November 1, 2015 As the presidential candidacy of Donald Trump took off, white nationalists across the country rallied to his message Luke Ford No sacred cows.

As the presidential candidacy of Donald Trump took off, white nationalists across the country rallied to his message

Posted on November 1, 2015 by Luke Ford

Here’s a classic guilt by non-association smear.

How come Democrats never get smeared by the media for their support from communists and black nationalists and Muslims?

From the SPLC: You can’t blame a politician for the politics of their every supporter. You can’t even blame that pol for failing to denounce every ugly thing his or her enthusiasts might say. But at some point, you have to wonder. Such is the case with Donald Trump.

It’s often difficult to tell exactly what Trump’s positions are, because, outside of immigration, he has offered almost no details about them. But as the first three months of Trump’s unexpectedly super-charged campaign for the GOP nomination for president unfolded, it became clear that he was very much the preferred candidate of virtually the entire white nationalist movement in America.

Trump never asked for that support. But he got it. And when a plethora of media outlets began to report on that fact, Trump’s response was tepid indeed. He didn’t need David Duke’s endorsement, he said of the infamous former Klan leader who he suggested he’d barely heard of; indeed, the billionaire New Yorker known for his boastfulness added in the same breath, he really didn’t need anyone’s.

Whether Trump is consciously dog-whistling to racist extremists or simply following his own star, he has increasingly delighted the racist right, many of whose denizens were initially deeply skeptical of his candidacy. After Trump released his six-page immigration plan — which included calls for deporting some 11 million people, forcing Mexico somehow to pay for a 1,900-mile border wall, and revoking the 14th Amendment’s promise of birthright citizenship — Duke exulted.

“I praise the fact that he’s come out on the immigration issue,” Duke told listeners of his radio show after the mid-August release. “I’m beginning to get the idea that he’s a good salesman. That he’s an entrepreneur and he has a good sense of what people want to hear, what they want to buy. … And I think he realizes that his path to popularity, toward power in the Republican Party, is talking about the immigration issue. And he has really said some incredibly great things recently. So whatever his motivation, I don’t give a damn. I really like the fact that he’s speaking out on this greatest immediate threat to the American people.”

Pressed to renounce Duke’s backing by reporters for Bloomberg Politics, Trump, who earlier said he didn’t need anyone’s endorsement because “everybody likes me,” responded, “Sure I would, if that would make you feel better.”

From the Start

Donald Trump’s appeal to the radical right was there from the start, in the June 16 speech announcing his candidacy. “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best,” he said. “They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with [them]. They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists, and some I assume are good people.”

White nationalists responded almost immediately. Members of the White Genocide Project, a racist group formed to push the baseless claim that a “genocide” of white people is occurring around the world, started a White House petition calling on President Obama to honor Trump for “opposing white genocide.”

Jared Taylor, one of the nation’s leading white nationalists and founder of the racist journal American Renaissance, praised Trump for his characterization of Mexicans. “Americans, real Americans, have been dreaming of a candidate who says the obvious, that illegal immigrants from Mexico are a low-rent bunch that includes rapists and murders,” Taylor said in a video on his website.

Gregory Hood, an avid white nationalist writer for Richard Spencer’s Radix journal, also chimed in, declaring that “Trump is worth supporting. He is worth supporting because we need a troll. We need someone who can expose the system that rules us as the malevolent and worthless entity it is. We need someone who can break open public debate. We need someone who can expose and heighten the contradictions within the system. And we need someone who can call out the press, the politicians, and the pseudo-intellectuals as the empty shells they are.”

Trump was not the first politician to raise the hopes of American white nationalists. In recent years, racist support developed for then-U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Ky.), who has been accused of but denied authoring anti-black writings, and then-U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), a virulent opponent of immigration. But by far the most of that kind of support seen in recent years went to Pat Buchanan, the white nationalist columnist, former MSNBC commentator, and well-known “culture warrior” who ran unsuccessfully for president in 1992, 1996 and 2000.

Even more extremists fell in line behind Trump after the release of his immigration plan — a plan that is almost indistinguishable from the policy proposals made by John Tanton, a white nationalist who founded the Federation for American Immigration Reform and essentially created the modern nativist movement.

Richard Spencer, who heads the white nationalist National Policy Institute and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing” to halt the “deconstruction” of white culture, is a former editor at the Buchanan-founded American Conservative. After seeing the plan, Spencer told The New Yorker magazine that Trump reflected “an unconscious vision that white people have — that their grandchildren might be a hated minority in their own country. I think that scares us. They probably aren’t able to articulate it. I think it’s there. I think that, to a great degree, explains the Trump phenomenon. I think he is the one person who can tap into it.”

Jared Taylor, in an American Renaissance piece entitled “Is Trump Our Last Chance?,” put it like this: “Donald Trump’s new position paper on immigration makes it official: He is easily the best presidential candidate on border security and immigration since Pat Buchanan. And we can be sure he is not a bait-and-switch politician who excites supporters with a few sensible ideas and then betrays them. Mr. Trump has single-handedly made immigration the key issue of this election. His heart is in it when he says we need to build a wall, deport illegals, and have an immigration ‘pause’ until every American who wants a job gets one.”

Language, Violence and Elitism

It has become clear over the years that when public figures savage minority communities — calling them rapists and drug dealers, for instance — a climate of fear and bigotry often follows that ultimately leads to hate violence. Trump’s toxic anti-immigrant rhetoric, so prominent in the news today, has consequences.

After the release of Trump’s immigration plan, dozens of threads about the candidate appeared on Stormfront, the world’s largest hate forum, founded and still run by a former Alabama Klan leader. In one, a poster suggested that it would only be plausible to deport about 25% of undocumented immigrants.

“Everyone in favor of shooting the rest … raise your hand,” another replied.

“You have my sword,” chimed in still another, posting that message alongside a photograph of an assault rifle with several clips and a handgun.

It wasn’t only the professional racists who haunt Stormfront who sounded like that. At a major Trump speech in Mobile, Ala., one person could be heard shouting “white power!” Olaf Childress, editor of The First Freedom, was passing out the openly racist tabloid to people in the crowd estimated at up to 30,000. And another Trump fan advocated violence to The New York Times: “Hopefully, he’s going to sit there and say, ‘When I become elected president, what we’re going to do is we’re going to make the border a vacation spot, it’s going to cost you $25 for a permit, and then you get $50 for every confirmed kill.’ That’d be one nice thing.”

In the early morning hours of Aug. 19, that kind of talk came to a head when two white men leaving a Red Sox game in Boston came across a homeless Latino man. They beat the man badly with a metal pipe, then urinated in his face. Following their arrest, one of them reportedly told police, “Donald Trump was right, all these illegals need to be deported.” Asked about his language and the hate attack, Trump limited himself to saying that his followers “are very passionate. They love this country and they want this country to be great again. They are passionate.”

A day later, he condemned the crime a little more directly.

On Sept. 9, Trump took on another minority group — Muslims. Teaming up with a fellow GOP presidential hopeful, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), he joined a rally in Washington, D.C., sponsored in part by the Center for Security Policy, one of the country’s most influential anti-Muslim groups. The rally drew counter-protesters, including activists for undocumented immigrants angered by Trump’s statements. His supporters spit on the counter-protesters and even pulled one girl’s hair.

To Cas Mudde, a Dutch scholar and expert on the radical right who is currently teaching at the University of Georgia, Trump is an elitist nativist who is appealing to far-right elements in America like many others before him.

“Trump himself doesn’t hold a populist radical right ideology, but his political campaign clearly caters to populist radical right attitudes, and his supporter base is almost identical to the core electorate of populist radical right parties in (Western) Europe,” Mudde wrote in an opinion piece published in The Washington Post.

“However, Trump also stands in a long tradition of American nativism, going back to the Know Nothings of the mid 19th century, of American anti-establishment politicians, and of conservatives who claim to be the right ‘CEO’ to make America great again. But, in contrast to the rich history of U.S. populism, Trump is an anti-establishment elitist. He is better than everyone, i.e., both the elite and the people!”

Posted in Donald Trump, Nationalism | Comments Off

Richard Spencer and Kevin MacDonald Discuss ‘White Genocide’

Posted on November 1, 2015 by Luke Ford

Blog: Today a group of well-known white supremacists is gathering at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. The conference, titled “Become Who We Are: The Identity and Spirit of Our People”, promises lectures by the nation’s leading racists, including men’s rights sympathizer Jack Donovan, former Klan lawyer Sam Dickson, retired California State University, Long Beach professor Kevin MacDonald, and National Policy Institute founder Richard B. Spencer — a man described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as “a suit-and-tie version of the white supremacists of old, a kind of professional racist in khakis.” On October 24, 2015, two of these speakers, MacDonald and Spencer, appeared on the white supremacist Radix Podcast — a media outlet founded by Spencer.

The pair discussed — what else — Jewish intellectuals and the decline of the white race, a phenomena the duo referred to as “extinction” and “genocide.”

Spencer asked MacDonald, author of the anti-Semitic tome Culture of Critique (a favorite of pickup artist Roosh Valizadeh), what he thought of Jewish influence on anthropology. Spencer said he believed there were other factors at work, such as “the white population” having “abdicat[ed] its authority.” MacDonald, in turn, agreed about the “white race” letting its guard down, but said it was “far, far more the Jews” who “strongly identified as Jews” who were to blame for the “fall of Anglo-America.” If it weren’t for them, he reasoned, whites would still be able to discuss racial supremacy and racial differences without fear of retaliation or ridicule.

Spencer: Do you, do you think Jewish influence was a decisive factor, um, just, just in the sense of what…that you were mentioning there? It, it wasn’t just one movement. There, there seemed to be a, a whole host of different things. There’s Frankfurt School’s kinda post-Marxism. Uh, Stephen Jay Gould was a kind of, you know, sunny-side-up public intellectual who would talk about baseball and jazz music and all this kind of Americana and things like that. Uh, but he, but he also identified to some degree with socialism. Um, or, or do you think there were, there were other factors, because obviously, you know, it, it wasn’t just, uh, you know, uh, a matter of antagonism by, by Jews. There was…the other factor was that the, you know, the white population seemed to abdicate its authority.
MacDonald: Yes it certainly did. And, and, um, the, the, uh, most important book on this, I think, is, is Eric Kaufmann’s book on the, the Rise and Fall of Anglo-America. Now in that book he attributes the fall of Anglo-America to a sort of combination of Jews and WASPs sort of agreeing that cosmopolitanism was the way to go. And I, I have an extended argument with him about that, I, I think that it was far, far more the Jews who were strongly identified as Jews. Um…if you look at, at the people around Partisan Review, if you look at Stephen Jay Gould, if you look at the Frankfurt School, [Franz] Boas, all these people, very strongly identified as Jews and [were] very clear that they didn’t want the idea that, that, uh, there was this…Any, any possibility, any even discussion of, of racial superiority by, by Europeans.
Um, but that was, you know, it went far beyond racial superiority. Any kind of racial identity and even the existence of race as a concept. Um, and emphasizing cosmopolitanism and, and, you know, immigration from all peoples as a sort of moral imperative, you know, that, that went beyond the interests of the United States. The interests of the United States were not important. Th-this is explicitly stated not only by Jewish organizations but by Jewish intellectuals like Sidney Hook, uh, the Partisan Review crowd, all, all, all on page with that.
This was in the 1940s. Um, so, it’s been a full-court press and, and my view is that there certainly were WASPs that went along with this. Uh, one good example is, um, John Dewey, um, the educator, uh, who is very much on the left — but he’s also very promoted by, by Jewish interests. In other words, these people made alliances with, with willing non-Jews, as they always have, and they still do. We see this all the time.

The pair delve into what they believe to be the most pressing issue of the day: the possibility of white “extinction.” Spencer asked MacDonald what the prospects would be for such an event, and MacDonald’s reply was predictably gloomy. Folks don’t want to think about “white genocide” because they believe it to be “absurd.” Although he believes white males are “doing pretty well” in the U.S. — an understatement if I’ve ever heard one — he believes that white America’s Achilles heel is our policy of “admitting millions and millions of non-whites” into this and other predominantly white countries. “And if your group is not reproducing” and is “giving up territory to people who are reproducing” the result is that your group will become “a smaller and smaller percentage of that population”, he warned.

Spencer: What are the prospects for an extinction of a race? Um, and a race that continues to contract, or a race that just continues to degenerate? Um, what, what are…Let’s go there —
MacDonald: Yeah.
Spencer: — to these kind of dark subjects.
MacDonald: It’s a dark place. And, and um, when you mention…you talk about white genocide and so on, to most people they just [sic] eyes glaze over and they, they don’t wanna think about it, they think it’s an absurd thing. Uh, I mean I was in Washington, D.C. recently, went to the House of Representatives, you look out there, all these white males with power. You know, in a way we’re doing pretty well. But, but at the same time we’re admitting millions and millions of non-whites into these countries. They have higher birthrates. Well, what’s the, what’s the big story of evolution? It’s differential fertility! It’s the whole story! It’s the whole name of the game!
And, and, and you have to think about what’s it gonna be like, not in fifty years but in a thousand years. You know, ’cause evolution is been [sic] goin’ on for eons, you know? You know, the, the uh, extinction of the dinosaurs sixty-five million years ago. We can’t even comprehend that in our brains.
But you have to think about the very long term future. And if your group is not, is not reproducing and it’s giving up territory to people who are reproducing, well, you’re gonna become a smaller and smaller percentage of that population. Your political power’s gonna go down, um, and ultimately I, I, I’m very concerned about victimization. I mean, I, if you’re a biologist, an evolutionist, you look at the world, ethnic conflicts are the norm throughout human history. You know, Germans and Poles can’t get along, how’re blacks and whites gonna get along in America? Asians and Mexicans…You know, there’s gonna be conflict. There already is conflict. And we’re gonna be victimized as we be…as we lose political power, and it’s gonna be more and more obvious.

Posted in Kevin MacDonald, Nationalism, Richard Spencer | Comments Off

WHITE NATIONALISTS DESCEND ON D.C. FOR NATIONAL POLICY INSTITUTE CONFERENCE

Posted on November 1, 2015 by Luke Ford

Devin Burghart writes Oct. 23, 2015:

Just blocks away from the White House, North American and European white nationalists of various stripes are scheduled to convene at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington DC on October 25 to 27 for the 2013 Leadership Conference of the racist “think-tank,” The National Policy Institute.

Fresh off a recent visit to Europe where he spoke again at a meeting of the Traditional Britain Group on October 19, National Policy Institute director Richard Spencer claims the event “will explore the future of identity for European peoples around the world.” There is very little new, however, to Spencer’s calls for “peaceful ethnic cleansing” to create a white homeland in North America. IREHR takes a look at Spencer and the National Policy Institute.

University-educated and well-to-do, Richard Spencer is part of a new generation of leaders trying to re-shape the image of white nationalism.

After obtaining a bachelor’s degree at the University of Virginia and a master’s degree the University of Chicago, he was a doctoral student at Duke University before “dropping out to pursue a life of thought-crime,” according to Spencer.
Like several of his older white nationalist movement mentors, Spencer began his political activity in mainstream conservative circles. He worked as an assistant editor at Pat Buchanan’s The American Conservative magazine, then became executive editor of Taki’s Magazine (the publication of Buchanan’s co-founder in The American Conservative). But Spencer kept marching to the white side.

In November 2008 he spoke about Nietzsche at Paul Gottfried’s H.L. Mencken Club event. By early 2009, Spencer could no longer hold back his fixation on “contemporary white consciousness.” In a 29 May 2009 TakiMag piece entitled “White Like Me” Spencer opined, “In our increasingly globalized world (it’s not just a cliché), race hasn’t been obscured or overcome, as many had hoped, but heightened and magnified—and contemporary white consciousness, if we’re to use this term, is so complicated and bizarre (more on that below) that no serious cultural publication should refrain from discussing it.”

By year’s end, Spencer left the semi-respectability of the paleo-conservatives for good, when he announced that he was leaving TakiMag to start AlternativeRight.com, “an online magazine of radical traditionalism.” Under the financial umbrella of British expatriate Peter Brimelow’s white nationalist VDARE foundation, Alternative Right took to repackaging old white nationalist ideas for a new generation.

Launched March 1, 2010 with a professional-looking design and a long list of columnists, Alternative Right quickly became a big success in white nationalist circles. As one activist wrote, “I have been glued to the same website for hours today: Richard Spencer’s new webzine Alternative Right … I hope that Alternative Right will attract the brightest young conservatives and libertarians and expose them to far broader intellectual horizons, including race realism, White Nationalism, the European New Right, the Conservative Revolution, Traditionalism, neo-paganism, agrarianism, Third Positionism, anti-feminism, and right-wing anti-capitalists, ecologists, bioregionalists, and small-is-beautiful types.”

The popularity of the website made Spencer a rising star in the movement. When Louis Andrews, the chairman of both a white nationalist think-tank and a small publishing house took ill in 2011, Spencer was tapped to take over both operations. Spencer moved both projects to Whitefish, Montana where he lives in a $3 million home.

To Washington Summit Publishers, Spencer brought in new works like Guillaume Faye’s Why We Fight: Manifesto of Resistance and Sea Changes by Derek Turner to sell alongside classic racist publications, like Francis Parker Yockey’s Imperium, to Fascism Viewed From The Right by Julias Evola, to Madison Grant’s The Passing of the Great Race. Several of the new titles in the WSP catalogue come from the Abergele-based Wermod and Wermod Publishing Group. The company is run by another speaker at the Traditional Britain conference, Alex Kurtagic. Spencer and Kurtagic worked closely together on Alternative Right, and the two have shared the platform on multiple occasions.

Washington Summit Publishers gave Spencer another revenue stream, but credibility was to be had from the think-tank, the National Policy Institute. Founded in 2005 by William Regnery II, a member of a wealthy conservative publishing family, and influential white nationalist figure Sam Francis, the National Policy Institute goal was “to elevate the consciousness of whites, ensure our biological and cultural continuity, and protect our civil rights.” It published several so-called studies, including: “The State of White America – 2007,”“The Costs and Benefits of Mass Deportation,” “Conservatives and Race,” “The Wealth and IQ of Nations,” and “Uhuru for South Africa.” Before moving to Montana, it was located in Augusta, Georgia.

Spencer’s first big move as executive director of the National Policy Institute was to hold a splashy conference in Washington D.C entitled “Towards a New Nationalism: Immigration and the Future of Western Nations.” He kicked off the conference with a direct invocation of Enoch Powell’s infamous Rivers of Blood speech. Using video of recent riots in England with tape of Powell’s 1968 speech, Spencer, discussed the catastrophe that Latin, Asian and African immigrants have brought the white race. Other speakers at the event included white nationalist stalwarts like Council of Conservative Citizens leader Sam Dickson and Jared Taylor of American Renaissance. At the conference, the National Policy Institute also published a pamphlet by Spencer entitled “The Majority Strategy – the Essential Argument – Why the GOP Must Win White America.”

After the re-election of President Obama, many white nationalists gave up their hopes that Republicans would adopt their “White America” strategy. Some, like Spencer, gave up on the idea that they could win back America altogether and retreated towards enclave-style white nationalism.

At the spring 2013 conference of the other white nationalist think-tank, American Renaissance, Spencer took to the podium to advocate for “the creation of a White Ethno-State on the North American continent.” He told the small crowd on hand in Tennessee that “We need an ethno-state so that our people can ‘come home again,’ can live amongst family—to put it banally, so that they can feel safe and secure.” To create a white homeland, Spencer argued for peaceful ethnic cleansing to solve the problem. “Today, in the public imagination, ‘ethnic-cleansing’ has been associated with civil war and mass murder (understandably so). But this need not be the case. 1919 is a real example of successful ethnic redistribution—done by fiat, we should remember, but done peacefully.” He elaborated on his dream, “It is perfectly feasible for a white state to be established on the North American continent. Action is the easy part.”

Following Spencer’s move to Montana, other white nationalists have taken up the call to move to the Western United States. For instance, a Canadian white nationalist recently started purchasing land in an effort to take over the small rural town of Leith, North Dakota (population 16) to turn it into a racist stronghold.

Posted in Nationalism | Comments Off

Whites Meet In Washington To Discuss Their Group Interests

Posted on November 1, 2015 by Luke Ford

RamzPaul tweets: Hey, @HuffingtonPost, do you make similar slurs when Jews get together to discuss their group interests?

Samantha Lachman writes for the Huffington Post:

WASHINGTON — The 150-plus white men who gathered on Halloween to discuss their shared European heritage and identity insisted they don’t think they’re better than other races.

They’re simply different, they said. They’re “white advocates” and “identitarians.” “Racial idealists” or “racial communitarians.” The label “white supremacists,” to them, is a political “scare term” created by liberals and groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center to undercut “legitimate” white interests.

The conference, called “Become Who We Are,” invited other white people to gain this race consciousness so their revolution can move off Twitter, blogs and online journals and into the mainstream. Discussion topics included “The Origins of the White Man,” “The Tragedy of Southern Identity” and “Why We Will Win.”

“There’s something radical about actually being public and talking about these views seriously,” said Richard Spencer, president of the National Policy Institute, which organized the conference. “There’s a tendency in our movement to embrace the fringe — we want to be alienated from society, we want not to be taken seriously.”

“We’re trying to make this a sensible position that all white people need to think about,” he said.

Nonetheless, conference attendees wore name tags that revealed only their first names.

Spencer referenced the red pill in the movie “The Matrix” to suggest that white people were becoming “red pilled” — awakened — by their reality or lived experiences.

“You can’t get away from this general tendency to delegitimize the white man,” he said. “We totally recognize the fact that our views are considered beyond the pale, or awful — but we’ve got to start this way. The gay movement had to start at some point, Zionism had to start in the 19th century when that was considered a ridiculous, terrible notion.”

Of course, this insistence that their views are based on genuine differences rather than a sense of superiority is undercut by the sort of rhetoric their community uses to describe traits they believe are inherent in other races or ethnicities. Jews are manipulative. African Americans are lazy or violent. Latinos are free-riders who are stealing American jobs. Etcetera.

This reporter, who is Jewish, was one of three journalists who attended a conference session open to the press at the National Press Club in the heart of Washington. A sentiment among the event’s speakers and attendees is that Jews have rigged the American political system to encourage more open immigration policies, so they can bond together with other minorities and subjugate Americans of European ancestry.

But Jews, they said, have maintained a cohesive identity, and there’s much to admire about that.

“The Jews exist precisely because they were apart, precisely because they had, maybe you could say, a bit of paranoia about trying to stay away — please don’t quote paranoia,” Spencer said.

Most Jews would respond that they were forced into ghettos in Europe because of anti-Semitism. The conference’s participants think it’s the reverse: Anti-Semitism arose because Jews evolved separately and achieved economic and political success that has, understandably, inspired envy. It’s a chicken and egg non-dispute we’re not going to resolve here.

Regardless, conference speakers agreed that white nationalists could learn quite a bit from the Jews.

“The opposition to intermarriage. The creation of their own state. The recreation of their language. This is the greatest triumph of racial idealism in history. All we’re asking for is equality. The same right that Jews claim for themselves,” said Sam Dickson, an attorney who advocates for breaking up the United States to create a white ethno-state. (Dickson has represented the Ku Klux Klan in court.)

Dickson suggested that white people “could give” black people Massachusetts and New York — “blacks could be given Manhattan” — while whites would take states like Iowa. He said the white ethno-state of his imagination would be open to all whites, liberals and conservatives alike.

“White people, as we’ve become a minority, will not be able to live in a state of severe repression and discrimination,” he said. “Our ethno-state will not be a meeting of the Tea Party; it’s not going to be the Southern Baptist Convention. It’s going to be a genuine ethno-state with Christians, Catholics, alcoholics, teetotallers, gay people — it’s not going to be a subset of the right.”

This ethno-state won’t happen without a revolution of thinking among whites, however. And this revolution won’t happen within the bounds of American politics. But having a Republican presidential candidate like businessman Donald Trump talk about deporting millions of immigrants and repealing birthright citizenship is a start.

“He’s certainly saying things on immigration that we haven’t heard from a mainstream candidate in a very long time,” said Kevin MacDonald, a former professor at California State University, Long Beach, who his fellow speakers describe as the preeminent authority on how Jews intentionally cultivated superior intellectual capabilities in order to better compete for resources.

“That’s absolutely a breakthrough — and he’s been excoriated for it,” MacDonald continued. “So I think he is seen by people like us as a possible home” — though he may not achieve his goals on immigration. “It’s not that we even believe that he will necessarily do it but it’s not like we have other choices, either,” MacDonald said.

There were only about 12 or so women at the conference, which is perhaps understandable given that white nationalists on Twitter want to #BringBackThePatriarchy and force women back in the kitchen, 1950s style.

“Any radical movement is mostly staffed by males,” Dickson said. “Women are by nature conformist, they give more obedience to authority, they’re more involved with family and children, they have to be more worried than we are about damage to the family. In any movement for reform, whatever it be, men always dominate.”

From the HuffPo comments:

* There is nothing more human than trying to have the agency to control your future, rather than just going along with herd morality and the impulses of the moment. Those who don’t do this have already dehumanized themselves.

* A border is a boundary – it denotes geograpic territory of a Nation. Liberals think there is no such ‘need’ for these things, that Nation-States should bee ‘fluid’, and that its fine for people to exploit other countries for personal gain. And yet, when you travel to other countries, and discover Nationalist fervor, and rigid immigration policies, you ignore them and focus on how much-more ‘progressive’ they are compared to the US…..you have zero credibility.

* Why do you liberals care? If they have their own ethno-state, they’re out of your hair. You should be cheering them on and helping them in any way you can.

* America was taken by force from the largely primitive inhabitants by Whites who developed it with their labour and technology, while also importing some slaves from Africa as a largely low-skilled labour force mainly in the South.

In other words, it is a state built on the principle of White supremacy and therefore even “Whiter” than a state created in a vacuum entirely by Whites, where race would simply not be an issue.

* America was created by white people. When one takes into account the massive problems caused by other races, their contributions to this country are probably net negatives.

* What’s the difference between these guys and Israelis wanting Israel to remain a Jewish ethnostate?

* I genuinely do not see the problem with these people trying to achieve a homogenous ethno-state. Japan and Israel have successfully done this. Nobody goes to Japan and complains about how the Japanese ‘need diversity’. They’d tell you to get the hell out. I just find it funny that the comments expressed below are only proving that these people are right. The overtly hostile reaction and hypocritical tolerance for any other racial group working in its group benefit speaks volumes. You people only care about individual rights and freedoms when it benefits you.

I’m not understanding what the problem is. I missed the point of why individuals of European descent working towards their collective benefit and interest is a bad thing? I thought this was going to be some article about Neo-Nazis in D.C. and it turns out they’re relatively educated and organized.

Posted in Nationalism | Comments Off

Jewish pickup lines I learned on Twitter

Posted on November 1, 2015 by Luke Ford

Adapted from Twitter:

* Hey baby, nice verbal IQ!
* You can hide in my attic any day of the week!
* I’ll spin your dreidel!
* You raise my interest rate!

Posted in Israel | Comments Off

WT: Rooms filled with white people cause ‘microaggressions’ for minorities

Posted on November 1, 2015 by Luke Ford

Washington Times:

A report by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign into the topic of “microaggressions” found that the simple task of “walking into or sitting in” a room full of white people can be problematic for minorities.
“Students of color reported feeling uncomfortable and unwelcomed just walking into or sitting in the classroom, especially if they were the only person of color, or one of a few,” said the report, titled “Racial Microaggressions @ University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign,” National Review reported Wednesday.
“People do not necessarily say I do not belong, but I feel as if I do not when I am in a classroom and I am the one non-White person,” said one student in the college’s report, National Review reported.
Many colleges turn to Dr. Derald Wing Sue of Columbia University for a definition for the term “microaggression.” He has described such offenses as “brief, everyday exchanges that send denigrating messages to certain individuals because of their group membership.”
The Princeton Microaggressions Facebook page relied on Dr. Sue’s definition for its purposes in December 2014, but added: “The perspective and lived experiences of each individual contextualizes the world around them and thus places a particular meaning in words based on their distinct subjectivity. What counts as harmless banter to some may be emotionally triggering to others.”
The University of Illinois report suggests that one way to ameliorate microaggressions on campus may include “General Education requirement about race, White privilege, and inequality in the United States,” National Review reported.

If things are so horrible for minorities in America, why don’t they just leave?

From the WT comments:

* Sounds like its the minorities that have the problem and need to get over it.

* Yes, it is largely a problem with minorities! “I feel…” is a very subjective statement that can be loosely used to justify practically ANYTHING, even though there may be no OBJECTIVE evidence of something.

Hmmm…I wonder how it would sound if a white person were to say that he/she “feels” very uncomfortable–that there are “microagressions” against him/her–when being the sole white person in an environment full of black people.

Instant cries of RACISM!!!

Again, today’s PC environment 1) just gives too many people the license to say STUPID THINGS, and 2) permits minorities, e.g., .blacks, to have many of their own misguided mindsets perpetuated rather than corrected. In the end, the collective black culture never changes, and the definition of insanity just rolls on: doing the same thing, generation after generation, and expecting different results.

Sad.

* White people have a legitimate concern about being around large numbers of black people (in many situations..) due to the absolute statistics that Blacks are VERY high probability to rob and/or murder you compared to ANY other race! Those statistics ARE PUBLISHED BY FBI and every police agency on EARTH! Where are your facts? In spite of this, most white people I know go out of the way to make others feel part of the community! Stop your own stinking racism. Too many descendants of African slaves have simply failed to Integrate into civilization! Stop blaming modern people for your own misfortune! Nobody alive today owed a SLAVE, and nobody alive today is or has been one (except for the few underage-females enslaved as prostitutes on Bill Clinton’s Orgy Island, that is!)

* Black males aged 15-34; the main perpetrators of ALL crime in this country are only 3% of the total US population. REPEAT 3% of the American Population commits ALL this crime.

This is the group the 2013 FBI crime statistics say are responsible for:

56.4% of ALL Robbery
52.2% of ALL Murders
33.9% of ALL Aggravated Assaults
31.3% of ALL Forcible Rapes

2012 FBI Statistics
54.9% of ALL Robbery
49.4% of ALL Murders
34.1% of ALL Aggravated Assaults
32.5% of ALL Forcible Rapes

2011 FBI Statistics
55.6% of ALL Robbery
49.7% of ALL Murders
33.6% of ALL Aggravated Assaults
32.9% of ALL Forcible Rapes

3% of the US population creates ALL this misery.

I think this would be a wonderful opportunity to pause for a moment and give thanks for the many great contributions of the Negro community and their culture to our society. Their peaceful and generous nature makes them ideal neighbors, lending testimony to their exceptional family values and parenting skills unrivaled by any other culture.

Their commitment to academic excellence enriches our schools and serves as an example to all who hope to achieve prominence as a people. Real Estate values are fueled by the influx of North American Negroes into an area due to their caring and respectful nurturing of these communities, an example of all they have achieved by their enthusiasm for self-improvement through hard work and a self-reliant can-do nature. Without their industrious and creative drive, we would be poorer as a nation.

Presently enriching the cities of Spokane WA, Chicago IL, Philadelphia PA, Washington D.C., St. Louis MO, New Orleans LA, Los Angeles CA, Flint MI, Baltimore MD, Pontiac MI, Gary, IN., Houston, TX , Newark NJ, Cleveland OH, Atlanta GA, Richmond VA, Memphis TN, Birmingham AL, Camden NJ; and let’s not forget Detroit, the tourism capital of the world!

Posted in Blacks, Diversity | Comments Off

Dirty Jobs In Orthodox Judaism

Posted on October 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

Some shomrim recite Psalms, others smoke dope (Shalom Auslander), others masturbate. You get what you pay for. Shomrim, kosher supervision, are usually down market occupations staffed by a high number of retards.

LAT: An Ancient Vigil : In Orthodox Judaism, a Shomer Keeps Watch Over Souls of the Dead

Nevertheless, the job’s drawbacks seem to outweigh its rewards.
“People don’t treat me the same after I tell them what I do,” says a veteran watcher who is known to area morticians as “the unofficial shomer of Los Angeles.”
“They think it’s disgusting to hang around with dead bodies.” He asked that his name not be used for fear of being further ostracized.
The problem, he says, is the public’s fear of death: “I was spooked myself at first. . . . I didn’t want to do it again because of the negative perceptions I had.” But he kept at it, in part, to conquer his own demons. “I knew I had to face it–and I had the guts to do it.”

NYT: On Maple Avenue he came to the Yeshiva of Spring Valley, where he went to school for a time. “Do you see that Hebrew lettering?” he said. “It says: ‘Please join us for a reading by Shalom Auslander. Bring your bags of rocks.’”

Mr. Auslander grew up on the other end of town, which used to be less religious, and looping around his own street, a cul-de-sac called Arrowhead Lane, he was astonished to find, next to his old house, a holdout: a ranch house with a “John 3:16” sign on the lawn. Nearby was a landmark he calls the Stone of Pornography in “Foreskin’s Lament”: a boulder behind which he used to find a seemingly inexhaustible store of skin magazines, ditched presumably by a guilty commuter heading home. No porn this time, but there was a discarded box of nonkosher cookies.

Pornography, which Mr. Auslander eventually imported by the sackful, was part of his secret life in Monsey, both an escape and a source of anxiety. So were marijuana, orgies of nonkosher fast food and shoplifting expeditions. To a certain extent, he always felt like an outsider in the Orthodox world, he says now, but his escape proceeded by fits and starts, in spurts of rebellion and then periods of appeasement.

“The big discovery for me was that there’s a whole world out there,” he said. “That there’s no reason to be terrified of the Nanuet Mall and, even worse, no reason to be scornful of it.” But it took him years, including a stint as a bearded, fedora-wearing student in Israel and a subsequent gig as a weed-puffing shomer, or ritual corpse watcher, in New York, to arrive at his current, uneasy state of truce.

He tried ignoring God, and also compromising with him. As a teenager, he writes in “Foreskin’s Lament,” which goes on sale this week, he once rode his bike to Caldors on Saturday but then found himself unable to further violate the Sabbath by activating the electric-eye door opener. In the early-1990s he was married and living in Teaneck, N.J., working in an ad agency and just getting started as a writer. One Saturday he walked all the way to Madison Square Garden to see a game during the Stanley Cup playoffs. God punished him by making the Rangers lose.

“It’s ridiculous that I feel the way I do,” he said at the end of his drive in Monsey. “That I have this cartoonish view of God as someone who rewards and punishes. I feel like a fool when I read someone like Richard Dawkins,” he said, referring to the British atheist and evolutionary biologist. “But let’s trade childhoods.” Intellectually, he said, he understood Mr. Dawkins, but “emotionally I’m not there at all.”

Posted in Orthodoxy, Shalom Auslander | Comments Off

WP: Build a wall on the border? No thanks, says San Diego.

Posted on October 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

Wisdom from the WP comments:

* What kind of B.S. article is this? Congressman Duncan Hunter (Sr) led for a wall being built that goes into the Pacific ocean and extends east to the Arizona border. And thank goodness it was built. We were being inundated with huge groups of illegals swarming across freeways, backyards, leaving crime and shattered lives in their wake. Creating new crossings either for automobile or by foot is a good idea but don’t even try and promote those crossing which are designed for LEGAL immigration with some type of open border La Raza inspired political ideology.

* San Ysidro gets 200,000 some days.
it’s a favorite crossing for drug traffickers
one person can carry enough heroin inside them to have a street value of $300,000.
and it’s safer for them too,
they don’t have to risk being robbed by other mexicans in the remote border areas.

Posted in Immigration | Comments Off

Tom Tancredo Leaves The GOP

Posted on October 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

Tom Tancredo writes:

For most of those years after 2000, we had a Republican President and a Republican-controlled Congress, but the conservative agenda was largely ridiculed and abandoned.

Across America, in every state, countless hardworking Americans have taken time away from their families and their jobs to volunteer on political campaigns– knocking on doors, making phone calls and talking to neighbors – all to support the effort to beat back the Obama agenda. In 2010, that grassroots effort resulted in the Republican takeover in the House. In 2014, it resulted in Republicans sweeping to power in the U.S. Senate – and the largest House majority since Herbert Hoover was President.

Yet, despite these historic gains, nothing changed. The GOP neither advanced a conservative agenda nor checked the radical “transformative” agenda of Barack Obama. We got condescending lip service, and nothing more.

Promises have been broken and principles abandoned, while millions of American families watched their dreams slip further and further out of reach.
Republican congressional leaders maneuvered to deliver votes to fund President Obama’s unconstitutional amnesty order, and more recently, his unprecedented job-killing EPA rules.
They have voted twice in four years to violate the very modest, bipartisan caps on spending put in place with the laughably-named “Budget Control Act” in 2011 — and now have abandoned the caps completely.
They have voted to continue funding what is essentially a $500 million macabre earmark for abortion provider Planned Parenthood.
They have voted to fund Obamacare, and despite promises, have never passed a complete repeal of the PPACA.
No one has been held accountable for the outrageous IRS and VA scandals.
And now, as icing on the poisoned cake, House Republicans have elected a Speaker who was not asked to renounce his commitment to open borders and amnesty, policies which will betray the values of 75% of the party and give Democrats a permanent electoral majority within a decade.
Even in foreign policy the Republican Party leadership has deceived those who elected them by engineering passage of the pathetic Corker/Cardin amendment – which greased the skids for President Obama’s flawed Iran deal to clear Congress without having to meet 67 vote threshold for ratification that the constitution requires for binding international treaties. No one will be surprised if they do the same thing with the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Republicans are repeatedly asked to capitulate today in exchange for better options tomorrow.
After the next election, after we win one more office or a few more seats – then, after that next election conservative reforms will be considered.
Somehow, that brighter tomorrow never comes.
But times have changed. In 2010, the Republican rank and file stopped drinking the Kool Aid and started demanding accountability. And demanding results. The conservative electorate that elected Republican majorities is tired of capitulation.

The conservative majority in the Republican Party wants leaders who will stand and fight, leaders who will be as passionate about advancing an American agenda as President Obama and the Left are at advancing the global socialist agenda.

Grassroots Republicans want Republican leaders who are as assertive and consistent in pushing a policy agenda as Senator Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV)2%
was when Democrats controlled the Senate. They should use tools like Budget Reconciliation aggressively, adding conditions to spending bills and legislative initiatives that the White House wants.
That hardball approach is the only way to deal with an imperial President and make good on the many promises that Republican politicians have made to Americans.
Sadly, it has become obvious that the Republican establishment simply has no intention of ever fulfilling promises made in platforms and campaign speeches. To their mind, there are elections, and then there is “governing,” and governing to them means not messing with a gargantuan government on autopilot.

The Republican establishment does not want to control spending.
It does not want to secure the borders or enforce immigration laws.
It does not care about American sovereignty.
It has no interest in ending the unaccountable and corrupt culture that has become a hallmark of official Washington.
By insulting the grassroots, the GOP leadership has set upon a suicide mission. The problem is that failed leadership is allowing Obama to destroy the Constitution and take the whole country down the drain. Well, count me out.

Posted in Republicans | Comments Off

Paul Singer Backs Marco Rubio

Posted on October 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

Paul Singer announced yesterday that he is throwing his support behind Rubio. Singer is a billionaire hedgefund manager and prominent bundler for Republican candidates. The issues he primarily cares about are Israel, “immigration reform” (and we all know what that really means), and gay-rights,…..oh, and also in forcing governments to pay off their debts, as that’s how he’s made a lot of his money. So we could expect a President Rubio to push “comprehensive immigration reform”, to continue the neo-con program of open-ended US military involvement in the middle-east, and to stand out of the way whenever the homosexual lobby wants to push thier latest proposal for gaying up America.

By the way, someone should ask Rubio, who will undoubtedly get a lot of support from the FOX News demographic which is opposed to gay marriage, why he is now accepting millions of dollars from Paul Singer, who was instrumental in getting the New York state legislature to legalize gay-marriage. Something tells me that nobody at FOX news will ever ask him that.

* The Pro-Immigration side is not monolith. The high tech business want an endless stream of HB-1 types while the Ag lobby wants nothing that will interfere with stoop labor such as a fence or better documents, and so on. The religious types want refugees while the ethnic lobby want family reunification. This is why they maintain such a rigid front. Once one part crumbles it will be easy to pick apart the rest. What Trump needs to do is ruthlessly go after after one portion of the coalition in addition to everything else. He could focus on a fence which would be visible and tangible but would only keep out the wetbacks or he could go after E-Verify which would undermine the business lobby.

Posted in America, Immigration | Comments Off