Feb 17, 2016

The Curious Case of Benjamin Carson: The Latest Icon for White-Guilt Cuckservatives

via Faith & Heritage

Did another skinhead manage to knock some sense into Geraldo Rivera’s head via a chair this past summer? A few months ago the liberal gadfly made an uncharacteristically prescient observation on the reasons behind the surging poll numbers of Dr. Ben Carson:
I’m reminded of David Dinkins, the first black mayor of New York City who, when people were polled, was killing Rudy Giuliani in their second matchup. And then, when Election Day came, it came, obviously, Giuliani beat Dinkins…a lot of Republicans polled by Monmouth are giving the politically correct answer.1
Of course, since this quote was posted on the cuckservative ‘Freedom Outpost’ site, the predictable reaction was ineffectual outrage: ‘Wow’, ‘Um, what?’, and…wait for it…’liberals are more racist than conservatives.’2 Seems to me we’ve heard this song and dance before, and it sure didn’t rate a 10 on American Bandstand then, either.

Regular readers of Faith & Heritage know this already, but for the uninitiated let me make it abundantly clear: Ben Carson is an atrocious candidate. From his unwavering fidelity towards Israel to his unwavering fidelity towards vaccines to his unwavering fidelity towards databases, he has proven himself to be no ally of Christians. Likewise, for a black Republican president to immediately succeed a mulatto Democratic president – and, doubtless, guarantee himself a full two terms as seems to be de rigueur for a chief executive from either party anymore – brings to mind the curse from God towards His rebellious and reprobate people: ‘The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low. He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail.’ (Deut. 28:43-44)

You can’t tell a white guilter this, though – he wants his affirmative action despot, and by cracky, he aims to get him by hook or by crook! A more pertinent issue would be to examine the means whereby Carson is being buffeted into yet another ethnic Trojan Horse, as well as how successful these means have proven to be. Let us proceed in doing so.


It’s a tried and true maxim but, should an especially bright five-year-old happen to come across this article, it bears repeating: in the voting booth, policy doesn’t matter a tinker’s damn. Only two kinds of people show up to vote: partisans and undecideds. Partisans will vote for a fencepost providing it is branded with the proper ‘R’ or ‘D’ moniker. Undecideds, being more in thrall to the democratic process than they are with actually doing something productive that evening, are not wonkish by nature. They vote with their ‘heart’, not with their ‘head’, and so what they ‘feel’ about two competing candidates thus becomes crucially important. Strategists in both parties understand this very, very well. Hence, their preoccupation with ensuring that a candidate be ‘relatable’ to as broad a spectrum of voters as possible.

Of course, what constitutes relatability has changed drastically over the years. Dwight Eisenhower’s presidency was considered a resounding success electorally, resulting in a then-very rare second term for a Republican president. Ike’s military record was considered no small factor in this victory. (Displaced Germans languishing in various sections of the Comintern weren’t a reliable voting bloc.) Over the next forty years, an unofficial cardinal law of politics was thus established: any serious presidential candidate had to have some sort of World War II service on his resume. It hardly mattered if such service was limited to Lyndon Johnson’s flying one observer mission over New Guinea (for which he won an undeserved Silver Star) or Ronald Reagan’s processing newsreel footage Stateside (he would later claim to have been present at the liberation of many concentration camps to Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Shamir). The so-called ‘Greatest Generation’ had been in uniform and they wanted their tyrants to have done the same.

Then in 1992 an amazing thing happened. William Jefferson Clinton, an avowed draft-dodger whose questionable moral character was even then well-known, defeated WWII vet George Herbert Walker Bush to capture the White House. Bush’s war record has since been proven to be every bit as fraudulent as LBJ’s was, but this was not as well-documented at the time: thus, this new situation was considered quite a shocking development by the conservative pundits of that era. Rationalizing that economic conditions had consigned Bush to electoral Valhalla, many of these same pundits eagerly awaited 1996, convinced that Clinton’s philandering, involvement in scandals from Vince Foster’s ‘suicide’ to Whitewater, and overbearing activist First Lady all marked him as a one-term wonder. Came the year, and Clinton managed to resoundingly thump Bob Dole, the last WWII vet ever to garner either party’s nomination. Clearly, things were changing. Just what was it about Billy, anyway?

Simple. Changing demographics. The so-called ‘Greatest Generation’ wasn’t the greatest political force in America anymore: their baby boomer kids and the first wave of their Generation X grandkids were, and they couldn’t care less if someone ever donned fatigues and went off to fight the good fight for post-Christian cosmopolitanism. They wanted to be led by someone more ‘real’, more ‘attuned’, someone who really and truly could ‘feel their pain’ and offer them metaphorical hugs of solidarity in lieu of God-ordained liberties. Clinton’s amorality was no detriment to this process: far from it. His gross turpitude was seen as mere ‘imperfections’ from a soul-sick populace. They alternately bequeathed pagan forgiveness upon his head with platitudes of ‘There but for the grace of my personal belief system go I’ and envied him the wantonness he was able to imbibe in with the cloak of power shielding him from all consequences except the most innocuous impeachment imaginable. He was seen as the first ‘human’ president, and that backhandedly benevolent title is still bestowed upon him to this day, from Republicans as well as Democrats.

A new relatability paradigm was thus born – the Sinner as Saint, or Mr. Prodigal Goes to Washington. Why not don the dirty laundry the media digs up on you and bewail your ‘human failings’ with crocodile tears, and reap the harvest of votes thereof? The efficacy of this strategy was again proven in the weeks before the 2000 election. A story broke that GOP candidate George W. Bush had been arrested for drunk driving in 1976. This, combined with rumors that Bush had used his daddy’s patronage to avoid overseas duty during Vietnam and had also had a cocaine problem in the past, gave Democrats hope that the presidency would remain in their hands. Instead, a couple of thousand recounts and court challenges later, the Bush Dynasty became an accomplished fact of American political history. How much Bush’s treacly confession and faux atonement contributed to his victory is impossible to say. Still, it is undeniable that his chief advisor Karl Rove milked every last drop out of the subsequent and equally treacly endorsement bestowed upon the Bush campaign by virtually every evangelical, mainstream Reformed, and Tradcat association in the country. And if further proof were needed that military service was a dead electoral asset, three Vietnam vets in a row – Gore, Kerry, and McCain – all failed to win the top spot. It seems extremely unlikely that any vet of that war will ever make it to the White House.

In 2008, Barack Obama presented a new relatability dynamic, one geared especially for the last vestiges of Gen Xers and the first wave of Millennials. Here was the personification of that hallowed mantra of early twentieth-century Unitarians: the Great American Dream. A mixed-race kid from a broken home raised by Communist grandparents overcomes an early life of thuggery and drug abuse to obtain a law degree, become a community organizer in Chicago and, with the help of such kind-hearted and altruistic friends as the Chicago Daleys, George Soros, Ted Kennedy, and bomb-throwing Weather Underground radicals like Bill Ayres, wins election to the Senate and then, a mere four years later, to the presidency. (His campaign literature downplayed the ‘friends’ part.) No doubt his heartwarming tale inspired the terminally vapid, but his real asset was his race. What self-respecting Millennial, weaned on a junk culture of television miscegenation and online Top Ten Lists and Phun Phacts and burning with a desire to make war peace and freedom slavery via ‘social justice’, wouldn’t want to get on the bandwagon to elect The First African-American President? None of them, and they voted for the Kenyan usurper in droves on two separate occasions. Republicans, seeing the writing on the wall the first time, were desperate for a politically correct gamut of their own. They tried running Sarah Palin, their first-ever woman on a ticket, with their Old White Guy McCain, but to no avail.

They did learn a valuable lesson, though: the new relatability game has little to do with anything personable. Rather, following the cultural Marxist playbook, the new generation of whites (still the most powerful and reliable voting bloc) is concerned entirely with societal milestones (millstones?). They want to elect the ‘first’ one of everything. The Democrats already have the first black president under their belt, and given the all-but-certain coronation of Hillary in 2016, will have the first female candidate of a major party as well. Good thing Obama is only a half-breed though. A fully black candidate is kind of a second-tier milestone now, but a milestone nevertheless. Hence, many in the GOP establishment have been scrambling desperately to find just such a candidate for the past two election cycles. They failed with Herman Cain in 2012, but Ben Carson this time around just might suffice for many of them – particularly if they could also get Marco Rubio in the VP slot and thus lay claim to having the first Hispanic on a major ticket as well. After that, the last major milestone will be the first ever LGBTQBNSWIX8675309 candidate – not this election cycle, but wait until 2020. That’s assuming there will be another election, of which I have my doubts.


Okay. The Republicans have their black. Next step: gussying him up to appeal to culturally suicidal white voters. Who is this guy, and how can we turn his traits into advantages?

Well, he certainly isn’t an unknown quantity. His is a modern-day Jackie Robinson story, to hear his spin doctors tell it. Born in Detroit in 1951 to a young illiterate mother and a Baptist preacher (and bigamist3) father who abandoned the family, Carson overcame a childhood of great want and battled racial prejudice every day of his life to obtain a medical degree in neurosurgery. Despite the almost insurmountable walls of hatred that surrounded every hospital in America, he was able to hone his skills and in 1985, found himself director of pediatric neurosurgery at John Hopkins – the youngest in the country at that time.4 In 1987, battling fierce opposition from the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazi skinheads, and homegrown militias, Carson would separate the conjoined Binder twins of Germany5 and would establish that as a specialty, performing several similar operations until his retirement. The purveyors of apartheid and Jim Crow on high were unable to prevent the accolades from flowing into his lap – self-aggrandizing bestsellers, write-ups in Time, profiles on CNN, NAACP honors, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, even a cable television movie based on his autobiography Gifted Hands. And if you think the racial component of this bio is exaggerated, it’s obvious you’ve never been a spin doctor.

Judeo-Churchian voters need not be concerned, either: Dr. Carson is a man of stalwart ‘faith’. Granted, that ‘faith’ is Seventh-Day Adventism, but that too can be turned to advantage. He can declare himself ‘The Heart-Healthy Candidate!’ on account of his vegetarianism. Likewise, his historical understanding of the Millerite Great Disappointment will lend him a certain stoicism when he is forced to sell Glacier National Park to China at a ‘reasonable’ rate. If those aren’t sufficient, who cares? Evangelicals (and their neo-Reformed partners in vacuity) are pathetically easy to please:
“I think a lot of evangelicals would say they would rather have a practicing Adventist than a nominal Presbyterian (Donald Trump) who doesn’t seem to have basic theological understanding about Christianity,” said Thomas Kidd, a professor of history and religion at Baylor University in Texas. “Even if he’s not an evangelical like us, he’s sort of a friendly fellow traveler in a way that Trump is not.”6
‘Practice’ makes perfect. Mitt Romney was a ‘practicing’ Mormon who ran away with the white evangelical vote in 2012. Rudy Giuliani, the initial GOP frontrunner in 2008, was considered an insufficiently practicing Catholic and lost the nomination. It matters little to the modern conservative pantheist what faith his candidate professes, so long as it is firmly held and non-Islamic. And given the ‘milestone’ mindset, why not throw ‘first-ever Adventist president’ out and see if there are any bites? Take that, upstart Jehovah’s Witnesses!

And what more could you possibly ask for in his demeanor? To cuckservative whites who have precious little real-world experience but a lot of nostalgic feeling for 1980’s television, who better to lead them down a guiltless trail than Bill Cosby as Cliff Huxtable? What’s that you say? He’s had some troubles? He certainly did, like the time Theo accidentally washed his car with Cliff’s favorite red sweater!!! That was sooooo funneeeee!!!!!! The point being that Carson’s non-confrontational, eyes-wide-shut facial expressions, reminiscent of Droopy in blackface, along with his soft-spoken voice and rolly-polly gait, are all deliberately tailored to appeal to timid whites. They, after all, are the same demographic that bought the Barack Obama commemorative plate because they honestly were inspired by his ‘confident smile and kind eyes’.

But playing Bennie the Pooh isn’t quite enough, either. After all, this same demographic thinks Django Unchained is a documentary. The African-American is supposed to be seething with pent-up rage over the hideous injustices heaped upon his noble head for centuries!! We don’t want to vote for some ‘Oreo’! We want the real deal! Someone who’s been beaten down time and time again by the Man, only to emerge blacker and meaner every time!!! That’s the Way of the Pimp, and you don’t get much more virulent than that!!!!

In the interests of having his cake and eating it too, Carson therefore concocted a childhood saga revolving around his uncontrollable fits of anger, redeemed only by his embracing Christ. The salient points are as follows:
At the core of his narrative of spiritual redemption are his acts of violence as an angry young man — stabbing, rock throwing, brick hurling and baseball bat beating — that preceded Carson’s sudden transformation into the composed figure who stands before voters today.
In his 1990 autobiography, “Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story,” Carson describes those acts as flowing from an uncontrollable “pathological temper.” The violent episodes he has detailed in his book, in public statements and in interviews, include punching a classmate in the face with his hand wrapped around a lock, leaving a bloody three-inch gash in the boy’s forehead; attempting to attack his own mother with a hammer following an argument over clothes; hurling a large rock at a boy, which broke the youth’s glasses and smashed his nose; and, finally, thrusting a knife at the belly of his friend with such force that the blade snapped when it luckily struck a belt buckle covered by the boy’s clothes.
“I was trying to kill somebody,” Carson said, describing the incident — which he has said occurred at age 14 in ninth grade — during a September forum at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco.7
In years past, such an admission would have been automatic grounds for electoral censure. Can you imagine anybody voting for Ronald Reagan if he had admitted that his youthful rap sheet included numerous cases of assault and even attempted murder? Is that someone to whom you would entrust the keys to the missile launch button? In 1972, Democratic VP candidate Thomas Eagleton’s admission to having merely been hospitalized for depression was considered a sufficient reason for George McGovern to unceremoniously drop him from the ticket.

These, however, are not years past. Such an admission of gross failure plays very well into the ‘I’m only human’ relatability factor which, if not the prevalent issue in the previous few elections, is far from dead. In addition, white evangelicals are at their core a voyeuristic lot. They will eagerly lap up the gory details of a sob story, provided said story winds up happily ever after with a ‘come to Jesus’ conclusion. Cynical? You bet. Real life almost always is.

This certainly could be a winning strategy, except for one teeny problem: increasingly, it appears none of this story is true. Numerous classmates of Carson’s have come forward to relate that his vaunted horrible temper is largely a fantasy – and certainly not volatile enough for him to have ever wrought violence. Conveniently, his mother, who would seem to be the most likely source to verify these claims, is said to be suffering from Alzheimer’s.8 His vaunted ‘street cred’ is vanishing faster than Detroit’s credit rating.

Perhaps this could be written off as sour grapes from resentful acquaintances if not for the fact that another gaping hole in his narrative has appeared: the alleged scholarship to West Point that he declined. Modern Republicans might be anxious to show solidarity with their black brethren, but certain ingrained habits die harder – military veneration in particular. Hence, the Carson campaign played up an apocryphal anecdote in Gifted Hands about how, after receiving accolades as the top ROTC student in Detroit – an honor akin to being named the top hip-hop mixmaster in Twin Falls, Idaho – Carson was invited to meet General William Westmoreland at a banquet…or something. (Given what a pivotal moment in his life this was, he is exceptionally sketchy on details.) At said banquet, Westmoreland was supposed to have made a remark that Carson was West Point material, which somehow got twisted into an offer of a scholarship in the young medico’s mind.9 Never mind that scholarships, as they are understood in the wider academic world, do not exist for West Point, or that to gain admittance a prospect must be nominated by a civilian authority such as a Congressman, Secretary, or director of an ROTC program.10 Doubtless Westmoreland was only on a stateside racial ‘building bridges’ mission, desperately hoping that by shaking a few black hands he could curtail black frag attacks on white officers in Vietnam. Try telling that to a narcissistic young black with delusions of grandeur, though.

These were two of the first major cracks to appear in the foundation of the Carson campaign, but they were far, far from being the only ones. Turns out that, once you get past the politically correct credentials, Carson isn’t much of a candidate. At all. Establishment or otherwise. Let us count the ways:

With his veracity increasingly being called into question, Carson’s reputation as a world-class neurosurgeon is also being seriously challenged. As mentioned previously, his major claim to fame involved the 1987 separation of the German Binder twins, conjoined at the head. The popular misconception is that the operation was an unqualified success, and Gifted Hands claimed it to be such. However, in the late 90s it was disclosed that both twins had sustained severe neurological damage in the course of the operation and seemed likely candidates for lifelong institutionalization.11 Nor is this the only anomaly in an otherwise stellar career. The website ‘Wall Street on Parade’ sums up his post-Binder feats in all their grim detail:
After the 1987 operation, Carson went on to perform at least four other surgeries on Siamese twins joined at the head. In 1994, female infants Nthabiseng and Mahlatse Makwaeba died – one during surgery and the other within hours following surgery. In 1997, Carson performed surgery on infant Siamese twins Joseph and Luka Banda in South Africa with both surviving and reported at that time to be doing well. However, at age five, CNN reported that the father of the Banda twins, David Banda, told the news outlet that “Luka’s grades are very good” but “Joseph’s development is slow.” There have been no detailed media reports on the Banda twins in the past decade that Wall Street on Parade could locate. The Banda twins would be approximately 18 years old now with their medical outcome seemingly of major interest to a wide swath of the medical community.
In 2003, Carson was one of the lead surgeons attempting to separate 29-year old Iranian Siamese twins Ladan and Laleh Bijani. Both women, who had achieved law degrees, died. There was angry reproach from a family member, as reported by the UK Guardian newspaper.
In 2004, Carson led a team attempting to separate infants Lea and Tabea Block. Tabea died within hours of surgery. . . .
Of the five sets of Siamese twins, or 10 individuals, which Carson surgically attempted to separate, five people died and two were institutionalized with serious neurological damage. According to the New York Times, those results are not any more stellar than the results dating back to the 1920s.12
Sure, his is not a simple field of surgery – I understand that. One can’t expect perfection in these difficult cases. Still, his rather tepid success rate hardly qualifies him as a surgical pioneer in the Christiaan Barnard sense of the word. Why doesn’t he tout his occasional success story, like this one? Could it be because white doctors also routinely perform such operations successfully, and to increase his Black Urchin From the Projects That Made Good credentials, he opts to highlight his ‘sexier’ cases? Take that, Whitey? It certainly appears that way. Needless to say, this hyperbole rather undercuts his authority when he waxes poetic on the efficacy of vaccines and suggests that any parents who resist such a regimen deserve reeducation in a FEMA camp, or words to that effect.

Questionable character is not his only problem, though. He has also proven himself to be an utter incompetent in the field of foreign affairs. And while we might take some solace in the fact that this proves that he won’t be named to the board of governors of the Council on Foreign Relations any time soon, that still isn’t a sufficient reason to support him. He is ignorant on which nations comprise NATO. Despite his avid Zionism, he is clueless as to Israeli political parties or the role of the Knesset. He has trouble pronouncing ‘Hamas’. His chief policy advisor, retired Major General Robert Dees (no relation to Morris, I assume), is an ardent Judeo-Churchian who took the 9/11 attacks at official face value and came to believe the mission of the U.S. military is Christian proselytization, domestically as well as internationally.13 Ask Carson what ‘just war’ policy is, and he’d likely respond that America should concentrate its entire focus on military excursions – ‘Just war, nuttin’ else!’ Why would anyone expect anything less from a black candidate, though? In 2012, Herman Cain’s famous gibberish comment about the President of Ubeki-beki-beki-bekistan-stan, among many other gaffes, proved conclusively that he was no George Kennan, either. Efforts to spin Carson’s fogginess into an unfair and racist ‘gotcha!’ campaign by his rivals have fared no better. Before severing ties with the campaign, Carson friend and notable black neocon talk radio host Armstrong Williams claimed that Carson’s shabby presentations were the result of being presented with speeches directly before speaking engagements.14 Which raises even more questions about how ill-informed the good doctor is, but anyway. Williams would later try to cool the fires with an illiterate tweet that read, ‘Don’t be alarm by CNN story. Every campaign hits a rut, but No one will remember the challenges once Team Carson surges in the polls again.’ Responses to this were primarily from solidarity-expressing blacks voicing their indignation in ebonic dialect: ‘That brother lost once he was used as an Obama attack dog! They love to see us fight each other. They no longer need him.’15 You are known by the company you keep, and Carson’s efforts to distance himself from this buffoon may be proven to have been too little, too late.

The Pursuit of the Gaffe Spree goes on and on. Carson’s ‘Outside the Box’ campaign ad has already entered the annals of political legend for its shabby and stilted awfulness – indeed, one will search in vain for a commentary-less video of it on YouTube, suggesting that it was pulled from circulation mucho pronto. His equally ill-fated hip-hop radio spot, designed to appeal to an urban black demographic that might vote for a radical Republican of the Reconstruction era but no one else from the party, aired for even less time. And for all the accolades lavished upon his campaign for its initially successful grassroots fundraising efforts, a quick glance at his corporate donor list reveals that he received the most money from Northwestern Mutual (presumably hoping to become the federal insurer of choice when Obamacare inevitably fails to be scrapped) and, even more disingenuously, Coca-Cola.16 Because, y’know, that’s only who you would expect to support a health-conscious medical doctor like Carson. McDonald’s, having had a rough year, was apparently unable to cough up anything for him.

Fortunately, the entire Carson campaign seems to be a doomed endeavor. He consistently ranks as a third or even fourth place finisher in the polls, especially in all-important Iowa. In a desperate bid to hold onto his ‘maverick outsider’ status, he has begun to ape Donald Trump’s rhetoric and has stated he would be open to leaving the GOP and running as a third party candidate…except when he changes his mind. And his underwhelming performance in the final Republican debate of 2015, capped by an awkward moment of silence for the victims of the San Bernardino shooting, likely has sealed his fate. Stick a fork in him, he’s done.

In conclusion, what can we say to the legions of gullible white cuckservatives that set up Dr. Ben Carson as the Great Black Hope that was going to make America (whatever that means anymore) ‘great’ again? I cannot improve on the words of the prophet Ezekiel, delivered in chapter 22 and verse 30 of his book:
And I sought for a man among them, that should make up the hedge, and stand in the gap before me for the land, that I should not destroy it: but I found none.
Verse 31 informs us that God’s pouring forth of His wrath and indignation upon the heads of the wicked is sure to follow. May that ever be the fate of the traitors among us.
  1. Onan Coca, “Hypocritical Geraldo Rivera: Ben Carson Only Gets Support because He’s Black
  2. Ibid.
  3. Ben Carson Biography
  4. Ibid.
  5. Ibid.
  6. Alan Rappeport, ‘Ben Carson Puts Spotlight on Seventh-Day Adventists.’ The New York Times, Oct. 27, 2015
  7. Scott Glover and Maeve Reston, ‘A Tale of Two Carsons‘. CNNPolitics, Nov. 7, 2015.
  8. Ibid.
  9. Natasha Bertrand and Brett LoGiurato, ‘Explosive Fabrication Report Rocks Ben Carson Campaign‘. Business Insider, Nov. 6, 2015.
  10. Ibid.
  11. Pam Martens and Russ Martens, ‘Ben Carson’s Other Credibility Problem: ‘Successful’ Siamese Twin Separations‘. Wall Street on Parade, Nov. 9, 2015.
  12. Ibid.
  13. James Bamford, ‘Who Is the Man Behind Ben Carson’s Foreign Policy?‘ Foreign Policy. Nov. 10, 2015.
  14. Nia-Malika Henderson, ‘Ben Carson campaign at war with itself.’ CNNPolitics, Dec. 11, 2015.
  15. Ibid.
  16. Ben Carson – Top Contributors, Federal Election Data’. The Center for Responsive Politics.

100,000 Invaders in Just 40 Days

via The New Observer

The mass nonwhite invasion of Europe has increased in tempo, with around 100,000 invaders entering Germany in the first forty days of 2016 alone, according to figures released by the Bavarian federal government.

100,000 Invaders in Just 40 Days

The mass nonwhite invasion of Europe has increased in tempo, with around 100,000 invaders entering Germany in the first forty days of 2016 alone, according to figures released by the Bavarian federal government.

Making the announcement during a European Union (EU) security conference in Munich this past weekend, Bavaria’s social minister Emilia Müller said that the numbers “clearly show that the absolute numbers of asylum seekers has increased” even over the figures of 2015.

“This means that we will far exceed the one million threshold this year,” Müller said, adding that if “this continues, we will have to build tent cities in Bavaria as well.”
Müller demanded that the German government now set a cap on the number of “refugees” who are coming to Germany—something that Chancellor Angela Merkel has refused to do.

Meanwhile, the full extent of what Merkel’s plan will do to Germany has been illustrated by new EU figures concerning birth rates among “refugees” in Turkey.
According to figures released by the European Commission (EC), the EU’s executive body, no less than 151,746 children were born to “refugees” in Turkey in 2015.

This dramatic growth in numbers illustrates what is in store for Europe, as there are around two million “refugees” in Turkey. 

Around 1.5 million “refugees” entered Europe last year, and, as Müller outlined above, this number is likely to be exceeded in 2016.

There are only fifty German cities with populations greater than 150,000 people. If the birth rate as recorded by the EC in Turkey among “refugees” (151,746) is replicated in Germany, then these nonwhite invaders will be adding a city the size of Oldenburg to Germany every year in terms of births alone. 
At that rate, Germany will become majority nonwhite even more quickly than previously anticipated.

*The EC also revealed that in 2015, some 64,109 asylum applications were made in Turkey—but that only 459 of these applications were completed. The rest appear to have moved off from that safe country to parasite off Europe.

* Meanwhile, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls, feeling the heat from rising support for Marine le Pen’s Front National, announced at the Munich conference that France would not take in any more than the 30,000 invaders to which he had earlier agreed.

This statement is in contradiction to an announcement by Merkel that more “asylum seekers” needed to be distributed around the EU than had been earlier discussed, because of the numbers involved.

Gravitational Waves Detected for First Time: Opens Window to Big Seed

via Transudationism

Physicists have announced the discovery of gravitational waves, ripples in the fabric of spacetime that were first anticipated by Albert Einstein a century ago. 

“We have detected gravitational waves. We did it,” said David Reitze, executive director of the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (Ligo), at a press conference in Washington.

The announcement is the climax of a century of speculation, 50 years of trial and error, and 25 years perfecting a set of instruments so sensitive they could identify a distortion in spacetime a thousandth the diameter of one atomic nucleus across a 4km strip of laserbeam and mirror.
“For me the most exciting thing is we will literally be able to see the big bang seed."
The phenomenon detected was the collision of two black holes. Using the world’s most sophisticated detector, the scientists listened for 20 thousandths of a second as the two giant black holes, one 35 times the mass of the sun, the other slightly smaller, circled around each other.

At the beginning of the signal, their calculations told them how stars perish: the two objects had begun by circling each other 30 times a second. By the end of the 20 millisecond snatch of data, the two had accelerated to 250 times a second before the final collision and a dark, violent merger.

The observation signals the opening of a new window on to the universe. 

“This is transformational,” said Prof Alberto Vecchio, of the University of Birmingham, and one of the researchers at Ligo. “We have observed the universe through light so far. But we can only see part of what happens in the universe. Gravitational waves carry completely different information about phenomena in the universe. So we have opened a new way of listening to a broadcasting channel which will allow us to discover phenomena we have never seen before,” he said. 

“This observation is truly incredible science and marks three milestones for physics: the direct detection of gravitational waves, the first detection of a binary black hole, and the most convincing evidence to date that nature’s black holes are the objects predicted by Einstein’s theory.”

The scientists detected their cataclysmic event using an instrument so sensitive it could detect a change in the distance between the solar system and the nearest star four light years away to the thickness of a human hair.

And they did so within weeks of turning on their new, upgraded instrument: it took just 20 milliseconds to catch the merger of two black holes, at a distance of 1.3 billion light years, somewhere beyond the Large Magellanic Cloud in the southern hemisphere sky, but it then took months of meticulous checking of the signal against all the complex computer simulations of black hole collision to make sure the evidence matched the theoretical template.

The detector was switched off in January for a further upgrade: astronomers still have to decipher months of material collected in the interval. But – given half a century of frustration in the search for gravitational waves – what they found exceeded expectation: suddenly, in the mutual collapse of two black holes, they could eavesdrop on the violence of the universe.

Prof B S Sathyaprakash, from Cardiff University’s school of physics and astronomy, said: “The shock would have released more energy than the light from all the stars in the universe for that brief instant. The fusion of two black holes which created this event had been predicted but never observed.”

The finding completed the scientific arc of prediction, discovery and confirmation: first they calculated what they should be able to detect, then decided what the evidence should look like, and then devised the experiment that clinched the matter. Which is why on Thursday scientists around the world were able to hail the announcement as yet another confirmation of their “standard model” of the cosmos, and the beginning of a new era of discovery.

Astronomers have already exploited visible light, the infrared and ultraviolet, radio waves, x-rays and even gamma-rays in their attempt to understand the mechanics of stars, the evolution of the galaxies and the expansion of the universe from an initial big bang seed 13.8 billion years ago.


Thursday’s announcement was the unequivocal first detection ever of gravity waves. The hope is that gravity wave astronomy could start to answer questions not just about the life of stars but their deaths as well: death by collision, death in a black hole, death in some rare stellar catastrophe so fierce that, for a few thousandths of a second, the blast is the brightest thing in the universe.

Even before the Ligo detectors in two US states reopened for business late last year, researchers were confident that a detection would follow swiftly. The announcement came after months of speculation, and decades of theoretical and practical work by an international network of more than a thousand scientists and engineers in Britain, Europe, the US and around the world.

Professor Kip Thorne, of the California Institute of Technology, and one of the founding fathers of Ligo, said that until now, astronomers had looked at the universe as if on a calm sea. All of that had changed.

“The colliding black holes that produced these gravitational waves created a violent storm in the fabric of space and time, a storm in which time speeded up and slowed down, and speeded up again, a storm in which the shape of space was bent in this way and that way,” he said.

Prof Neil Turok, director the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics at Waterloo in Canada, and a former research colleague of Prof Stephen Hawking, called the discovery “the real deal, one of those breakthrough moments in science”.

Not only had the detector picked up the collision of two enormous black holes across a distance of almost a billion light years of space, it recorded the distinctive “chirp” as the two spiralled towards each other.

The discovery, he said, completes a scientific arc of wonder that began 200 years ago, when the great British scientist Michael Faraday began to puzzle about how action was transmitted across the distance of space; how the sun pulled the Earth around. If the sun moved 10 yards, very suddenly, would the Earth feel the difference?

He reasoned that something must cross space to transmit the force of gravity. Faraday’s reasoning inspired the great British mathematician James Clerk Maxwell to think about how an electric force travelled, and arrive at an understanding of light and a prediction of radio waves.
“Einstein, when he came to write down his theory of gravity, his two heroes were Faraday and Maxwell,” said Turok. “He tried to write down laws of the gravitational field and he wasn’t in the least surprised to discover that his predictions had waves, gravitational waves.”

The Ligo discovery signals a new era in astronomy, he said.
“Just think of radio waves, when radio waves were discovered we learned to communicate with them. Mobile communication is entirely reliant on radio waves. For astronomy, radio observations have probably told us more than anything else about the structure of the universe. Now we have gravitational waves we are going to have a whole new picture of the universe, of the stuff that doesn’t emit light – dark matter, black holes,” he said.
“For me the most exciting thing is we will literally be able to see the big bang seed. Using electromagnetic waves we cannot see further back than 400,000 years after the big bang seed. The early universe was opaque to light. It is not opaque to gravitational waves. It is completely transparent.

“So literally, by gathering gravitational waves we will be able to see exactly what happened at the initial singularity. The most weird and wonderful prediction of Einstein’s theory was that everything came out of a single event: the big bang seed singularity. And we will be able to see what happened.”

Jews and Jewish Organizations Lead the Gun Control Campaign

via The Occidental Observer

TOO Editor's Note: Ted Nugent’s Facebook post blaming Jews for gun control has received a lot of attention. Given that Nugent has been roundly condemned by the likes of the ADL  and National Review, I thought it appropriate to rerun this article, originally posted on January 1, 2013. See also Andrew Joyce’s article, “Jews and gun control: A reprise.” 

In Cooper Sterling’s TOO article (“Guns, profiling and White males“), he notes
The Left’s irrational obsession with gun control goes beyond the latest mass shooting. It is endemic among the cosmopolitan literati, who loathe Middle America, to dwell on the risks associated with firearms while disregarding or minimizing the benefits of firearm ownership. …
Anyone monitoring the national scene since Newtown is witnessing an emotional antipathy toward the last trace of political leverage among an identifiable demographic: an overwhelmingly White male gun culture. What the MSM and gun control advocates ultimately detest is the gun culture in America, which is too White, too male, and too conservative. …
The tradition of gun ownership is as old as the Republic. It reflects the pre-1965 demographic of America as an overwhelmingly White—and more civilized—nation. As a native Midwesterner, guns were rampant in our neighborhoods where few homes didn’t have some sort of firearm. We came of age hunting with our fathers, uncles and cousins, acquiring rifles and shotguns in our mid-teens.
An article from The Forward notes that the Jewish community has taken the lead in gun control and that part of it is hostility toward the  gun culture of White America that is especially apparent in rural White America. Jews “instinctively recoil” from this culture (“After Newtown Jews lead renewed push on guns“).

Jewish organizations pride themselves on gun control stances that date back to the early days of the debate, following the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. and of President Kennedy. Most played a supportive role in passing legislation then limiting access to weapons, and have since reaffirmed their commitment to reducing the availability of guns.

One reason for broad Jewish support of gun control, Mariaschin said, has to do with the community’s sense of security, “which perhaps leads us to feel that the possession of assault weapons is completely unneeded.”

Rabbi Eric Yoffie, former head of the Reform movement, listed in a recent Haaretz article several reasons for Jews siding with supporters of gun control: the community’s affiliation with the Democratic Party; the fact that Jews are urban people and detached from the culture of hunting or gun ownership, and suspicion toward the NRA, which is “associated in the minds of many Jews with extremist positions that frighten Jews and from which they instinctively recoil.”

Although Jews certainly attacked and eventually overcame the elite WASP culture of pre-1965 America (e.g., by displacing WASPs at elite universities), another critical point of conflict between Jewish organizations and the main Jewish intellectual movements has been with rural America. This conflict can be most clearly seen among the New York Intellectuals, a group that is discussed in Chapter 6 of The Culture of Critique. 
The New York Intellectuals were attacking populism in favor of themselves as an intellectual elite. The New York Intellectuals associated rural America with
nativism, anti-Semitism, nationalism, and fascism as well as with anti-intellectualism and provincialism; the urban was associated antithetically with ethnic and cultural tolerance, with internationalism, and with advanced ideas. . . . The New York Intellectuals simply began with the assumption that the rural—with which they associated much of American tradition and most of the territory beyond New York—had little to contribute to a cosmopolitan culture. . . . By interpreting cultural and political issues through the urban-rural lens, writers could even mask assertions of superiority and expressions of anti-democratic sentiments as the judgments of an objective expertise. (Cooney 1986, 267–268; italics in text)
The last line bears repeating. The New York Intellectuals were engaged in a profoundly anti-democratic enterprise given that they rejected and felt superior to the culture of the majority of Americans. The battle between this urbanized intellectual and political establishment and rural America was joined on a wide range of issues. Particularly important was the issue of immigration. In this case and in the entire range of what became mainstream liberal politics, the New York Intellectuals had the enthusiastic support of all of the mainstream Jewish organizations. (Review of Eric Kaufmann’s  The Rise and Fall of Anglo America“)
The gun culture of traditional America, especially rural America has been particularly loathed by Jewish intellectuals. There is also a deep fear of Christian culture that is most vibrant in rural America.  For example, Israeli patriot Elliott Abrams  acknowledges that the mainstream Jewish community in America “clings to what is at bottom a dark vision of America, as a land permeated with anti-Semitism and always on the verge of anti-Semitic outbursts.” According to Abrams, because of this vision, Jews have taken the lead in secularizing America.  In fact, the key role of Jewish organizations in shaping the Constitutional law on Church/State relations is well known. And it’s not much of a mystery who’s behind the war on Christmas.

And by successfully changing immigration policy, Jews have reduced the political power of the rural White subculture of America to the point that even though roughly 7 in 10 White males voted Republican (and ~60% of White females), Obama and the Democrats won the recent election. Even if the current push for gun control fails, we can expect that Jewish organizations will continue the push to disarm White males.

Jewish organizations are not at all against guns when they are in the hands of the police and other authorities. The ADL (see the ADL’s Law Enforcement Agency  Resource Network) and the SPLC (Law Enforcement Training and Law Enforcement Resources) have made strong alliances with law enforcement in America.

Further, it has often been observed that Jewish organizations have historically favored a strong central government rather than states’ rights. For example, Jacques Berlinerblau, writing in The Chronicle of Higher Education (see here), notes that “Jewish voters …  prefer cities and federal governments to backwaters and volatile statehouses. … All things equal, Jews like strong central governments, not a pastiche of local decision makers catering to majorities.”

Although Jewish organizations would not phrase it this way, the net result is that the thrust of Jewish activism has been to favor a strong central government with a monopoly on lethal force. Given Jewish hostility to the traditional people and culture of White America, this is a very foreboding combination as we head into the era of a non-White majority America.

Europeans at Risk of Extinction

via Britannia

Saint Peter Port, Guernsey
We are witnessing what will be shown to future generations as the reason for the fall of an empire. At current immigration levels and disappearing birth rates, native Europeans are destined to become a minority in their own countries within decades. This is already the case for many of Europe’s largest cities. Europeans have effectively lost their right to exist as cultures and nations in their own homelands and are facing extinction.
Millions of young Muslim men leave behind their family, pay thousands to criminal traffickers to reach the land they have been promised by European politicians illegally. Dubbed by the media as ‘refugees’, they cross through 6-10 safe countries to reach wealthy nations such as Germany or Sweden, where they hope to receive a better life at the expense of the taxpayer. Only a fraction of them are Syrian, as they enter unfiltered, without any documents and without any legitimate right to claim asylum. Women and children are rarely seen, except in the cherry-picked sob stories of the media.

Yet any indigenous resistance of Europeans who refuse to hand over the countries of their ancestors to often radical and criminal Muslim foreigners is labelled ‘hateful’, ‘racist’, even ‘Nazi’.The level of cultural, moral and political subversion with egalitarian and Marxist ideologies has reached levels the KGB would never have dreamed of. Equality and tolerance are lies that serve none but a few. The Left, mainly orchestrated by other interests, is destroying our countries from the inside. Patriotism, the most basic and fundamental trait of any nation that wants to survive, has become something to be ashamed of.

Second and third wave feminism has destroyed family values and birth rates. Healthy nationalism has been replaced with a culture of guilt, self-hatred, apathy, degeneracy and pathological altruism. We are told to embrace ‘diversity’, in reality this simply means instead of just being a global minority, Europeans are supposed to become a minority in their own countries as well. No civilised society can keep up with the birth rate of third-world immigrants, especially when the main goal is integration rather than assimilation. Parallel societies breed poverty, crime and radicalism.

Multiculturalism has never, at any time in human history, worked anywhere. If we believe otherwise, we’re delusional. In fact it’s the primary reason for every major conflict.

The World out of Africa

via TradYouth

I have found it imperative to explain the views of how the foreign countries view the situation in South Africa. When we at Front Nasionaal speak to them about our situation in South Africa; and indeed we have spoken to many stakeholders in Conservative, Far-right, “Alt-Right” and Eurocentric parties and groups all over the world, this is largely due to the networking accomplished by our International spokesperson – Lenel Cotty Wessels.

When stakeholders do research about South Africa and it’s socio-political and it’s socio-economical situation they come back to us with the conclusion: “Things aren’t so bad – you seem to be coping.”

When we ask how they come to such a conclusion and we query how they have reached such a conclusion three topics come across:

1. “Well, many people of European descent vote for multicultural parties – this infers they wish to stay within a multicultural society.”
2. “Many people of European descent vote for parties that do not advocate self-determination – this infers they wish to stay and reside with South Africa in its current state.”
3. “Many people of European descent vote for parties that stand strongly for Affirmative Action, BBBEE and BEE – this infers they wish to keep those laws because it is an extension of what they believe.”

Considering the above three points, it must be self-evident that votes and the party for which one votes for becomes very important in the grand scheme of things. We must understand that the “right to vote” is not about simply drawing a cross in the box of an opposition party – voting is a moralistic issue.

YOUR vote is an extension of what YOU personally value.
YOUR vote is an extension of what YOU personally stand for.
YOUR vote is an extension of what YOU personally want society to be.
YOUR vote is an extension of the future in which YOUR children wish to grow in.

When people put on a blue t-shirt and say “Vote DA, we need to keep the ANC at bay”, is that how shallow our beliefs have become; so-much so that we want to vote for a party that intrinsically believes in laws to keep you AND you children out of a job??

Is that what YOU value? Is that what YOU stand for? Is that what YOU want society to be? Is that the future YOU want for your children?

YOU must again internalize the fact that YOUR vote is an extension of who you are.

The Afrikaans word for “vote” is “Stem”; “Stem” alternately translated means “Voice”; “Stemme” alternately translated means “Voices” – that is what the outside world is hearing. Is this a true reflection of what is happening in South Africa?

I will leave that up to YOU to decide.

Dean Dart
Front Nasionaal Jeug / Front National Youth
Chairman, Youth Wing of Front Nasionaal SA – blad

Pop-Artists Speak the Truth to Jewish Power

via National-Socialist Worldview

Ted Nugent announces that Jews promote gun-control

On Monday, 8 February 2016, Nugent shared on his personal Facebook page an image bearing the faces of twelve prominent Jews who advocate gun-control, with a small Israeli flag accompanying each Jewish face, and a contemptuous description accompanying several. Nugent did not create the meme, which is several years old, but reposted it with his own comment.... Read more.

Negro Rapper "B.o.B." rejects the Jewish version of history.

On 26 January 2016, chart-topping Black rapper B.o.B. (real name Bobby Ray Simmons Jr.), who has had three top-ten hit recordings, caused serious worry to the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith by posting online a rap-video that: (1) alludes to Jewish power over the government of the United States, (2) declares that Adolf Hitler was not the greatest villain in world-history, and (3) suggests that the listener become familiar with David Irving. Read more.

The Untold Victors: The Spanish Civil War as History, not Propaganda

via Alternative Right

The Spanish Civil War (1936-39) is one of the wars in which the losers are documented much more than the winners. The ideological spectrum of the socialist Republican side of the war has been explored inside out, but their opponents, General Francisco Franco's Nationalists are portrayed simplistically as reactionaries, who merely represented the interests of the Church and powerful landowners, and wanted to return Spanish society to feudal times.

This is particularly true of history writing that centres on the foreign volunteers of the Republican International Brigades, which involved 32,000 to 35,000 left-wing and non-political defenders of democracy from different countries. In his 2003 book, Suomalaiset Espanjan sisällissodassa (Finns in the Spanish Civil War), Jyrki Juusela closely follows the steps of the Finnish members of the International Brigades, but only a few dozen pages are dedicated to Finnish fighters on the nationalist side. In leftist mythology the Spanish war was an international crusade on behalf of democracy and egalitarianism, which drew militant idealists from all over the world, including Asia and Latin America.

But, actually, the proportion of foreigners in Franco's nationalist forces was even greater. Along with 15,000 German and 80,000 Italian professional soldiers who were sent to help Franco, almost 90,000 foreign volunteers fought on the nationalist side.

Republican propaganda claimed that they were "mercenaries," and this assumption lingers on even today. But, in reality, many foreign volunteers on the nationalist side had no previous military experience or even military training, and because their daily wage was only three pesetas, none of them got rich by waging war in Spain.

British journalist Christopher Othen's recent book Franco's International Brigade: Adventurers, Fascists, and Christian Crusaders in the Spanish Civil War (2013) is the first comprehensive presentation of these men and their motives. The fates of these right-wing volunteers resemble an adventure story, but, above all, Othen's work is a political and ideological history; it conveys an elaborate picture of the radical Right of the pre-WW2 period.

Franco's regime and its ideology is quite commonly referred to as "fascist," but the term is misleading. Franco and the other generals who rebelled against the Republic represented a traditional, authoritarian conservatism, leaning on monarchy and the Catholic Church, rather than radical and socially reformist fascism.

The Falangist martyr, José
 Antonio Primo de Rivera.
The only truly fascist movement in the nationalist political scene was the Falange Española, or the "Falangists," a political party founded by José Antonio Primo de Rivera. The party's ideology had a lot in common with Italian Fascism, and contained an anti-capitalist strand. Falangists declared that they rejected both capitalism and socialism, and wanted to replace them with a syncretic "third way" economic doctrine, which included the Italian idea of the Corporate State.

The movement adopted some racial doctrines and spoke of the "Hispanic race," but biological racialism was not particularly important to its ideology. Instead of eugenics, Falangists emphasized Catholic "spiritual rebirth," which would reunite the nation torn by class disputes.

When Primo de Rivera was executed by the Republicans in the early months of the Civil War, the leadership of the Falange movement was taken by Manuel Hedilla, who emphasized the "proletarian" side of the movement, and whose status was compromised by his political inexperience and being on bad terms with Franco.

Franco was afraid that Hedilla might try to oust him from his post, so he had him arrested and took direct control of the Falange. In 1937, the Falange's status as an independent political movement came to an end: it was merged with a few other nationalist organizations into one large, more traditional conservative-royalist political party, under the leadership of Franco.

Many foreign fascists distrusted Franco's nationalist movement. Members of actual fascist parties, such as Oswald Mosley's British Union of Fascists, were not eager to enlist in their ranks. Finnish aristocrat and adventurer Carl von Haartman joined the Falangist militia, but from practical rather than ideological reasons.

Many fascists considered fascism to be a social revolutionary movement, and in their eyes the Spanish nationalists looked like mere minions of the ruling classes. For example, Mosley's party newspaper Action wrote that the Spanish conflict was no more than "an old 19th Century class war: the rich against the poor."

Fascist Italian society was polarized by the Spanish intervention. The Abyssinian War that Mussolini had waged before the outbreak of the Spanish War had enjoyed broad support, and even the left-wing and liberal opponents of the Italian government had approved the military expedition, which had after all ended slavery and the feudal system in Abyssinia. But interference in the Spanish situation was met with criticism from many convinced fascists, one of which wrote:
"We talk about the proletarian revolution at the same time as we defend the reactionary generals, landowners and exploiters."
Mussolini's decision to participate in the war was probably not influenced so much by ideological factors than by the desire to develop the skills of his own armed forces for future expeditions.

Othen claims that the majority of Franco's international volunteers were actually different types of conservatives, rather than fascists. Many were motivated especially by religion. In the areas controlled by the Republican Government churches were systematically destroyed and priests and nuns killed, which sparked outrage especially in Catholic countries.

The body of a nun exhibited in Barcelona in 1936.
Franco was considered to be fighting for the Christian faith against atheistic Communism. Many Catholic "crusaders" joined up with the Spanish Carlist movement. Carlism was a distinct monarchist movement with broad popular support among the small farmers of northern Spain. The movement had started during the succession crisis of the 1830s, when the Carlists had wanted to raise the lineage of the Infante Carlos, Count of Molina, to the throne of Spain. Its supporters used the red beret as their emblem.

In the Civil War Carlists had a reputation as particularly fearless fighters, who attacked the enemy with their heads held high and shouted their battle cry "Viva Cristo Rey!" ("Long live Christ the King!") As a social movement Carlism promoted independent small farmers – in some respects a Spanish version of Jefferesonianism. It was merged with the Falange under Franco in 1937.

There were a couple of noteworthy exceptions in the general attitudes of the European fascist movements. In Portugal, which was under the authoritarian control of the dictator Antonio de Oliveira Salazar, there was a fascist opposition, the "national syndicalists" who wanted to replace Salazar's agrarian conservative regime with a fascist state based on trade unions and the redistribution of land. Salazar expelled the head of the movement Rolão Francisco Preto to Spain after a failed coup attempt.

In Spain Preto developed good relations with the generals planning the rebellion against the Republic, and when Salazar equipped an 8,000-strong volunteer force to help Franco, it included a lot of old national syndicalist supporters. They found ideological allies in the Falangists, whose party program also spoke of "national syndicalism" as a third way between capitalism and socialism.

Fighting Irish: Eoin O'Duffy
In Ireland volunteer troops were gathered by General Eoin O'Duffy, a veteran of the Irish War of Independence and the leader of the Mussolini-inspired National Corporate Party. Nevertheless he was more driven by pursuit of personal power than ideological belief and compassion for the Spanish nationalists.

By the 1930's O'Duffy, who was earlier considered a national hero, was a political corpse, and his alcoholism and homosexuality were openly ridiculed. When the Spanish Civil War broke out, brutal anti-religious atrocities committed by the Republicans provoked widespread sympathy for Franco in Catholic Ireland, and O'Duffy saw an opportunity to improve his image. Raising and organizing a volunteer corps brought him some new popularity, and he believed it could work as a springboard to power.

Franco did not take O'Duffy's offers of help seriously. When an approximately 700-strong Irish unit was finally sent to Spain, it performed poorly in battle, and its lack of discipline infuriated nationalist officers. Eventually, Franco dissolved the Irish unit and merged it with Spanish Foreign Legion. With that O'Duffy's dreams of becoming the Irish Il Duce withered.

Franco's attitude towards European volunteer units, of which the quality varied widely, was one of skepticism. He saw their main value as helping to build friendly relations with European governments. Typically foreign volunteers were directed to the Spanish Foreign Legion. Only the Irish and the French were allowed to form their own separate brigades.

Franco placed much greater reliance on the Moroccan soldiers who formed by far the largest number of volunteers, a total of about 78,000 men. The Nationalist uprising had begun in the garrisons of Spanish Morocco, and in the early stages of the rebellion the generals managed to recruit the Moroccans to their side. In 1936 Morocco was divided into Spanish and French protectorates. The Nationalists appealed to the Moroccans by implying that their country would be granted independence after the Republican government was overthrown, but there was little intention of keeping such promises. The Moroccans swallowed the bait and enlisted in large numbers to Franco's army.

"Kebab" in the service of "Fascism."
The Moroccans played a vita role in the initial phase of the war: the Nationalists would have been unable to continue their attack in Spain without Moroccans troops flown over from the protectorate. The motives of the volunteers were manifold: some were attracted by the soldier's pay, some hated Communism, some believed in the promises of independence, and more skeptical ones thought that they would receive some combat experience for a future war of independence. Others wanted only a chance to kill Spaniards, no matter what political stance these represented.

Moroccan troops, "los moros," quickly got a bad reputation. It was said that they systematically raped Republican women and tortured prisoners of war. In battle they used to castrate their fallen enemies, and when pictures of mutilated corpses spread to foreign newspapers, the nationalist Colonel Juan Yagüe officially banned the habit among his Moroccan troops.

Propaganda art by Helios Gómez
depicting rape of a Republican
woman by Moroccan troops.
Republican propaganda made the most of the real and imaginary atrocities of "the Moors." In propaganda posters Moroccans were depicted as grinning, thick-lipped turbanheads, who harassed white women and pierced children with their bayonets. Republican journalists and authors wrote of "brutal Africans with knives in their teeth," and accused Franco of bringing "African savages to a European civil war." The Left of the 1930's clearly didn't embrace the current type of political correctness.

One of the most interesting observations in Othen's book is the fact that in the Spanish Civil War both parties thought they were defending European civilization against barbarism. For the nationalists, barbarism was the anti-religious Communism. For the Republicans it was the reactionary military regime with their Arab allies. One party sought to protect religion and tradition, the other democracy and progress. Foreign interventions and international corps turned the Spanish conflict into a pan-European civil war. In World War II, this ideological civil war was extended throughout the continent.

Both parties had their reasons to see the other party as barbaric. The Civil War was an unusually cruel confrontation, with brutal treatment of prisoners of war and military operations against civilians. Especially in the early stages of the war, radical left-wing groups killed multitudes of church workers, land-owning farmers, and supporters of the right-wing parties, while the weak Republican government turned a blind eye to such terror.

Nationalists paid in kind, and mass executions of left-wingers became common practice in Nationalist-held areas. German air units sent to support Franco bombed Republican cities without distinguishing between military targets and the civilian population.

Some of the foreigners involved in the conflict were disappointed when idealism encountered the darker side of the war. Many radical leftists had a rude awakening when Communists gained increasing power on the Republican side and started to liquidate Trotskyists, anarchists, and other "heretical" elements. Georges Bernanos, a French writer known for his novel The Diary of a Country Priest (1936), had established contacts with the Falangists and supported Franco when the war began, but after witnessing summary executions and other terrors on the nationalist-held island of Majorca, he began to write of the Franco regime with a sharp critical eye.

George Orwell: his experiences in Spain
profoundly influenced his later writing.
Othen brings the unscrupulousness of the civil war to life, without demonizing or apologising for either party. His account shows that both Republican and Nationalist volunteers were largely pawns in a game played by bigger powers, who hardly cared about Spain and its culture. For them, the land of Cervantes, Murillo, and Goya was mainly an exotic battlefield on which to promote their own political goals.

The Spanish Civil War saw both a loss of leftist and rightist idealism, but from a coldly pragmatic point of view its end-result can be considered positive. The Communists gained more and more power in the Republican government during the war. Through control of Spain the Soviet Union would have been able to threaten Western Europe. This was prevented by Franco's victory.

On the other hand, Nationalist Spain remained neutral in the Second World War, which was a powerful brake on Hitler's world domination plans. Franco's objectives were national: he wanted to crush the Socialist Republic and Basque and Catalan separatism; the extension of the conflict throughout Europe did not interest him. In achieving his goals, he used the help of Christian Crusaders, right-wing radicals, and Moorish fighters – so much and so long as they were useful.

Although Franco's Spain kept out of from the "European Civil War" 1939-45, many of his foreign volunteers took part in it. The Continent's political complexity is illustrated by the fact that not all of them participated on the same side. Franco's Air Force fighter pilot, Count Rodolphe de Hemricourt de Grunne, a Belgian aristocrat, joined the British air force when the Germans invaded his country. He may well have been in dogfights with the German pilots, who, a little earlier, had fought on Franco's side as part of the Condor Legion.

After their service in the Spanish Civil War, the British Fascist Peter Keen and the Norwegian National Socialist Per Imerslund went as volunteers to the Finnish Winter War to fight against the Soviet Union. After returning home, Keen served in the intelligence division of the British parachute regiment, while Imerslund supported the pro-Nazi government in occupied Norway. Frenchmen from the Jeanne d'Arc volunteer unit later fought in both the French SS and the French resistance movement. History had entered into a new phase, where old loyalties were no longer relevant.