downturn occurred and Le Pen’s Front National ran on a platform of "France for the French" and only gained 15% of the national vote, this revealed the new terms of the arrangement – ethno-nationalism for "the Other," but multiculturalism and ethno-masochism for us.

Is there any wonder why we see such a phenomenon as European youths joining ISIS, when all Western Civilization offers them is the hollow shell of the "open society" – the castrated shopping mall of consumer identity?

It was the French Revolutionary Third Estate that decided Sephardic Jews could become full citizens, but not Ashkenazi – they were included two years later. Following the Revolution, Paris henceforth became a bastion of "liberty, equality, and fraternity," a place in which "justice reigns," in which both innocent ‘Dreyfus’ Jews and guilty ‘Schwartzbard’ Jews could hope for preference under the law.

Aussie Jihadist
Napoleon went through Europe, acknowledged as the modern Cyrus, smashing the ghetto walls to bits and calling forth a Grand Sanhedrin with twelve questions for the Jewish elders in order to bring them into line with the Enlightenment values of individualism, anti-tribalism, and the Christian value of anti-usury.

The position of most post-Enlightenment thinkers, including Karl Marx, fifty years later, was that Jews could assimilate only by renouncing their Judaism. Of course, we know this did not happen, we know that the universalism of the revolutionary values was not heeded by this particularistic people, nor were the conditions against usury.

We know that after their ‘liberation,’ Jews came to dominate France economically: The Rothschilds, the Meniers, the Cernuschis, the Camondos, the Pereires, the Foulds, the Cahen d’Anvers, the Dreyfusard. All these maintained close business and financial ties, intermarrying and becoming the new Aristocracy of the Bourgeoisie Revolution, floating loans to the French government for its lost wars against the English and the Prussians.

We know that today there are countless Jewish organizations in France and that Jewish solidarity and ethnic networking has never dissipated. 40% of French Jews are officially affiliated to a synagogue or to a Jewish organization – so much for universalism swallowed by the rest of France!

False France

This is the France that defends the tasteless antagonizing of Charlie Hebdo as "humorous" and "an expression of free speech," while censoring a real comedian Dieudonne because the target of his comedy is Jews, rather than Muslims.

This is the France that ignored Dominique Venner, a true patriot, who killed himself in Notre Dame in protest against this wave of massive non-European immigration that would create jihad on the streets of Paris! (Vindicated!) The sordid media, of course, distorted his suicide as a protest against gay marriage.

This France is the place, where nearly 40% of the people and all the intellectuals voted Communist in the 1960s, the scene of Situationist student revolts, with chants of "Marx, Mao, Marcuse" that thankfully dissolved into the politics of intellectual obscurantism and the intellectualist drivelings of Lacan, Derrida and Baudrillard.

1968, before France insourced its anarchy from the Third World.
The same "Liberal," "tolerant" France that rolls out the red carpet to terrorists is the same creature that butchered not only members of the defeated Vichy Government, the so-called ‘collaborators,’ but also right-wing intellectuals such as Robert Braillach.

As Rémi Tremblay pointed out in these very pages:
"Thousands of French (estimates greatly vary; de Gaulle talks about 11,000 French Canadian historian Robert Rumilly 80,000, Robert Aron between 30,000 and 40,000) were murdered and executed while many were imprisoned in concentration camps in a purge similar to the one that followed the French Revolution of 1789."
In response to women’s participation during la Résistance, de Gaulle, granted them the right to vote,. According to Wayne Northcutt and Jeffra Flaitz's Women, Politics and the French Socialist Government, this led to an electoral shift towards the Left:
"Since their formal enfranchisement in 1944, the female electorate of France approximately 53 per cent of the voting population – has manifested a gradual shift to the left."
It was also French women who had been the first white women to cross the colour bar with African Americans during and after WWI and French ‘colour-blindness’ that helped fill the American Negro’s head with ideas that aspired outside his station, and which he then brought back to America.

Quite simply, it was the French Revolution and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen that set the modern tone for blind toleration and ethno-masochism, and which fired the ardour of the mutinous Haitians who sang La Marseillaise, as if it were one of their own chants to the Napoleonic troops sent to quell their race-based rebellion.

Paris's darling: Josephine Baker
The France that suffered the outrage of November the 13th is also the abode of extreme capitalism and l’air du temps, with its fixation on "the Other." It was in Paris that the fetishization of the Negro first began to hold sway, with le jazz hot and Josephine Baker, amongst many others, bringing, in the words of Edmund White, “a whiff of jungle air and an elemental strength and beauty to the tired showplace of Western Civilization.” 

This is the France that has prosecuted Robert Faurisson for questioning aspects of the Holocaust and made intellectual inquiry into an historical event a criminal offense.

This is the France which was the first country to elect a Jewish head of State, Leon Blum in 1936. Blum also happened to be a "non-Zionist" member of the World Zionist Organization.

Count Stanislaus de Clermont-Tonnerre wisely argued:
"We must refuse everything to the Jews as a nation and accord everything to Jews as individuals... they should not be allowed to form in the state either a political body or an order. They must be citizens individually."
But neither Jews nor Muslims operate in this "enlightened" way, and nor should we!

The problem is, of course, that France is experiencing a crisis of confidence in itself; its identity has been rocked by Revolutionary ideals from over two hundred years ago, leaving it with petty universalisms and moral platitudes. In times like these one should remember the Vichy government’s endorsement of Jean Giono’s "retour a la terre" (return to the soil), by which he hoped that France would rediscover "its pure and true face."[3] Let’s hope the apocalypse that is to come leaves enough of France for this vision to be realized.

[1] Badiou, Alain. Pocket Pantheon: Figures of Postwar Philosophy. London New York: Verso, 2009. Page 21.
[2] Hussey, Andrew. Paris Underground: Juan Goytisolo and the ‘Situationist’ City. Urban Space and Cityscapes: Perspectives from Modern and Contemporary Culture, Ed. Christoph Lindner. Routledge, New York, 2006, p. 86.
[3] Golsan, Richard J. Myths of Apocalypse and Renewal: Jean Giono and "Literary" Collaboration Vol. 27, No. 3, Issue 87: Special Issue: The Occupation pp. 17-35 Published by: University of Wisconsin Press, 1998. 26.