Feb 24, 2015

Homeschooling the Overman

via Counter-Currents

Deer Hunt mosaic from Pella,
Macedonia, 4th-century BC
I am a writer, who became a teacher, and then again a writer. Now I teach and never write. Writing is the only thing I’ve ever been good enough at that I could legally use to make money; that is, to survive in the bourgeois world. To date my total income from writing is $50.00. It turns out I don’t write for money, but writers never do.

Actually, I was a very good teacher, too, but only when I got to teach exactly within the frame of a very particular assemblage of ideas and concepts. To do otherwise was just to be a mouthpiece, a talking head adept at representing the words on a teleprompter to an audience of “scholars.”

Proud Parent of a Scholar. Georgia Perimeter College

Perhaps not overly proud, then, but I know who’s car it is, and the necessity of “being proud” of having a child in college; that is, being a scholar, that is, of paying someone to tell him or her what to think. Not how to think. No.

So, I teach, and never write.

Proud Parent of a Thinker. A-Life-Never-Institutionalized

My son is four, going on five. That is, if I have a son. Hypothetically speaking, I teach him from home.

Concepts: spatial aperture and closure; extreme alterity and orthodoxy; blast radii and the theater of operations; language and slavery; territory, terrain, and form of life.

Ideas: Why did Achilles go to Ilium? What type of man does Athena love? Why does mamma go to work? How do you become-raptor? What does homo medio luporum do?
Maxim: Expression gives form to content.

Tactics: Room clearing; Weapon as a magisterial release from a specific problem; Thievery and anti-capitalist action.

Personae and Affects: Deleuze, Nietzsche, Achilles, Bane, Baby Dave, Casey Jones, FT Marinetti, John Coltrane, Tuareg, Zomia marauders.

Personae and Concepts: The Top Five Concepts That Will Make You Useless to Capitalism and the State:
  1. Transvaluation
  2. Nomadic War Machine v. the State
  3. Capture and Control and Line of Flight
  4. Assemblage, Content, and Expression
  5. Deterritorialization and Reterritorialization
My son is four, almost five. Some tell me he’s too young to be exposed to this stuff. They don’t know: I have no one else to teach and no time to write. It’s either him or schizophrenia.

You see, son, the discourse on female genital mutilation proves that anthropology is a morality-machine in the service of bourgeois life.

One day, I tell him, this world of partial objects will be forced to make sense. If the State has its way, that sense will resemble an emperor, his guards, and a few men in suits hiding behind a hastily made barricade with piss running down their legs. If I have mine, it will be YOU they are hiding from.

He understands the distance between a llama herd and wolf pack.

Sometimes he colors and draws. That is, sometimes he slavishly traces the Form created to ensnare and direct his creative potentials. A heart, the coloring book suggests, is the symbol of love. There is nothing natural, I tell him, in the inscription of meaning onto shapes. It is presumed to be so, because marketing is essential to the creation of a herd.

But that heart, I explain by analogy, is exactly what you are to the State — and to men of the State: something to trace, bound, cut, and inscribe meaning and potential upon.

Other times, he maps the sound waves caused by a thrown rock.

Men who want to lead need men who will follow. You’ll find the latter next door. Not here.

Draw Achilles, I suggest, without anthropomorphizing his affects. He just smiles and explodes crayons in a bloody 8.5 by 11 swath.

Like coywolves lurking on the borders of a bourgeois utopia — a new species created by the situation at hand, right now, just as adept at pack hunting as foraging — we are creating a new form of life: technologies and techniques of the pack, preying upon the herd and the weakness it creates. This is why we transvaluate.

We teach each other cooperative predation. We play a lot, saying only what is necessary. Coywolf cubs say by doing, by acting complex ludic gestures in subtle communications. Just as the coywolf, we play as practice for combat, mental powers expanding, powers of abstraction elevating, gaining the capacity to mobilize more of the possible than any grazing prey animal could ever comprehend: life capacities more fully deploy when hunting or viking.[1]

Expression gives form to content, I tell him. Cubicles and autonomous bazaars of non-State violence both require bodily energy to function, but the uses to which they put that energy create life forms counterposed to one another. Bodies, I teach my son, can do many things.

So we stalk, ambush, and strike, go for the kill — all with a mindful awareness of the physiology of predation and the power of the body to actively create when passive representation is not a part of the arrangement.

We create zones of indiscernibility. We wear masks. We gear up.

We take field trips: dinosaur museums offer life-changing lessons on the borders between predator and prey if one can successfully filter out the normalized herd instincts and life ways apparent in the explanatory narratives that inscribe meaning on the fossil casts.

A few years ago I went to the mountains to learn about flows, chaos, and canalling. My son is a becoming-mountaineer, a becoming-raptor, when we hike. It’s tempting to say that I always bring dereliction to the mountains, but really they find it in me. What does a coywolf want? Just a single moment of variability, an opportunity, an opening. There’s a reason, I teach my son, that the State had to buy these mountains in order to control what we do on their peaks and shadowy slopes.

Returning to the city like soldiers returning from battle, like arditi out of step with the rhythms and ideals of bourgeois life, we fight what these do to our bodies as the signs once again barricade our potentials. The lesson, I tell him, is to affirm all of this too: to make it useful, just like the coywolf. Somewhere out there, I tell him, is a free dinner for he who knows how to find it.

My son plays without the domesticating overcode that tells him that play is escape. You can’t escape, I tell him, that which doesn’t capture you.

But I also teach him the English alphabet and Arabic numerals.

You see, son, without language you will have no proper frame of reference (we say “plane of immanence” in our house) for your impending wage slavery and freedom to buy things. Without a common language, you are useless to advertising and to your overseers: you won’t have anything to talk about at work, or school, or at the gym, or on the ball field.

Achilles? Ha! Good luck. That’s an enunciation that cannot be expressed with contemporary (dominant) technologies. I don’t know, my best friend showed me a limited edition action figure of Achilles: violent superabundant deterritorialized heroism, yours for $185.00.

I know, son, I know that merely copying the letters just as they have been given us by (not so-)Random House is nothing but representation and the counter-to-thinking. I know that it is better when you make up your own letters and words – or just turn numbers into letters. I know that I told you about Appalachia and the legal enforcement of becoming-bourgeois on mountain people so that when their land was closed they could feel good about wage earning, shopping, and consuming.

I know all of this. You are learning without being educated. Please just copy the letter as it is already written. Please just enforce the memory on your muscles and MIND.

Without this language you’ll never be a part of something bigger than yourself – to glory, to a pack, to your own instincts and critical apparatus. I never told him that. The “bigger than oneself” comes up as something slaves tell themselves in order to keep building someone else’s Great Wall. The nation? No idea. The people? You’re looking at him. God?

You don’t assault sacrality by positing a counter-sacred. You don’t trade one master for another.

So please son, make that B legible to the entire English-speaking world. You did it! You’ve officially communicated. How free do you feel now?

How much servility does it take — how much absolute badass deterritorialized freedom does it cost — to make your body a tool of the State?

How much daring and agony does it take to extricate oneself from the ties that bind?

My son has no idea.

What if you’ve never been subjected to them?
When I mentioned to Baby Dave that we were about to fulfill one of my hypothetical son’s rites of passage, the watching of Fight Club, he suggested that the son wouldn’t understand the movie, “because he’s never been domesticated.” Domestication stings my eyes and ears.

The next day I showed him “The Sinatra Group.” He looked at me quizzically as I laughed. Does one need to know who is Frank Sinatra in order to understand the bit? Common frame of reference.

Domestication is our common frame of reference. When you live to create lines of flight at every opportunity, it is hard to keep from capturing your son, just so he can understand how far you have traveled and how hard you have fought.

I tell myself as I teach him the tools of the herd animal, that the aim is creation, rather than adaptive conformity, hoping that that zone of indiscernibility becomes the border, the in-between where revolution is assembled and where completely different natures are formed.

But he already understands. This is his form of life. Never institutionalized.

My nephews, if I have any, listen to Maroon Five and love So You Think You Can Dance. My son, if only I had one, listens to Code Orange and Pixel, and watches Predator movies. When my mom, assuming I have one, listens to Agnes Obel, she exclaims how similar she sounds to “that girl on The Voice.” My son hears the price of divinity and a cello becoming-bass.

Even the radical fringe of counter-American politics is too tame for my son. “Who cares?” he says, when I steal a moment to write something in a notebook, “Come and fight!”

“No,” I tell him, “writing is a weapon. It is an action just as important as the AK series. It is only allowed to us because those who rely on our acquiescence and orchestrated oppositions have no idea what we are creating with it.”

“Come and fight, NOW!” he says.

This is why I don’t write anymore. But I still fight. And create.

Notes:

1. Brian Massumi, What Animals Teach Us about Politics (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2014), loc. 213.

Aryan Origins?

via West Hunter

It looks as if the people that founded the Corded Ware culture, largely eliminating the previous LBK-like farmers, were the Yamnaya, themselves a mixed population, approximately half some kind of eastern hunter-gatherer and half some farming populations genetically similar to Armenians.

In which of those two populations did primitive Indo-European – the language – originate? I’m betting on the hunters. I suspect that they’re the ones that domesticated the horse: horses weren’t very common south of the Caucasus, and it doesn’t look as if they were domesticated there.

It’s not easy for farmers to conquer horsemen: easy the other way around.

The dominant Y-chromosome lineages among the Yamnaya (and later, most of Europe and India) originated in those hunters, not in a Middle Eastern population. It is hard to believe in a scenario in which the farmers conquered the hunters and then forced their women on them (Take my wife, please!).

Analyzing old myths and legends, various people smoking superior kinds of dope have argued that there was a ‘war of the functions” – formation wars – at the beginning of the Indo-Europeans, where a group of warriors and priest/magicians/judges conquered farmers. Two estates absorbed the third. Possibly referenced in those sobbin’ women, the Aesir-Vanir war, the Mahabharata, etc.

Moreover, something relevant happened earlier, before the Yamnaya made their big move. Somebody – pastoralists – smashed Old Europe in the Balkans a good deal earlier, and someone (maybe the same people) brought a very early branch of Indo-European into Anatolia ( Hittite, Luwian, Palaic, Carian, etc. ) Then there are the Indo-Aryan languages, and Tocharian: looking at those branches, and the genetics of early speakers, should resolve this problem. For example, if you find a  population of Indo-European speakers that has that eastern hunter-gatherer genetic signature, without the Armenian-like signature, probably the language originated in the hunters. Or vice versa.

Race and Drug Arrests: Another Big Lie

via American Renaissance


How often have you heard that blacks use illegal drugs at the same rate as whites but are arrested far more often for using them? This is supposed to prove that the police are hopelessly racist.

The ACLU gets very excited about this. Former Executive Director Ira Glasser said drug laws are “a system of separating out, subjugating, imprisoning, and destroying substantial portions of a population based on skin color.” Sounds bad.

So what are the facts? The US Department of Health and Human Services does regular surveys, and asks people if they take illegal drugs. Blacks are only about 10 to 20 percent more likely than whites to say that they do.

But if you look at the arrest data, blacks are 2-1/2 times more likely to be arrested for drug possession and 3.7 times more likely than whites to be arrested for trafficking. So, is this proof of police discrimination?

If it were, it would be an aberration. In the case of violent crime–rape, robbery, assault–we know that the reason police arrest blacks more often than whites is because blacks are more likely to commit these crimes. We know that because the Justice Department does huge surveys of crime victims and asks them what race the perp was.

About half of all robbery victims, for example, say the robber was black and–sure enough–about half the robbers police arrest are black. The same is true for other violent crimes: Police are more likely to arrest blacks because blacks are more likely to be criminals.

So, do police suddenly go nuts if drugs are involved? If that’s so, there must be a lot of nutty black police officers. Take Washington, DC. Ever since it got home rule in 1975, every mayor in DC has been black. Two thirds of the police officers are black. And yet, the ACLU itself reports that in 2010 a black DC resident was 8 times more likely than a white resident to be arrested for marijuana possession. Was that racist police–racist black police–or just more black dope smokers?

Actually, it’s possible for blacks to be no more likely than whites to use drugs but still get arrested more often for using them, even by scrupulously race-neutral police. That’s because blacks commit so many other crimes. If a black is arrested for robbery–and blacks are about eight times more likely than whites to be arrested for robbery–the police search him for drugs. If they find drugs they charge him with possession in addition to robbery. If he hadn’t got caught for robbery–or assault or murder or whatever it was–he probably would not have gotten that drug charge.

As I said earlier, the idea that blacks don’t use illegal drugs much more often than whites comes from surveys. But when you ask people if they take illegal drugs do they tell the truth?

As it turns out, there is scholarly literature on this. Researchers ask people if they have taken drugs and then take urine or hair samples to find out. And almost every time, blacks are a lot more likely than whites to say they haven’t taken drugs but the test then proves they were lying.

A 2005 study in the Journal of Urban Health, for example, found that blacks were ten times more likely than whites to lie about cocaine. Hispanics were five times more likely. When it came to marijuana, not one of the 109 whites in the sample lied, but one in eight of the 191 blacks lied.

A 2008 study of Vietnam-era veterans in the journal Addictive Behaviors found that blacks were more than 20 times more likely than whites to lie about cocaine, and twice as likely to lie about marijuana.

A 2003 report also in Addictive Behaviors surveyed 290 black men who were being treated for high blood pressure. Only 48 admitted they were using illegal drugs but urine tests found that 131 of them were. Forty-five percent were taking drugs but only 19 percent admitted it.

This behavior goes back a long way. In 1994, more than 20 years ago, a large study of young people, aged nine to 20, found that blacks were six times more likely than whites to claim they didn’t use cocaine–but have it show up in a urine test.

The Journal of Urban Health article I quoted earlier says this, and I quote: “the results replicate and extend a growing body of research suggesting that African Americans underreport substance use on surveys.” Underreport is a nice way of saying that they lie about it.

So, does this prove that there is no bias in drug arrests? Not necessarily. The samples in these studies are limited, and occasionally, the results go the other way.

One 2001 study found that when people arrested for various crimes were asked about drug use and then tested, whites were more likely than blacks to lie about crack cocaine–but less likely to lie about marijuana or methamphetamines.

In general, though, it seems that blacks are a lot more likely than whites to take drugs and then claim they don’t.

But there’s a better way to tell which groups are more likely to use illegal drugs. Every year, the US Department of Health and Human Services tells us how many people went to the emergency room because they took an illegal drug and got sick or went crazy. Since the government tabulates these numbers by race, we can calculate rates.  Blacks are 3-1/2 times more likely than whites to go to the emergency room because they took an illegal drug. They are 2.8 times more likely than whites to end up in the ER because of marijuana, and seven times more likely because they took cocaine.

It doesn’t seem likely that blacks just freak out more when they take drugs, but if that’s the case, that would help explain high arrest rates, too: People who are so high they have to go the ER are probably doing things that attract the attention of the police.

Some people might say that white people with drug problems go to fancy private clinics instead of the ER. Doesn’t’ work that way. You go to detox for weeks at a time, by appointment. If you just show up blithering they’ll send you to the ER.

So, the ACLU is wrong. First, it appears that blacks do use illegal drugs more often than whites, but lie about it. And there’s no question they get picked up a lot more for other crimes and if they have drugs on them they’re charged with possession. Finally, they’re 3-1/2 times more likely than whites to end up in the ER because they took illegal drugs.

It looks to me that, as usual, police are just arresting the people who break the law.

So, can we lay to rest this idea of racist police? Apparently not. Just last week, the University of California Student Association–representing the state’s 233,000 college students–voted to urge the university system financially to divest from the United States. I’ll quote you one of the reasons: “racial and ethnic minorities are disproportionately targeted by law enforcement agencies, particularly for drug-related offences.”

The myth lives on. We have a lot of work to do.  Thanks for watching.

An Open Letter to Tim Wise: What about Jewish Privilege?

via TradYouth

Is there a double standard in your
application of privilege theory?
Dear Timothy Jacob Wise,

You’re scheduled to make a grand visit here at the Indiana University at Bloomington, and the Traditionalist Youth Network has plans to picket you. Already, this has caused an uproar on the University, with our flyers being torn down, and I am curious to see what the reaction will be when we show up to protest. Already, on the Jordan Bridge, our messages have been covered up with “IU welcomes Tim Wise!” There has been a significant reaction to the fact that one of our flyers has a classical “Jewish” stereotype with a mask on, saying this is “anti-Semitic.”

I personally didn’t have a role in spreading these flyers, nor have any particular interest in spreading them. I do however; wish to ask you a simple question. Why, if you are ideologically consistent, not renounce, or even discuss the notion of “Jewish Privilege?” When you and other academics argue against so-called “white privilege,” “cisnormativity,” “straight privilege” and the like, there is never a discussion of “Jewish privilege.” Jewish privilege, in it’s quantitative (in terms of raw statistics which demonstrate Jewish influence) and qualitative (in terms of the contradictory reactions to various actions when committed by Jews vs Non-Jews) form is never discussed. If it is discussed, it is always to be scoffed at and dismissed.

Just as those who rail against “patriarchy” “white privilege” “racism” “cisnormativity” “body shaming” and “Kyriarchy” claim to not hate all men, white people, cisgendered, or thin individuals, yet only to be against the “social structures” which allow for their ability to subjugate and oppress minorities. I am not, in discussing the issue of “Jewish privilege,” attempting to smear or defile the Jews as a whole, rather as a religion or an ethnic group.

I wouldn’t dare criticize the ultra-orthodox Jews like Samtar and the Nutrea Karta, who have continued to faithfully uphold Judaism’s commitments to withdrawing and abstaining from political life until the appearance of their messiah. Nor is this addressed to secular Jews like Norman Finkelstein, Noam Chomsky, Gilad Atzmon, and many laudable individuals who have contributed to the international struggle for Palestinian rights, and deconstructing Jewish privilege. Gilad Atzmon deserves all the credit that is due for exposing the reality of Jewish privilege to the world. If Atzmon is ever given the opportunity to speak to the Indiana University, the Traditionalist Youth Network will serve as his personal entourage as the apostles of “free speech” attempt to block his both.

Not everybody in TradYouth is a “White Nationalist”. I’m not. I support the project’s work to promote Traditionalism. I clarify my position in my previous article, “Is My Race My Nation? Doubts Concerning White Nationalism.” I’m not all that interested in “White interests”, but I am interested in your application of privilege theory, and whether you’re being consistent. For understanding, the issue of quantitative White privilege: on your own website, you publish an article about “quantifying white privilege” where you list as an example of said privilege, the numbers of whites and the number of African-Americans arrested for the same year for drug violations. You note that the statistics of arrests juxtaposed with the quantity of black and white drug users do not add up, and that we should be expecting a greater number of whites on arrests and a few number of blacks on arrests:
“Imagine how different life would be in America if 160,000 more whites and 160,000 fewer blacks were being arrested each year for drugs: a shift of 320,000 persons in all in terms of who would be brought under the control of the justice system and who wouldn’t. Imagine what it would mean over the course of a decade: at least 1.5 million more whites with drug arrest records than the numbers of whites who actually have such records now; and likewise, 1.5 million fewer blacks with drug arrest records when compared to those who have such records now or will in the next ten years … So it is no exaggeration to say that but for white privilege in the enforcement of drug laws, the war on drugs and all of its destructive impacts on neighborhoods, families and the country as a whole would have been avoided.”
Yourself and others also argue that White Privilege is demonstrated by the achievement gap in education and employment. Besides the aforementioned statistic, there are some frightening statistics regarding high school drop out rights. From an early age, it has been demonstrated that on average, African-Americans and Hispanics have lower test scores then their Caucasian counterparts. In 2001, over 20% of African Americans and Latino Americans have dropped out of school. On the collegiate level, a greater number of Whites than Blacks enter university and of those who enter, a greater percentage of blacks and Hispanics do not end up finishing.

You claim on your FAQ, that while you do not focus of sexism, you are sympathetic to the cause of dismantling “patriarchy.” Leading feminist Laci Green, in her explanation of Feminism, claims a defining example of patriarchy is the overrepresentation of men in the government, the arts, business, and that “women die” in “wars started by men” Specifically, the senate, representing a country that is 50% and 50% female has an over-representation of men in government. For example, as of 2014, less the 20% of the congress, both the senate and the house were women. This discrepancy is argued by some, to account for the fact that there are scores of bills of “regulate women’s bodies” in some form or another, but no bills “regulating men’s bodies.”

Now, if we take these statistics to represent institutionalized racism. What about the statistics that demonstrate a Jewish privilege? Specifically, according to Stephen Steinlight, the former head of the American Jewish Committee, Jews constitute the “most privileged and powerful of white Americans.” Due the fact that Jewish individuals, in comparison to the rest of the population, have a greater annual income, more than this, they are overwhelmingly represented in our government. If it is “patriarchy” for an 80% male senate in a country that is only 50% male, then what in the world is a senate that is 13% Jewish, in a country that has a population of only 1.7% Jewish? Jews are over represented in our higher legislative body by a statistic of 13 to 1.

Furthermore, in terms of foreign policy, does not the “unbreakable” pact between Israel and America, together with a foreign aid budget of 80% demonstrate a Jewish privilege? I know that you are critical of Zionism and the state of Israel, and you are to be lauded for that. However, I would like to know if you consider these aforementioned raw statistics to be an indication of a “unique Jewish privilege?”

Mr. Wise, my question to you is this. Do the raw statistics imply a Jewish privilege? If you say no, then why do the previous statistics you yourself use to justify white privilege necessarily mean white privilege?

The next question involves Jewish attitudes. I referenced before a “qualitative” nature to any form of privilege. For example, for yourself and others who complain about white privilege, a “qualitative” example of white privilege would be that a white woman does not feel that her skin color and/or natural hair is naturally ugly, and has to remedied with skin whiteners and/or hair straightners. Or the fact that, as Buzzfeed, points out, African-Americans and other minorities are treated as “spokespeople” for their race.

If an internalized inferiority complex is to be taken as an example of “white privilege.” Then what do you make of the internalized self-hatred of many evangelical Christians? The aforementioned Steinlight freely admits that Jews get a “free pass” because of the Holocaust, and the “Christian guilt” has been an effective tool in creating a duality of consciousness, a self-hate if you will. The context in which Steinlight brings this up is the issue of immigration to the United States from Muslim and Latin American countries. His thesis is, in no uncertain terms, that Mexican immigrants and Muslim immigrants will not emulate America’s traditional approach to Jews because they approach Jews in a different theological sense then the majority of American Christians, both Protestant and Catholic. To quote exactly what he says in the sub-section of his paper “posing the sphinx question”:
“Does it matter that most Latino immigrants have encountered Jews in their formative years principally or only as Christ killers in the context of a religious education in which the changed teachings of Vatican II penetrated barely or not at all? Does it matter that the politics of ethnic succession — colorblind, I recognize — has already resulted in the loss of key Jewish legislators (the brilliant Stephen Solarz of Brooklyn was one of the first of these) and that once Jewish “safe seats” in Congress now are held by Latino representatives?”
Later, in discussing the threat of the Islamic community in the United States to Jewish interests, he says:
Powerful strains of religious triumphalism and religious supercessionism are central tenets of Islam. Such dangerous spiritual arrogance has been abandoned by many Christian denominations, largely as a product of Vatican II and years of interfaith dialogue and soul-searching encounters. Christian believers, from Roman Catholics to members of such liberal Protestant denominations as the Congregationalists and the United Church of Christ, have for example, adopted the view that God’s covenantal relationship with the Jewish people remains unbroken and that the advent of Christianity neither erased nor cancelled it. (In the United States, the Southern Baptist Convention forms a sad exception to this changed perspective, as do the traditional attitudes of several Orthodox Christian national churches.) No parallel spiritual generosity exists in Islam. While Muslims are prepared to offer the passing genuflection to Jesus or prominent figures in the Hebrew bible, the tone is one of enormous condescension.
What Steinlight has said here, quite openly, is that most Christians are easier to manipulate and control than Muslims. If it is “white privilege” for African-Americans and Latin-Americans to feel that their body types, skin-colors, and natural hair is “unhealthy” or “unnatural” and that they have to be appease white people to fit in, then what do you call it when Christians are supposed to hold an inferiority complex to Jews?

One last example of Jewish privilege I would like to discuss is representation in the media. Imagine for a second, if there was a movie in which a group of stereotypical Jewish Rabbis put a death curse on a young bank teller. For days a demon stalks her, and at the end, she is dragged into hell. Meanwhile, distorted and disgusting stereotypes of Jews are displayed, in an omnipresent role as vile antagonists. This hypothetical movie would have been denounced as “anti-Semitic” by the same Jewish organizations who denounced the “Passion of the Christ” with such vigor would have followed suit.

Now, replace “Jews” with “Gypsies/Roma” people and we have the offensive and despicable portrayal of “Drag Me to Hell.” Which did not attract any criticism from the ADL or the SPLC. Furthermore, Wikipedia’s article on the film does not mention the racism of this film in the slightest, only that it grossed a 92% approval rating. Compare that with the fact that Wikipedia’s article on both Jesus Christ Superstar and Passion of the Christ document the alleged anti-Semitism of the film.

So my question Mr. Wise is this. Does this not exhibit a form of distinct “Jewish privilege” where movies labeled anti-Semitic are widely condemned while movies which fully exploit age old hateful stereotypes, including ones which were used to justify hundreds of thousands of deaths, including during the Holocaust, gross millions without controversy?

One last question to point out regarding the issue of Jewish privilege regards the freedom to offend. Given that it was only a little over a month ago that the tragedy of the bombing in France occurred, there is no need to explain it. Because this note has gone on too long already, I would like to ask Tim Wise a simple question. Why are the masses concerned with the outcry against Muslim offenses on Free Speech, when there is little any word to the Jewish backed movements to suppress free speech? For example, why was there a United nations organized “Victims of Jihad” conference for the so-called “victims” of Islamic extremism like Ayaan Hirsi, Ibn Warraq, and Wafa Sultan, however no conference dedicated to the “victims of Zionism” such as David Irving and Mahmoud Ahmandinijad? Why is insulting the Prophet Muhammad acceptable in Western Europe, yet blasphemy against the Holocaust, specifically, the Jewish Holocaust victims, not acceptable in western civilization?

To some this all up, Mr. Wise, how are we to take the notion of “white privilege” seriously in our society. Do you not concede that, with the same methodology you reject your so-called “white privilege” that there is a separate and more exalted form of “Jewish privilege?” If the statistics of income disparity, incarceration, employment and the like indicate a privilege for the European-American, then what does it say when one distinct ethnicity constitutes a disproportionate amount of contributions to political campaigns, as well as dominate a our media, academic, and financial institutions? If white privilege is to be seen in a more subtle way, that being internalized conceptions of superiority or inferiority, then what say you regarding the phenomena of self-hate among over 60% of America’s Christians today? If white privilege is to be understood in terms of double standards in America’s justice system, then what say you regarding double standards in terms of media representation, and even the freedom of speech; supposedly the west’s most sacred right?

The Christian Question

via Radix

Oswald Spengler wrote many years ago, “Christian theology is the grandmother of Bolshevism.” What he meant was that Christianity’s endorsement of such ideas as universalism, egalitarianism, peace, world brotherhood, and universal altruism helped establish and legitimize the ethics and politics invoked by socialists and communists. Socialists and communists don’t always agree, however, which is why another German scholar, Karl Marx, pronounced that religion is in fact a conservatizing force, the opiate of the masses, the drug that prevents the workers of the world from rebelling against their class enemies. 

Both of these Teutonic heavyweights might have profited from reading James C. Russell’s The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity, since it speaks, at least indirectly, to the tension between their different views of Christianity, differences that continue to be reflected in political and ideological disputes on the European and American right today. The main question in the controversy is this: Is Christianity a force that supports or opposes the efforts of the right to defend the European-American way of life? Christians on the right argue that their religious commitments are central to Western civilization, while pagans and secularists on the right (especially in Europe) argue, with Spengler, that Christianity undermines the West by pushing a universalism that rejects race, class, family, and even nation.

Mr. Russell, who holds a doctorate in historical theology from Fordham University and teaches at Saint Peter’s College, does not quite answer the question, but his immensely learned and closely reasoned book does suggest an answer. His thesis is that early Christianity flourished in the decadent, deracinated, and alienated world of late antiquity precisely because it was able to appeal to various oppressed or dissatisfied sectors of the population—slaves, urbanized proletarians, women, intellectuals, frustrated aristocrats, and the odd idealist repelled by the pathological materialism, brutality, and banality of the age.

But when Christian missionaries tried to appeal to the Germanic invaders by invoking the universalism, pacifism, and egalitarianism that had attracted the alienated inhabitants of the empire, they failed. That was because the Germans practiced a folk religion that reflected ethnic homogeneity, social hierarchy, military glory and heroism, and “standards of ethical conduct ... derived from a sociobiological drive for group survival through ingroup altruism.” Germanic religion and society were “world-accepting,” while Hellenic Christianity was “world-rejecting,” reflecting the influence of Oriental religions and ethics. By “Germans,” it should be noted, Mr. Russell does not mean modern residents of Germany but rather “the Gothic, Frankish, Saxon, Burgundian, Alamannic, Suevic, and Vandal peoples, but also... the Viking peoples of Scandinavia and the Anglo-Saxon peoples of Britain.” With the exception of the Celts and the Slavs, “Germans” thus means almost the same thing as “European” itself.

Given the contradictions between the Christian ethics and world-view and those of the Indo-European culture of the Germanic peoples, the only tactic Christians could use was one of appearing to adopt Germanic values and claiming that Christian values were really compatible with them. The bulk of Mr. Russell’s scholarship shows how this process of accommodation took place in the course of about four centuries. The saints and Christ Himself were depicted as Germanic warrior heroes; both festivals and locations sacred in ancient Germanic cults were quietly taken over by the Christians as their own; and words and concepts with religious meanings and connotations were subtly redefined in terms of the new religion. Yet the final result was not that the Germans were converted to the Christianity they had originally encountered, but rather that that form of Christianity was “Germanized,” coming to adopt many of the same Indo-European folk values that the old pagan religion had celebrated.

Mr. Russell thus suggests, as noted above, a resolution of the debate over Christian universalism. The early Christianity that the Germans encountered contained a good many universalist tendencies, adapted and reinforced by the disintegrating social fabric and deracinated peoples of the late empire. But thanks to Germanization, those elements were soon suppressed or muted and what we know as the historical Christianity of the medieval era offered a religion, ethic, and world-view that supported what we today know as “conservative values”—social hierarchy, loyalty to tribe and place (blood and soil), world-acceptance rather than world-rejection, and an ethic that values heroism and military sacrifice. In being “Germanized,” Christianity was essentially reinvented as the dynamic faith that animated European civilization for a thousand years and more.

Mr. Russell’s answer to the question about Christianity is that Christianity is both the grandmother of Bolshevism (in its early universalist, non-Western form) and a pillar of social stabilization and order (through the values and world-view imported into it through contact with the ancient barbarians). Throughout most of its history, the latter has prevailed, but today, as Mr. Russell argues in the last pages of his work, the enemies of the European (Germanic) heritage—what he calls “the Euro-Christian religiocultural fusion”—have begun to triumph within Christian ranks. “Opposition to this fusion, especially as it might interfere with notions of universalism and ecumenism, was expressed in several of the documents of the Second Vatican Council,” and he sees the same kind of opposition to the early medieval Germanic influence in the various reform movements in church history, including the Protestant Reformation, which always demand a return to the “primitive church”—i.e., pre-Germanic Christianity. It is precisely this rejection of the European heritage that may have driven many Christians of European background out of Christianity altogether and into alternative forms of paganism that positively affirm their racial and cultural roots.

Whatever primitive Christianity or true Christianity or historical Christianity may or may not have believed and taught, what is indisputably happening today is the deliberate extirpation from Christianity of the European heritage by its enemies within the churches. The institutional Christianity that flourishes today is no longer the same religion as that practiced by Charlemagne and his successors, and it can no longer support the civilization they formed. Indeed, organized Christianity today is the enemy of the West and the race that created it.

Mr. Russell has produced a deeply learned book that assimilates history and theology, sociology and comparative religion, and even sociobiology and genetics within its pages. Moreover, it is an important book that addresses a highly controversial and philosophically and culturally significant issue that few others will address at all.

Fleas Beg Dog for More Time

via Alternative Right

In a recent meeting between the newly-elected King of the Fleas and the Dog, it was agreed that the Fleas could stay on the Dog’s hairy back for another four months, but only if they followed strict conditions.

These include only eating dead skin flakes from the dog instead of drilling down and drinking its blood; while also making amends for all the blood they have drunk and itchiness they have caused in the past by helping the dog in its daily work of catching frisbees, running after wet tennis balls, and chasing the postman.

After the meeting, King Alexis of the Fleas said, “I know you elected me on the promise of telling the dog to go and f**k itself, but my chief economic adviser told me that if we did that, the Dog would start rigorous scratching and we would lose the favourable position we have built up by being members of the Dog-o-zone. Also, Golden Spawn might be elected.”

The former King of the Fleas, the leader of the New Dogmocracy Party, was particularly scathing about the deal.

“The conditions imposed by the Dog will be particularly severe because the new King has gone out of his way to disrespect the Dog,” he explained. “When I was King, we always showed the Dog the greatest respect and sometimes tickled its tummy in a pleasing way, so it was more than happy to allow us to suck a few drops of its blood.”

Other critics have said that the deal is simply not workable, as the Fleas are not adapted to catching wet tennis balls or frisbees, and the postman won't even know they are there.

"The deal simply delays the day when the Dog will have a good old scratch or dose of flea powder," said a top vet from the IMF.

Philosophical Universe, Part 2

via Majority Rights

Comparisons may be in order here. In one hugely significant way Japanese pop-culture is way ahead of ours, with much more organic interaction between anime, music, literature, folk-culture. In a word, the islands of the rising sun are full of Japanese natives. It’s a shocking state of affairs, and one the leaders of the free world are less than amused by. While their breeding rate is dismal and they’re getting older, culturally-speaking there is a continuity we can only gasp at.

While Japan may be superficially cutesy, its pop-culture is not. It’s full of tropes such as the teen misfit, the schoolgirl popette, the emotional cyborg, hangups galore. The tribal mentality imprints itself on these gaudy trinkets of cyber-culture. That’s the attraction of Planet Japan – it’s sexy, not surrendering. Anime is a completely fetishistic artform, sex and tech in perfect harmony, Evangelion being the perfect example (prev).

The closest Europe gets to a harmonious pop-culture is (or was) Eurovision, a naïve folk-culture which is identifiable in Swedish pop-icons Abba. Though they sometimes come across like a beer-cellar oompah piano collective unconscious, make no mistake, they are sentimental optimists. It’s pop-Euro-folk as opposed to strident national sentiment.

If Eurovision was the circus of Europe, politically-motivated cynicism of the eastern states sabotaged its musical authenticity. So I have to say the only way to identify Europe is through its emblematic cohesion. Abba make a big effort to be pan-European, picking up Spanish guitar for Chiquitita. What we’re searching for is a naïve and non-cynical truth, something like pure tribalism. Without those emblems of harmony we are merely technically European, cynically so, without our hearts and anthems. “It’s about the music”, trumpeted the guy at the Turkish takeaway; they left in protest at the vote-rigging and who can honestly blame them? They are as folkloric as we are; listen to outside voices.

That is the spirit-road, and one shouldn’t deny that song and dance, effortless and free as a bird, are part of that route. I was trying to figure the “formula” of Abba; there’s one uptempo number goes “to fill the hole in your soul”. It’s a type of mock-tragedy, light as a bird with a hint of mystery.

Aspirational harmony you see and hear in Gothic cathedrals and the Mediterranean romance of Demis Rousos and Nana Miskouri, while their homeland is pillaged by the Fraulein. Maybe (you say) they should exit the Euro to restart the Drachma and clamber back onto the holiday idyll of yore? Maybe, but it doesn’t solve the problem of what is Europe save another facet of the money-go-round.

If we crave European harmony, we need a counter to the global nexus, and that counter is spirit. The spirit of place is something artists can conjure-up as convincingly as kleptocrats knock it down. Here’s a quote from a short story I read recently by Pierre Gascar
It was a black horse with a glossy coat, one of those half-breeds the peasants used to harness to their wagons. It had just been shod, and the blacksmith wsa taking his tools into the forge when the horse set off towards the middle of the square without the blacksmith’s son, who had untied it, making a move to catch it.
The baker’s wife was running across the square. She saw the horse coming towards her. It was moving slowly with the clatter of its new shoes which made its progress more nervous. The woman took shelter in the coach-house. 
I understood that everything that lived in that animal, the burden of strength, the whinnies as yet unleashed, the dream of space freer than space, everything that was held in check was in this man and woman, who face to face stared at each other in silence.
It was market day, and carts blocked the square. The peasants left them there first thing in the morning, one against another, higgledy-piggledy, and led their horses away into the stables of a café.
– La Petite Place
The square is evoked in painstaking detail with bright flourishes of grace and mood. The baker’s wife and the blacksmith’s son, joined by some invisible bond, the sombre horse reflecting their travails, the ateliers, the jumbled mass of peasant carts, the two eloping on the galloping mare. That type of story only exists outside the nexus of global finance-statehood. A spirit of self-government in all its contradictions. Hence, it’s a type of fable of humankind. One can imagine that living in such situations has a more fabulous Tati-esque sensibility. In that way, the life of La Petite Place borders on myth, it has not succumbed to the total rationalism of modernism.

That’s what I said: the totality of rationalism. That is to say, totalitarianism. And is not that a no-no? Greece may have invented democracy, but they were masters at disorganization, hence their sublime creativity. Modern analytics cannot countenance such independence of spirit. Greeks are the temperamental godfathers of Europe, and they are being leached in its name.

Let me put this in some artistic perspective. We may not accurately appreciate how thoroughly a Cartesian multiverse has efficiently managed to eliminate spirit. We live in a laboured, predictable reality. Literally everything comes under the same inane jurisdiction; Kim Sears, to pick a name at random, for expletives directed at a “flash Czech”. Meanwhile, ease of expression and grace go by the wayside. How has it happened to such devastating degree? Unless we can sort out what is amiss, how can we change in any significant manner the milieu, political or otherwise?

Everything is equivalent in some mysterious way; the Tati-esque choreography of an old French square; the baker’s wife running, the horse flexing its flanks, the psycho-sexual vibes. St Tropez, the 60s haunt of Bardot, had it; now it’s flattened by intercontinental brands and the buy-sell brigade. We are continually misinformed; management and global finance are the destructive forces.

The choreography of action cannot be pre-thought; you see it in 40s Marx Bros movies, creative outsiders. Guys like R Crumb, Ellison and the like are still there to stir the pot. We cannot close our minds to outsiders who’s voices strike with riveting clarity. My feeling or hunch is that a classical culture is a type of carefree theatricality, emotional extemporizing in the moment. Theatre and performance should strive to mirror that reality.

The best theatre is alternate, to wit The Vault’s production http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/theatre-reviews/11375430/cressida-bonas-theres-a-monster-in-the-lake-review.html “>There’s A Monster In The Lake – a sort of cod-philosophy of babes in the woods, spare and free. It’s artless art. You hear it in courtly chansons of the Renaissance, plainchant. You see it in 60s Marvel Comics, the unique origins of all the increasingly tedious elaborations. The clarity of free expression, unclouded by preformed mentalities.

Here’s a thing.  I was listening to The Early Music Show with Lucy Skeating, some medieval filigree, then got this stuff on YouTube – slightly corny, but corn is a good resource:




Now, this is not academic at all, it’s some self-taught musician, electro-pop, yet the medieval ambiance cannot be denied. He’s conjuring-up a mindscape, a landscape to great effect. Sense and sensibility; it doesn’t have to be accurate so long as the expression and feel are present, beloved of games-people and fantasy-merchants. Just add a travelling minstrel to La Petite Place to spin the yarn into a song.

There’s something dreamlike here, but something with a life-force, a life-force with a self-motivated direction. Predator and prey, craving sustenance, warmth, sex, habitat, gathering harvest. I mean, even an amoeba has that or it wouldn’t live! The BBC, however great an institution, doesn’t have it; it has research, think-tanks, academia.
CC Beck puts it like this
Citizen Kane was one of the first movies where the camera moved all over the place … In movies if nothing is happening on stage, move the camera..And nothing was happening in Citizen Kane.
If two people are fighting it’s best to show them facing each other, not the audience … but of course in the movies everything followed the Orson Wells approach. – The Comics Journal #95
I saw a fantastic Japanese action epic called 13 Assassins, set in the Shogunate era of the twilight of the samurai culture. They trek through a fabulous wilderness in their quest for the life of the Shogun’s renegade half-brother – shades of Rashomon. Reluctant Ronin grumbles “I gambled my life on this senseless war for power-politics”, and they are swept along by the just cause, for the renegade is a true villain, sadistic and sex-crazed, depicted as a sort of Japanese albino, his death-scene replete with rolling head.



In typical Japanese style, the blood is felt, not seen, a choreography of sound-effects and elegant sword-strokes. Contrast this true story with the unspeakable dullness of Wolf Hall; where is the carefree ambiance of the Tudor era? What I’m talking about essentially is temperament and type: those that seek justice, the scurvy knave. In Wolf Hall we only get weasel words and half-truths, not the naked savagery of a king’s yes-man.


What do they have in common? Simple; the ronin are ruthlessly effective mercenaries, the arabs are bloodthirsty worshippers, the English guy is a stiff-upper lip Jonny, the natives are superstitious skin-thumpers, the yanks are buddy-buddy toughies, Nyoka is even whiter by way of contrast in the jungle (etc.) Ethnic stereotypes abound, in other words; people without the prefigured, pre-thought reality of liberal determination. Sample dialogue: “seize the white infidel”, “at once, your illustriousness”. Also cliffhangers, woman in peril, being chased etc. Isn’t that what they’re for? As a footnote, the ethnic handiwork with thatched reed-roofs and the rough and ready village habitat could double for a luxury hideout for celebs.

This is where the school of pulp-fantasy that the comic books inhabit comes into its own. Temperament and type predominate. This is the test of true creativity. Everything can be pre-programmed in a pre-set reality, where knowledge is bandied round. Or everything can be a test of temperament; the tooth and claw of Harlan Ellison, the fanboy to fantasy innovator BWS. The latter, incidentally, landed in NYC on a wish and a prayer – the mark of an outsider.

young gods
Copyright 2003 Barry Windsor-Smith

All very classical, and there is a tradition of relating cherubs to the pagan in art. Christian or classical? How about both? The point is that there is a type of artless art that has a natural energy. It is not prefigured; it is a product of awareness – self-awareness as Bruce Lee would have it. Self-awareness is the bedrock of art, and it is a natural phenomenon.
You notice: rehearsed routines lack the flexibility to adapt
Bruce Lee’s languid appraisal of his 3rd tier opponent in Game Of Death (recovered footage)
Lee’s quote could be taken to imply that awareness is evolutionary, so you might relate it to the playful energy found in natural icons, or Tao (spirit). In any case, to be aware of natural spirit is to be moral, to have religion. All ancient civilizations pay obeisance to natural spirit. The Romans had water sprites and ritual baths – see Sulis-Minerva.

Our societies literally run counter to the flexible energy of selfhood that one might identify with Tao. Energy is deliberately utilized to provide smooth-running, hygienic, disinfected environments; if you take the energy equation from factory-farming to supermarkets, it’s entirely negative. Call it organized energy. The organized energy of prefabricated, preset routines has no use for natural energy.

So, what is natural energy? Here’s an interesting link; it takes the form of a tactile, small and energetic intelligence. If you take a look at this film of a microphage (white blood corpuscle) chasing a bacteria:

... you can see immediately that its actions are intelligent. That is, the energy is tactile, sensing its environment, directive.

Our organized energies destroy natural traditions which are small and tactile. This in turn destroys our natural defences against pathogens to which our bodies are designed to be exposed. I mean, in dirt, in less-than-hygienic environments – symbiotic microbes. That is the environment in which Man evolved and developed defences against (the sort of outdoorsy, horse and hunting world of some aristos, basically).

Not only the health-derived properties, but an awareness of symbolism, in water, earth. The last two paras from Animal Faith link reason to praxis, or the world of natural tradition (cosmic symbolism and associated ritual):
Ancient civilizations clearly did value the life-giving properties of springs, Roman baths, earth and mud. There is quite a lot going on here, and only some of it is symbolic. I’ve previously mentioned the fact that dirt strengthens the immune system because of the presence of micro-organisms. What you have is essentially earth-symbolism allied to fact (it may not have escaped your attention that the biggest threat to global health is an antibiotic pandemic?)
So, I think we underestimate the extent to which spirit affects us. An American pioneer settlement has an aesthetic appeal not by accident, but because it values the transcendence of craft, tradition, artisanwork over materialism. The presence of puritan chapels and unorthodox sects is a transcendent link to naturalism, animal and vegetative spirits.
All this is under present peril from prefigured, preset, predetermined liberal modernism, which has no concept of natural energy. Organization, the goal of all directed modernist groups, is the enemy of free expression. Therefore, we ought to divest ourselves of such modernist tendencies. Actually, this group seems wary of being de trop, so my words may not fall on deaf ears.

On Muslim Crime, Genetics, and the Rape of Europe

via The Occidental Observer

Another day, another Muslim-perpetrated shooting in Europe. And despite the gunman having the rather un-European name of Omar El-Hussein, the incident has provided yet more opportunities for redundant warnings against ‘European’ anti-Semitism. These killings, like those in Paris, disturb and irritate me for a number of reasons.

Firstly, and most obviously, I am troubled at the perpetration of Islamic murder and lawlessness in Europe. Secondly, media representations of these events refuse to disclose that they are a product of disastrous immigration and foreign policies — policies which have been demonstrably influenced by Jews. Thirdly, the simplistic and primitive drama inherent in shootings and fugitive hunts inevitably diverts mass attention from the broader and more subtle picture of how those policies are affecting Europeans. Intentionally or not, these are acts of distraction as much as acts of terrorism. Fourthly, the shootings provide opportunities for Jews to amplify their victimhood narrative, and to regurgitate tired old ‘lessons’ to Europe. These lessons are then tied in to further Jewish demands, which include the restriction of arms and free speech. Finally, I am considerably irritated by the way in which these events have been used as a means for Jews to present themselves as the perennial victims of terrorism, when they have a rich history of engaging in it themselves.

We are daily fed the idea that ‘Islamic terror’ is the number one threat to our way of life. It’s certainly a serious threat to the way we live our lives, but not in the way the media tries to make us believe. You see, I don’t limit my perception of Islamic terror to the obscenely theatrical, but relatively few, mass murders through which Muslim fanatics have managed to imbue their fossil creed with some relevance and publicity in the 21st century.  No. I see ‘Muslim terror’ also in the everyday, more banal but no less important, impact of Muslim crime on Europe. I see ‘Muslim terror’ not, as the Zionists would like us to see it, as a foreign policy issue. It is primarily domestic. It requires domestic solutions. I argue that the ‘War on Terror’ can be won most conclusively not with aircraft carriers, bombs, ground-troops, regime-changes and mass casualties — but with deportation lists filled with the names of the undesirable and the demonstrably unassimilable.

England’s The Independent reported last year that Muslims make up 4.7% of the population of England and Wales, but comprise 14% of the prison population in those countries. The figures still don’t give the full picture of Muslim-perpetrated crime because Muslims tend to engage most often in serious crime. For example, the report adds that “in some prisons the proportion of Islamic inmates is more than one-third, and in Whitemoor, a Category A prison in Cambridgeshire, it is as high as 43 per cent.” Explanations from Muslim apologists have been predictable:
Muzammil Quraishi, a senior lecturer in criminology and criminal justice at Salford University, said: “Young Muslim men are under the official gaze from their school days onwards — they have the lens of the state turned on them. Certain populations can become suspect populations in the eyes of the law enforcement agencies.” Amal Imad, of the charity Muslim Aid, suggested that poor educational performance, problems finding fulfilling jobs and family breakdown were factors in the increasing numbers of Muslims behind bars. She said: “It may be that they can’t integrate into society, they don’t think they have a positive chance to integrate into society.” Mizanur Rahman, a spokesman for the organisation Muslim Prisoners, blamed the spike on Islamophobia and racism among police officers.
So basically, these foreign apologists are arguing that ‘the lens of the state,’ ‘problems finding fulfilling jobs,’ and ‘racism among police officers’ are the reason why, by the British government’s own admission, Muslims are over-represented in rape convictions by three times their proportion of the population — not to mention the horrendous scandal showing that Muslims have been raping with impunity because police, social workers and politicians have been afraid of being stigmatized as racists. These biased commentators don’t feel the need to offer any substantial evidence for their argument, relying on buzzwords like ‘racism’ to deftly side-step any opportunity for rational debate and terrify authorities to simply allow Muslim crime to go unpunished.

But we truly live in a “Through the Looking Glass” kind of world, and while Muslim crime soars, the refrain from the media is that it is actually anti-Muslim ‘hate crime’ that is soaring. But is it? The Guardian reported that there were 500 ‘Islamophobic crimes’ across Britain in 2013. Many of these ‘crimes’ were of the “pig’s head left outside a mosque” variety. To put this into some kind of perspective, in the same year Muslims perpetrated at least 676 rapes. So for every pork-inspired teenage prank, there were probably a couple of Muslim rapes being carried out at the same time. I know which crime I view most seriously.

Even looking at the picture from a racial rather than religious viewpoint, the figures of the Crown Prosecution Service show that Whites are under-represented in rape convictions relative to their proportion in the population, whereas Blacks, ‘Asians’ (the label most often applied to Pakistanis, etc.), and those of mixed ethnicity all far exceeded their proportion of the population. So the media prefers the false alarm over hate crime to the real alarm which needs to be sounded over the ethnic rape epidemic.

This state of affairs has not gone un-noticed by a professor at the world-renowned University of Cambridge, Julian Hargreaves, who weighed into the debate by asserting that “an examination of statistics taken from the Crime Survey of England and Wales between 2006 and 2010 reveals a surprising counter-narrative to commonly-held perceptions of British Muslim communities and their relationships to crime victimisation and the criminal justice system.” Unlike the inept bleating of Quraishi, Imad, and Rahman, this research and its findings originated from the head of Cambridge’s Centre for Islamic Studies, and was produced by someone with a rather more native-sounding name.

Hargreaves found that the vast majority of Muslims actually reported very positive interactions with police forces (at a level higher than non-Muslims), categorically disproving the ridiculous theory that police racism was to blame for the Muslim crime epidemic. Hargreaves also tackled left-wing coverage of ‘Islamophobic crime’ by noting that his findings suggested, above all, “a growing need to move beyond misleading and potentially damaging generalizations which seek to cast British Muslim communities only as the victims of violent crime and police discrimination.” He further castigated mainstream media coverage of ‘hate crimes’ as “highly politicized and rhetorical in character, rarely rooted in statistical evidence and seldom substantiated by empirical findings.”

But the myth of Muslim victimhood at the hands of ‘hate crime’ is just one among many. Another great myth that we are force-fed is that these criminals are somehow not ‘real’ Muslims. This is a common ploy, and one pioneered to a great extent by Jews. You see, ethnic transgressors have a malleable function in their communities. Arrested, tried, or even incarcerated, they can play the role of ethnic victim to the ‘racist’ state. They can be stripped of anything but their ethnic or religious identity, adding to that all important statistical base which allegedly shows that higher rates of incarceration equal ‘institutional racism’ rather than a higher rate of criminality. However, if the crime is a little too serious, or its potential to rock the inter-ethnic boat too considerable, then the perpetrator can be cut loose from the community — “he was never one of us anyway,” etc. But of course he was. And he remains tied to his community by bonds of religion, cultural heritage and blood.

Moreover, empirical evidence demolishes this pillar of the Muslim narrative. According to a joint survey by the German Interior Ministry and the Institute for Criminology Research of Lower Saxony (KFN), “the willingness to commit violent crimes grows among young Muslim immigrants in Germany the more religious they become.”

In case you think that this is linked purely to acts of conventional terrorism such as assassination and bombing, the report is actually commenting on willingness to commit crimes such as armed robbery or assault and battery. The research also stated, by way of contrast, that “the willingness to commit violent crimes, such as armed robbery or assault and battery, among young Catholics and Protestants decreases with religious fervor.” Coming at least somewhat closer to forming an explanation for the Muslim rape epidemic, the report suggested that Islam cultivates “the acceptance of macho behavior,” and that Muslim immigrants “lay claim to a variety of male privileges.” The result is a burgeoning population of young Islamic males in Europe who have a sense of entitlement to White women, a disregard for our laws, and an open disgust for the effeminate “integration” policies of our governments. Meanwhile, Europe hermetically seals its avenues for free speech and the rape of a Continent goes on unchallenged.

The Washington Times reports that “in Sweden, Muslim immigrants account for 5 percent of its population but commit 77 % of its crime. Sweden’s “rape crisis” is a direct result of an influx of Muslim asylum seekers.” Amnesty International reports that Sweden has the highest number of rapes in Europe and the lowest conviction rate. According to Swedish Public Radio, in Stockholm alone, over 1,000 Swedish women reported that a Muslim immigrant raped them; 300 were under age 15. (One third of those living in Stockholm are immigrants; 24 percent are Muslim). These numbers represent only 25 percent of all rapes in Stockholm because officials claim the majority are unreported. Despite this, the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention and the European Commissioner for Home Affairs “refuse to admit the assailants are Muslim.”

Turning our attention to France, which has endured the full spectrum of Muslim crime, the 40% Muslim population of Marseilles has made it “the most dangerous city in Europe.” When Marseilles was labelled a “cultural capital of Europe” in 2013 (a rotating European Union honor), the award only refocused attention on Marseille’s growing reputation as a European drug-smuggling hub, a place where entire neighborhoods have slipped away from police control and fallen under the command of gangsters who earn millions importing and selling North African hashish and settle turf disputes with AK-47 assault rifles. “Marseille is sick with its violence,” Interior Minister Manuel Valls said.

In fact, Marseilles is sick with its Muslims. In case you think that the immolation of human beings is something ‘extremist’ Muslims do in far-off scratches of barren desert, reconsider that in Marseilles they regularly find bodies burned to a crisp with bullets in their charred skulls — victims of an execution ‘style’ that local Islamic traffickers call the “barbecue.” Each year, gangs from France’s 6.5 million-strong Muslim population compete with each other for the media spotlight over who can cause the most destruction. An estimated 40,000 cars are burned in France every year. Rape, that other feature of the lesser-reported Muslim terror in Europe also occurs with alarming frequency. Demonstrating the saturation of anti-European hatred among this population and confirming some aspects of the German study, on March 31 2014, police arrested four Muslim boys (three Turkish brothers between the ages of 13 and 15, and one 17-year-old from Morocco) for gang raping an 18-year-old woman as she left the main train station in Évry, a commune in the southern suburbs of Paris. During police questioning, the minors said that they attacked the woman because she was French and “the French are all sons of whores.”

In Denmark last year a 39 year-old Syrian Muslim asylum seeker climbed into a window of a family’s home in Graestad, a small village, to rape their 8-year-old daughter. Her parents got to her in time with the help of a neighbor. The incident was nothing new. Denmark’s 10news.dk reports that eight out of the nine ethnic groups who commit the most crimes are Muslim “asylum” seekers who entered Denmark from Lebanon, Pakistan, Morocco, Turkey, Syria, Somalia, Iran, and Iraq. Seventy percent of inmates in youth prisons are immigrants; the majority are Muslims. Denmark, like other European countries, and the EU, has implemented entire agencies dedicated to useless “integration” programs for Muslim immigrants.
One result from this mostly redundant effort is insight offered by Danish psychologist Nicolai Sennels who coined the term “Criminal Muslims.” His assertion that Islam creates a “psychology of an unhealthy culture that spawns criminal minds,” led to a national debate about freedom of speech and Denmark’s Integration Program. Based on extensive research, interviews, and analysis, (and echoing the findings of the German report) Mr. Sennels states, “Muslims are taught to be aggressive, insecure, irresponsible and intolerant.” For being intellectually honest, Sennels has been condemned by Islamic sites such as The American Muslim, which illustrates its knowledge of how to navigate multicultural Europe by stating that Sennels produces “Nazi style propaganda,” and that “his articles on Muslim inbreeding, mental deficiencies, etc. sound exactly like Nazi eugenics theories.” Note the complete reliance on what Sennels’ theories “sound like” rather than any real confrontation with his evidence or arguments.

Regardless of what Sennels’ theories “sound like,” his arguments are compelling in relation to Muslim criminality. In particular, he has produced significant contributions on the effect of inbreeding on sanity, noting extremely high rates of stillbirths in Pakistan (where 70 percent of all marriages are between first cousins) and Turkey (where the figure is 25 to 30 percent). Of those offspring which survive, Sennels notes that “a large part of inbred Muslims are born from parents who are themselves inbred — which increase the risks of negative mental and physical consequences greatly.” The rate of inbreeding in Muslim populations internationally is staggering and is in fact higher than the Muslim average in some European countries. Sennels notes that:
Statistical research on Arabic countries shows that up to 34 percent of all marriages in Algiers are consanguine (blood related), 46 percent in Bahrain, 33 percent in Egypt, 80 percent in Nubia (southern area in Egypt), 60 percent in Iraq, 64 percent in Jordan, 64 percent in Kuwait, 42 percent in Lebanon, 48 percent in Libya, 47 percent in Mauritania, 54 percent in Qatar, 67 percent in Saudi Arabia, 63 percent in Sudan, 40 percent in Syria, 39 percent in Tunisia, 54 percent in the United Arabic Emirates and 45 percent in Yemen (Reproductive Health Journal, 2009, “Consanguinity and reproductive health among Arabs.”)…Research, conducted by the BBC and broadcast to a shocked nation, found that at least 55% of the community was married to a first cousin. This is thought to be linked to the probability that a British Pakistani family is at least 13 times more likely than the general population to have children with recessive genetic disorders.” (Times of India, 17/11 2005, “Ban UK Pakistanis from marrying cousins”).
Importantly for considerations of Muslim criminality, as well as the threat of stillbirth and a high number of genetic disorders, the population is also extremely likely to have lower intelligence and to be deficient in social ability. Sennels comments that “the IQ is 10–16 points lower in children born from related parents and that abilities related to social behavior develop slower in inbred babies (Indian National Science Academy, 1983, “Consanguinity Effects on Intelligence Quotient and Neonatal Behaviours of Ansari Muslim Children).

Depression, schizophrenia, and various forms of psychosis have also been conclusively linked to the offspring of consanguineous marriages, and Sennels noted the fact that in Denmark “immigrant patients are stressing the psychiatric system and are strongly overrepresented among insane criminals: “In Sct. Hans Hospital, which has the biggest ward for clinically insane criminals in Denmark, more than 40 percent of the patients have an immigrant background” (Kristeligt Dagblad, 26/6 2007 “Ethnic minorities overrepresented among the criminal insane”).

This is all evidence indeed that the injection of vast numbers of Muslims into the European bloodstream has proved toxic. As Sennels puts it, we have imported a self-perpetuating population which has “limited social skills and understanding, limited ability to manage education and work procedures. … The negative cognitive consequences also influence the executive functions. The impairment of concentration and emotional control most often leads to anti-social behavior.”

The costs mount up. Not only does Europe fall victim to the crimes perpetrated by the inbred population, but it must also look after its increasing number of defective offspring.  As Sennels comments:
“Disabled immigrant children costs Danish municipalities millions. In Copenhagen County alone, the number of disabled children in the overall increase of 100 percent at 10 years. … Meredith Lefelt has contacted 330 families with disabled children in Copenhagen. She estimates that one third of their clients have a foreign cultural background.” (BT, 10/11 2003 Immigrants inbreeding costing one million.) On top come the expenses for Muslim immigrants who – because of different consequences of being born from blood related parents – are not able to live up to the challenges of our Western work market: Muslim immigrants and their descendants in Europe have a very high rate of unemployment. The same goes for Muslims in USA, where the Gallup Institute made a study involving 300.000 people concluding “The majority of Muslims in USA have a lower income, are less educated and have worse jobs than the population as a whole.” (Berlingske Tidende, d. 3. marts 2009: Muslims thrive in USA.
Additionally, statistics show that:
  • Non-Western immigrants are more than 300 percent more likely to fail the Danish army’s intelligence test than native Danes.
  • Two thirds of all immigrant school children with Arabic backgrounds are illiterate after 10 years in the Danish school system.
  • Immigrant children are overrepresented on Copenhagen’s schools for retarded children and children with physical handicaps. … 51 percent of the children on the three schools in Copenhagen for children with physical and mental handicaps have immigrant backgrounds and in one of the schools the amount is 70 percent.
I had to laugh recently when I read that Islamic State has been reported as telling an embedded journalist that:
We will conquer Europe one day. It is not a question of IF we will conquer Europe, just a matter of when that will happen. But it is certain. For us, there is no such thing as borders. There are only front lines. Our expansion will be perpetual. And the Europeans need to know that when we come, it will not be in a nice way. It will be with our weapons. And those who do not convert to Islam or pay the Islamic tax will be killed.
This from an ethno-religious group which has managed to win the Nobel Prize just nine paltry times, five of which are for the dubious achievement of “peace.” The vast geographic area which comprises the Islamic lands produces a mere one tenth of the World average when it comes to scientific research. This boast from a culture which disdains the book so much that 70% of Turks will never read one, and the UN Arab Human Development Report concludes that there have been fewer books translated into Arabic in the last thousand years than the amount of books translated within the country of Spain every year. I doubt Islamic State could even find Berlin on a map.

Even now, with Europe demographically weak, no Islamic nation could form a meaningful challenge to the Continent. Refuting science and progress as the mark of the ‘Crusader’ or the Devil, they will sink once more into the morass of in-breeding and cultural decay that they languished in until so very recently. We have no genetic interest in these people. We should assign no resources to them. They are best simply ignored and quarantined because the Muslim’s worst enemy is, and always has been, himself. He becomes harmful to us only to the extent that we, or the facilitators of his immigration, allow him opportunity to do so.

Merlin Miller, 2012 Presidential Candidate, Forms New Party

via American Freedom Party

Further evidence of the discontent with Republicans, Democrats, and special interest politics, another party forms. 2012 presidential candidate Merlin Miller formed “American Eagle Party.” In a December 2014 filing with the FEC the party filed a “Statement of Organization” for American Eagle Party.

Merlin Miller, after the 2012 presidential election, returned to his home state of Tennessee to resume film-making at Americana-Pictures and to continue working on his movie “False Flag” (a drama about the attack on the USS Liberty by Israeli jets).

During the election Merlin Miller was able to get on the ballot in 17 states. The AFP was unable to get petitioners in all 50 states because of costs and manpower. Also, Every state has their own set of qualifications for getting placed on the ballot.

Prior to the campaign, Merlin Miller and Dr. Adrian Krieg authored “Our Vision for America” outlining problems with the current political atmosphere in the United States.

The self appointed paragons of ‘piety and society’, Southern Poverty Law Center, wrote that Merlin was interviewed by Press TV in Iran, where he was attending an international film festival. During that interview, Merlin claimed that charges against him of “racism” stemmed from his criticism of Zionism and the Jewish-controlled media. He also stated that he believes 9/11 was a Mossad-orchestrated event carried out with “considerable inside help.”

A second Jewish extremist group, the ADL, wrote about Merlin’s attendance at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) 2013. “Official Blogs From The Anti-Defamation League” wrote a posting entitled, “Extremists Flock to 40th Annual CPAC Conference,” wherein they disparaged Merlin Miller, a Presidential candidate in 2012, as a “white supremacist.” Merlin Miller disagrees with the concept of an “ethnostate” for European-Americans to replace this failed “multicultural” experiment.
The 40th annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on March 14–16, 2013 in Wash­ing­ton, D.C. attracted a number of individuals on the extreme right of the political spectrum. Attendees at CPAC this year included a white supremacist who ran for President in the 2012 election, members of a “white student union” at Towson University, and a reported white supremacist who currently runs an anti-immigrant group. A prominent member of the anti-government Oath Keepers group presented at the event.
We fondly wish Merlin Miller much success in his new venture.

Downward Dog: Yoga and Cultural Appropriation

via Radix

“Cultural appropriation of the Other assuages feelings of deprivation and lack that assault the psyches of radical white youth who choose to be disloyal to western civilization.” - bell hooks
Often social media is great because it allows one to glimpse into not only the ideas and opinions of others, but the sources they consume, the media that affects them, the stories and banalities that occupy their attention long enough for a re-post with a one-sentence, hyperbolic hashtag. Occasionally it allows one to trace the web of how Tweetledum and Tweetledee form their opinions and emotional sentiments—that’s how I came across this gem of a blog post on yoga, social justice and cultural approbation—written by one Moonlitmoth.

Now Moonlitmoth looks to be a Gen Xer, and as a child of probable beats or hippies, secular granolas or liberal yuppies—one cannot safely assume that this moniker is a pseudonym. This “yoga and social justice” blogger is the stereotypical Western woman today, vaguely spiritual while consuming the modes of uplift and transcendence from other cultures while shaming herself for appropriating those very practices, and ultimately left both hollow and self-righteous. “White people, who like me, were not aware (aka. blinded by our privilege) to some glaringly obvious problems in my work. My analysis often failed to meaningfully address colonization and my participation in that oppressive system as a culturally appropriating, white yoga teacher.”

There are some real issues at work here, some deep seated problems with our modern womenfolk:
  1. Her lack of historical context: Ignorance.
  2. Her sense of internalizing the shaming she received for “appropriating” some aspect of another’s culture and being white: Shame.
  3. The hole that has been left in our culture by secularism and a thorough American vilifying of our own great spiritual traditions–namely ecumenical Christianity: Spiritual Void.
First, the lack of historical context, women in general tend to form their opinions more on sentiment than rational critique, but this traditional biased assumption is not theirs alone. Our public school system has been devised for one very specific reason, which can be summed up nicely by a George Carlin quote:
“They want OBEDIENT WORKERS. OBEDIENT WORKERS. People who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork, and just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime, and the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it.”
On this we are defiantly aligned with the radical leftist critique of the education system. But while Paulo Freire, the widely read Brazilian revolutionary Marxist pedagogue, identifies and rejects the ethos of modern education for: “Their vision of the new man or woman is individualistic; because of their identification with the oppressor, they have no consciousness of themselves as persons or as members of an oppressed class.” For our purposes we would replace the Marxist humanistic terminology of “oppressed class” with that of “race.” And this brings us back to Moonlitmoth and her identification of herself as White solely as a negative—as a culturally appropriating, colonizing, privileged White woman. As the process of modern education in its leftist guise attempts to isolate individuals for better control, whites have internalized their own vilification as the oppressor but not with relish but rather with shame. What has happened is that the traditional role of the bourgeoisie as the enemy of the class struggle, has been slowly and methodically applied to the “white race” as the enemy of humanity, and even more so to the white male in particular—or as Susan Sontag puts it, “the white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone.”

One of the things that radicalized me into White nationalism was the experience of shaming that I received in a university course on diversity—taught by a Black female professor who would ignorantly spew shibboleths that she could not backup.
While the process of individuation and White shaming has Moonlitmoth isolated from her own history, community, and tradition, she begins adopting and appropriating the customs, ideas, and cultural practices of others—and she internalizes their post hoc rage against the success of her ancestors. She identifies with the Other on feminist grounds, thereby joining and swelling their ranks against the real enemy: the dreadful White male. That is essentially the target of these attacks, what bell hooks refers to as: “white supremacist capitalist patriarchy.”

The real problem with this is not the obvious feeling of phoniness that accompanies when Whites “go native” as the anthropologists say, the real problem is her lack of understanding of why she feels so hollow, rather than hallow, even after appropriating these spiritual practices.

Moonlitmoth recounts how she was shamed for her online blog by East Indians for appropriating their cultural practice of yoga and that this experience made her feel shameful. She has the vague feeling that the Lululemon-sponsored, glorified stretching class that she was engaged in was a poor commercialized western attempt to appropriate the spiritual practice of another people, and that this desire to consume the exotic Other grew out of the oppressive framework of colonialism. This is what hooks calls Eating the Other.

While Moonlitmoth “taught anti-oppression workshops in yoga studios across north America,” anyone with even a tenuous grasp of history knows yoga grew out of the caste system of Ancient India as a spiritual practice for the Brahman elites, i.e. out of an “oppressive paradigm.” Therefore, she begins by completely contradicting her own premises. True yoga as a spiritual practice was never meant to be performed by the masses, because (as all traditionalist schools teach) spiritual ascension is only reachable by the select few who are inclined towards it. This is what Evola found in the esoteric core of Buddhism, which is assumed to be the egalitarian overcoming of Hindu oppressiveness—the same weak dialectic which is made for European paganism and Christianity. While there is a core unity in all the doctrines of “oneness”—the Hindu Atman, Judeo-Christian monotheism, Catholic universalism, Pagan tolerance, and Buddhist detachment—all function in reality as de facto caste systems.

Furthermore, it is probable that White people invented the practice of yoga to begin with, which means that it’s not really a form of colonial appropriation, but reclaiming a lost aspect of ancient Indo-European spiritual practice. Yes, Whites invented yoga, because it derives from a Vedic-Hindu practice, and Ancient India was conquered by invading Aryans from the north who enslaved the native brown-skinned Dravidians and imposed the caste system upon them. Through miscegenation over the course of many centuries this European blood became diffused with that of the other mixes:
“For maternally inherited mtDNA, each caste is most similar to Asians. However, 20%–30% of Indian mtDNA haplotypes belong to West Eurasian haplogroups, and the frequency of these haplotypes is proportional to caste rank, the highest frequency of West Eurasian haplotypes being found in the upper castes. In contrast, for paternally inherited Y-chromosome variation each caste is more similar to Europeans than to Asians. Moreover, the affinity to Europeans is proportionate to caste rank, the upper castes being most similar to Europeans, particularly East Europeans. These findings are consistent with greater West Eurasian male admixture with castes of higher rank.” [Source: Bamshad, Michael et al. “Genetic Evidence on the Origins of Indian Caste Populations.” Genome Research 11.6 (2001)]
That is why even today there is a higher amount of Caucasian blood in the Brahman caste. Ergo, Yoga as an ancient practice of the Brahmans was a White invention. This is not appropriation; it is a rediscovery of our Indo-European heritage.

Moonlitmoth again: “It took me a long time to admit this to myself and make the necessary changes this realization entails, but what I know in my heart, my mind and my gut is that what we are doing in western yoga is an entitled, willfully ignorant act of theft.”

The ignorance here is White people not knowing their own history and internalizing a sense of shame for borrowing something from another culture. All cultures borrow–should Whites shame Asians or Blacks for appropriating our technology, our religions, our languages and our cultures? When Christian Filipinos worship a White Christ, are they not committing the same cultural appropriation? Where is the shaming there?

The third theme at work here is perhaps the most important, but all three parts of this unholy triptych function to give us our Moonlitmoths, our New Agers, our vegan-yoga-mat-carrying-miscegenating-radical-feminist-cry-baby-White-women; ignorant, ashamed, and lacking spiritual sustenance–easily bullied by minorities who collectively cast their lot against her, they want her to ‘check her privilege’ and they want to give her the comeuppance of an exaggerated historical grievance. This spiritual void has many guises with which people in the modern world try to compensate. The sexual revolution was one such method. In a world without spiritual transcendence one such solution became eternal imminence—the fall into gross materialism. We’ve seen the phenomenon of White women proving their membership in this hollowed world through militant miscegenation and through the adoption of non-White children as Hollywood PC fashion accessories. And also through promiscuity – as discernment is the first step towards bigotry after all. And finally, through the modern selfishness of the consumerist ‘Sex in the City’ career gal. But this other aspect, not always disentangled from the modern ethos of: open society = open legs, is the one that attempts spiritual ascension, which like its sexual counterpart, results in experimentation with the exotic and unfamiliar - often confusing these elements for mysticism and depth. While the godfather of the New Age, Mexican-American Carlos Castaneda, has been revealed to be more sham-man than shaman, the acolytes of the vague open spiritualism of modernity seem not to have woken up to the facts. And the facts are that when we are taught to hate ourselves, when we are shamed to a facile state of tolerance, and when we dismiss and ridicule our own traditions as Eurocentric, misogynist, patriarchal, hierarchical, colonial, intolerant, oppressive, and all the other code-words for anti-white, we allow ourselves to be hollowed out. While the legacy of the radical 60s is still with us, we could do well to remind ourselves that the problem with having “an open mind”—a euphemism for having liberal, tolerant, and progressive values—is that people insist on putting things inside.