The article speaks for itself. For those who don’t know, Gavin McInnis is a founder of Vice Magazine (how conservative!). Follow the link to his Wikipedia article to learn more about the type of material he publishes.
I’m guessing Richard Spencer felt the need as an editor to “balance” Jared Taylor’s article with the pathetic life story of this guy. What do you think that says about the “Alternative Right”? At Takimag, the desire to conserve and perpetuate one’s own race is on par with . . . this.
We had a commentator here last year (Ryder or Fred Scrooby, I think) who insisted that racialism is the only real conservatism. He claimed it was the most basic concept to grasp – the seed from which all other preservationist impulses follow. Once you eliminate the natural instinct to prefer one’s own kin over others, the feeling of being invested in the future of one’s own people, it is a slippery slope downhill into liberalism from there.
This just goes to show how right he was.
The only good thing about that atrocious article was the fact that still only 3% of Whites marry outside their Race.
Liberals, like Libertarians, continue raging against natural, normal, healthy ethno-centrism in a battle against Nature its very self!
Far more than 3% date outside of their race.
The fallacy implicit in Takimag’s posting of this McInnes article is the notion that opposition to race-replacement is about this or that non-white individual‘s presence in a Eurosphere country or about this or that white individual‘s mixed-race relationship. It’s about neither. Opposition to race-replacement is always about numbers, never about individuals. Will one Bantu race-replace the Eurosphere? No. Will one trillion? Yes. Since my only concern is over race-replacement, therefore, I object to the “trillion” and not to the “one.” This article talks about “one” while if it had been honest and not sought to evade the issue it would have talked the trillion racial incompatibles currently pouring in. Why did it do that? Why did it talk about the one and not the trillion when it knows that people who object to the latter pouring in don’t to the former. Do I have an objection to this Englishman marrying this Red Indian woman? No. Is that supposed to mean I have no objection to the white race being ethnically-cleansed off the face of the Earth by the usual suspects via the current strategy of massive racially incompatible population transfers? Is Mr. McInnes the same as a massive population transfer? No. So I can smile benignly on this specific mixed marriage, because it cannot singlehandedly race-replace whites, while fiercely opposing present race-replacement immigration kinds and volumes, because they CAN single-handedly race-replace whites thanks to the volumes involved? Obviously. In other words, if I were put in charge of U.S. immigration would I devote myself to going after an individual like McInnes or would I devote myself to restoring the 1924 law, a law which allowed for individuals like McInnes whom therefore I don’t oppose since I want that law back. So, whoever decided to run this article is confused about the issue. This man Spencer is a Pontic Greek, n’est-ce pas? Pontic Greeks, as seen so glaringly in the case of Dienekes Pontikos, are inwardly conflicted in regard to the whole subject of race and race-mixing because, personally, they badly want to “be Greek” while knowing damn well their family tree is riddled with Turks. A very big schtick of theirs becomes, therefore, trying to make it OK to see oneself as Greek when one is really more or less a Turk, and that affects the way they think about race and race-mixing in general.
Another thing wrong with the article is the North American Red Indian race of McInnes’s wife is NOT the race that has U.S. whites alarmed. For one thing the North American Red Indian is racially different from the Mexican Indio, in such a way as to be less dagoe-like — less non-white. They’re non-white but less non-white than the sort of mystery meat that is at present pouring into the country. The race-replacement threat is not coming from the North American Red Indian who, by the way, is himself on the verge of extinction. So, I call bullshit right there, even apart from the rest of the bullshit discussed above.
I agree with you on the American Red Indian and numbers issue, Fred Scrooby. American Indians are more White-like than Brown Hispanics are; and they are almost extinct too, thus no demographic threat to Whites. I also care more about stopping unlimited race-mixing than just one case of interracial mixing! I am concerned about race-mixing only because it’s so common and threatening our very existence.
Modern conservatism is aracial, and hence not really conservative at all. We went over this extensively last year, as Prozium remembers.
The race blindness of the modern political classes is amazing, including those who are supposedly anti-system. A great many libertarians can’t even grasp that the open borders that they champion only leads to a mass of non-libertarian third worlders, people who want to tax whitey and fund massive government programs. They simply aren’t interested in libertarianism.
For example, southern California used to be a hotbed of libertarianism. Now? Not really. Why? It’s flooded with nonwhites who couldn’t care less about libertarianism. Yet the dogmatic libertarian won’t change his tune. He is not concerned with reality at all, he is merely a doctrinaire idiot. Dogma uber alles.
Same thing with modern, aracial conservatism. It can’t grasp that conservatism just doesn’t make much sense once you agree to race replacement of whites. Why honor the old ways, when you can’t even honor your own people? Why NOT teach the growing hordes of multiracial children more about MLK or Obama than about Washington and Jefferson? When racial differences are denied, and yet some racial groups keep lagging behind, why not blame it on white racism? What other cause could there be once you accept racial egalitarianism and race replacement? (obviously, you can really stretch and come up with various explanations – all false of course. The point is that we shouldn’t be suprised when racial egalitarians demonize whites. From their point of view, it makes perfect sense. )
I could go on and on, but the point is that once you give in on race, liberalism begins to make sense. Race is the one thing that you can’t compromise on without eventually losing everything else – ultimately you lose your entire civilizition along with the very existence of your people.
These libertarian and conservative clowns can never learn a fundamental truth: once you accept liberal premises, you will inevitably get liberal conclusions. It is not a coincidence that the Left will let you disagree with them on many things, but not race. Other things they will get mad about, maybe even get a bit nasty. But challenge them on race? They go absolutely nuts, pulling of hair, gnashing of teeth, rending of garments. They are smart enough to understand the key pressure point – race – even if conservatives and libertarians are not.
Yet the fools still dream. Hey, blacks are socially conservative! They are our kind of voters!! says the Republican. Well, many black voters might vote socially conservative in a referendum, like the California one concerning gay marriage. Doesn’t matter. They still vote overwhelmingly Democrat. They may be “your” kind of voters, but you aren’t their kind of party. You aren’t their kind of PEOPLE. Get it?
But, uh, the Hispanics are our kind of voters. They are so “socially conservative.” Yeah, sure they are. See paragraph above. See also massive votes for Obama.
But, ooohhh oohhhhh, I know the answer! When the nonwhites become prosperous, they will support Republican and/or libertarian policies. Well, check out the model minority, Asians. They have prospered in this country educationally and economically. They do not have anywhere near the legacy of historical discrimination that blacks have. And most of them seem so friendly, and are such nice guys at work!!!
Yet what does Gunga Din do in the privacy of the voting booth? Vote overwhelmingly for Obama. That should tell the aracial clowns something. It doesn’t matter how much you pander to the blacks and hispanics, it doesn’t matter how prosperous they get or how much education they get – this is still racial at its core. Even Asians, who you would *think* (if you were naive) would side with whites – don’t.
As to the issue raised above about numbers, I agree that nonwhites in very small numbers are not a terrible threat. But frankly, any level of miscegenation in a given community will tend to lower standards and set a bad example. It should always be opposed. Those who wish to mix are welcome to do so, but just not in the coming white nation. They will be free to settle in a mixed community, but they must leave ours. I think we need to be very firm about this.
Just want to point out that the creep who signs as “The Monitor” (as well as various other pen names) is an “aracial conservative” as described above by Trainspotter, with this slight difference — the Monitor’s schtick is not so much “conservatism” (whatever that is) or libertardianism as it is Christianity: if everyone becomes a Christian, race doesn’t matter to The Monitor. He has no objection to race-replacement whatsoever, only to people not being Christians. This individual is pure cancer.
“Far more than 3% date outside of their race.”
Certainly True, but the fact that so few decide to actually enter into mixed marriages suggests that there is still a very healthy taboo against mixed marriages. Many miscegenators DO NOT want to hear what their objecting relatives have to say about such matters and that is a good thing.
“Race is the one thing that you can’t compromise on without eventually losing everything else – ultimately you lose your entire civilizition along with the very existence of your people.”
Exactly and that is why I refer to my belief system as Racialism and not White Nationalism! Race is very primordial and ‘at the base’ of things so to speak.
Sir,
You used the word racialism. I think it is about time we substituted the word ‘racialism’ for the word ‘raceology’.
Dr. Shockley is to be credited for coining this term.
See this interview with Shockley for further details:
Fred, how are you? And the kids?
You must be doing well since I see you still say anyone who disagrees with you supports race-replacement. Don’t forget to call me a Jew and a paid ZOG agent!
Best,
Monty.
According to census data just over 90% of Whites don’t engage in miscegenation. Remember, per genetic similarity theory seriously, Whites least genetically inclined to ethnocentrism are leaving our gene-pool. A more ethnocentric White race is being bred.
That should read: “per genetic similarity theory” without the “seriously”.
Monitor,
From the extensive debates last year, it certainly appeared that you either favored or at least were indifferent to the race replacement of whites. Did we misunderstand you then (I doubt it, but just asking), or have you since given up your evil ways?
My impression was, and remains, that you were and are an anti. You were on here touting the standard aracial conservatism mixed with, if I remember correctly, a nice dose of faux christianity. Basically, the same empty crap that has gotten us nothing but degeneracy, stupidity, and continuous defeat for generations – not to mention the slow motion genocide of whites. Your loser way has had its chance for the last half century at least, and it has lead to nothing but disaster. America has quite literally been ruined during its time under the sway of your aracial conservatism, your snake oil for the rubes.
You still peddling those silly and fraudulent wares? Finding any buyers for the same old snake oil? Fewer and fewer I’ll wager. Or perhaps you’ve found a new pitch, in an effort to keep the rapes and murders of whites going on for a while longer?
Don’t waste any time on him or anything he says. It isn’t “his loser way”. It’s a pose.
Yosemite I will check out the vid. when I get a chance. Could one dub themselves a ‘Raceologist’??? I will certainly give the issue some thought.
One of the primary reasons I utilize the term Racialism is that from my understanding it came into being around 1909 and was in fact utilized by many Racialists.
The term ‘Racist’ came into being in the early ’30s and was created by a Jew and should be rejected (even Sam Francis said so)
http://www.heretical.com/miscella/racism.html
Monitor seems to think highly of Jared Taylor.
“Certainly True, but the fact that so few decide to actually enter into mixed marriages suggests that there is still a very healthy taboo against mixed marriages.”
Not as healthy as the thriving interracial dating / bastard mulatto scene.
“According to census data just over 90% of Whites don’t engage in miscegenation. ”
The same census that still says blacks are “11%” of the population?
“Whites least genetically inclined to ethnocentrism are leaving our gene-pool.”
You’re telling yourself stories, bud. Sneaky way to imagine the reason they’re flocking to blacks is “genetic”; they must be somehow genetically unwhite. What is this, neo-Lamarckism?
“American Indians are more White-like than Brown Hispanics are;”
Only insomuch as whites are dirty, bloated, meth-addled drunks who don’t trim their fingernails. A lot worth preserving, eh?
The same census that still says blacks are “11%” of the population?
There’s no census that says that.
You’re telling yourself stories, bud. Sneaky way to imagine the reason they’re flocking to blacks is “genetic”; they must be somehow genetically unwhite. What is this, neo-Lamarckism?
Jesus christ, that’s some piss-poor reading comprehension on your part. Wow.
GR, you can hate Whites as much as you want; but that doesn’t mean we should be brought to extinction. We have as much of a right to survive as any other racial group!
1.) There is no ongoing government-enforced, Jewish policy to demolish the traditional racial makeup of Anglo-Saxon communities via race-replacement. It’s childishly simplistic and hyperbolic.
Jews do what they do for the same reasons as white liberals: they want to destroy Christianity and its civilization. Among the elites, the behavior of Jews and gentiles are pretty much the same. There’s no overt strategy to kill off white people.
2.) White people still run things. They have reasons to be rootless and cosmopolitan without much help from the Jews. First, they are secularist, which is self-hating by definition. Second, mouthing PC slogans helps them get laid and helps them disguise their decadence. Third, the dream of a New World Order fuels the Aryan will-to-stupidity, which some call the Faustian Spirit.
Whites are not always victims. Whites invite their crap. In fact, they salute themselves for doing so. Mainstream political cant is full of this. It is too prevalent, widespread, and successful for One Jewish Cause to be a sufficient explanation.
After all, Jews weren’t were first to ruin Western destiny. White elites led the way, with the masses trailing behind them, burying themselves in their affluence, technology, and irreligious narcissism.
3.) Why you should you care about a future for White children anyway? The game is over once the brain loses oxygen, right? Therefore the long-term interest of the race loses priority over one’s material prosperity in the moment. After all, in the end, we’re all dead, supposedly. So why should it matter to someone what happens to the world after he is gone?
Response:
1.) The presence of Noel Ignatiev at an Elite University and the existence of Whiteness Studies would suggest that Whites are being prepared to be, in Ignatievs own words: “abolished”. Oh and did I mention he is a Jew?
2.) White still run things???
What is the Race of the current President?
What is the Race of the Attorney General?
What is the ethnic makeup of the Israel Lobby?
It is very easy to VISUALLY CONFIRM that Whites no long run things .
It is stunning that you would attempt to assert such with a straight face no less!!!!!!
3.) To completely ignore ones broader (Racial) community would be the height of Degeneracy! It matters not if one individual dies. the Agency of Evolution must be allowed to to carry the Race forth to its Destiny!!!!
Goodness even Hoffmeister under-stands this!!!
EMANCIPATORY RACISM:
http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/emancipatory_racism/
—3.) Why you should you care about a future for White children anyway? The game is over once the brain loses oxygen, right? Therefore the long-term interest of the race loses priority over one’s material prosperity in the moment. After all, in the end, we’re all dead, supposedly. So why should it matter to someone what happens to the world after he is gone?—
—
I’ll tell ya why, sellout…
It is because I, like any decent White Anglo man, could not, or especially, would not, tolerate seeing our children and particularly our grandchildren subjected to the terrors and bestiality of full blown soviet-style multi-Kult-ism inflicted on them!!!!!
All because some of us opted to sell our souls to Mammon! in the hopes of ‘material prosperity’–which really means being ENSLAVED to the zionist debt-usury mafia!
Ah, the mental and spiritual viral cancer of the Ayn Rand Kult raising it’s ugly and disgusting head one again!
Yeah, people like you better really be saving their shekels for your ‘retirements’ and not wasting them on booze, porn and sports/’entertainment’, since you types are going to have a VERY lonely existence in your “golden years” (LOL) in the nursing homes with angry, resentful, low-IQ minimum-wage foreigners giving you sponge-baths—and changing your diapers.
As out-of-shape and as sickly as so many ‘Americans’ are (and this ABSOLUTELY includes many ‘Whitey-Righty’s’–just go to any all-u-can-eat buffets ’round the country and observe), many may–and surely will–have an early retirement indeed–from Life itself!!!
U don’t care for the future of White children (future White generations), they sure as hell will HAVE NO NEED to care for your ‘future’ either! Could even understand if they actually–and actively–hate and despise your slovenly, effeminate asses.
Ye reap what ye sow!