silver

50 Comments

1. Firstly, please, it’s far too soon to be passing judgment. I’ve scarcely mounted an attempt to influence anything; I’ve just sketched out a few ideas about how influence could (and ought to) be pursued, most of it an attempt to correct what I think are traditional racism’s most glaring flaws (and I’m not quite done). If my ideas are dumb or unhelpful, fine, so be it. (Although I’d be most interested to hear what in particular you find so offensive or insipid.)

   Secondly, what would you have me do? People who see race and understand it can’t help but see it and understand it. If you’ve read Dragonlance, it’s much like the affliction the mage Raistlin Majere is cursed with: his eyes see time as it affects all things; mine see race as it affects all things. It’s too bad all this has happened for me in the wrong country, but that’s not my fault nor can I correct it simply by departing on my own.

   Thirdly, you’re not wrong that external interests keep racialism isolated, but isn’t it reasonable to think that is done at least in part because of fears and/or misconceptions of what racialism is all about?

2. 1.) I haven’t seen you say much at all about your alternative approach except that it should be sold as a “complete package” and that it is a better system of race relations than the status quo. You seem to be mostly preoccupied with chiding others for their failure to elicit mainstream attention and approval.

   2.) In part, perhaps. I don’t think fear and misconceptions are the driving force behind anti-racism though.

3. I agree with your general argument. There is no chance that racialism can succeed when it is divorced from a true understanding of the Jewish question. For how can we reverse race replacement without identifying the underlying root cause thereof — namely, Jewish political activities and domination of the communications media?

   But on one point, I must disagree with you.

   You suggest that the only reason Jobling denounces anti-Semitism is because he thinks such an approach has superior potential marketability than the “anti-Semitic” variety of racialism. That is a capital error. Jobling sincerely believes that “anti-Semitism”, as he calls it, is counter-factual — and rejects it for that reason. Until we recognise that our enemies have positive reasons for adhering to their doctrines, we will never succeed in defeating them.

   And I fear that Jobling’s treacherous ideas on the Jewish question are catching like wildfire within the nationalist Right in Europe — but not in consequence of any “activism” on Jobling’s part. For Jobling is merely part of a wider and growing trend within the racialist movement — a moving away from the “anti-Semitism” of traditionary pro-white activism in light of the so-called Moslem Question (or rather, diversion — for make no mistake about it, the Moslem question is a red herring intended to divert our attention from the Jewish problem).

   Jobling will never succeed in America. Of that I have no doubt. But I worry that his approach to racialism — which spells surrender to Jewish activities — is “catching on” in Europe, which is why I am so pessimistic about the prospects of a real nationalist movement arising in Europe. More like a Jobling-style or BNP-style neoconservatism.

4. I haven’t seen you say much at all about your alternative approach except that it should be sold as a “complete package” and that it is a better system of race relations than the status quo.

   If all the components of that package were in place would that be dumb or wrong? Is it better to drone about one particular point, say, IQ, and then leave it at that and the audience itself to make up its own mind about what to make of it? How has that fared?

   You seem to be mostly preoccupied with chiding others for their failure to elicit mainstream attention and approval.

   Not on my own blog.

5. I’m not in the business of selling anyone on racialism. As for racialist talking points, I rarely hear one without hearing the others.

6. Prozium, Berianidze and I have concluded that a small movement of centralized and organized extremists is superior to a mass movement that makes concession after concession to gain a larger share of popular opinion.

   So I’m with you on that. I just don’t agree with you on Jews for other reasons that are more ideological than popularity driven.

7. What is there to dispute? There are millions of Leonard Zeskinds out there. They have always been the driving force behind anti-racism.

8. “There is no chance that racialism can succeed when it is divorced from a true understanding of the Jewish question. For how can we reverse race replacement without identifying the underlying root cause thereof — namely, Jewish political activities and domination of the communications media? […] Until we recognise that our enemies have positive reasons for adhering to their doctrines, we will never succeed in defeating them.” ( — Yosemite)

   I would say those three sentences right there sum the problem up. I would say you can take everything that’s been written about race-replacement everywhere, all the tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of pages (millions, maybe, if you go back far enough and also count the internet?) and replace it, every scrap of it, with just those three sentences and come out ahead.

   I would say the most important cause of what’s going on is exactly as summed up in those three sentences: the Jews and their control over the mass media. I would say the second most important cause is women’s suffrage (coupled with women in government and in the bureaucracy). To see race in the “us-them” way men do (the only way worth seeing it) is partly a testosterone effect, and that hormone plus certain inborn circuits guys have but gals lack completes the inborn race-perception package that gals don’t have anymore than guys can give milk and suckle babies or would want to if they could (it’s all in the anatomy, the central and peripheral nervous system, and the hormones and it’s all built-in).

   Women’s suffrage exerts a huge influence by forcing the pre-election tailoring of party platforms and choice of candidates to suit women’s tastes and blinkered female perceptions of the world, so that before the election even takes place the fix is in: voters are given only feminized party platforms and feminized candidates to choose from. Whatever is feminized doesn’t see race, so neither can nor wants to stave off race-replacement. Race-replacement is off the radar in the female mind: doesn’t exist because the “us-them” way of seeing race doesn’t exist. They don’t see race as “us-them,” they see everything instead, race included, as “we” with the sole exception of other women with the potential to rival them for men’s affections: those other women with the potential to be rivals for men, they see through the “us-them” lens, that’s it.

   Getting back to the Jews, I tried to explain to A Finn the other day: What I think’s going on is the U.S., extremely strongly Jewish-influenced — outright controlled in certain domains, two of those domains being open borders policy and policy toward Israel — sets the Eurospherewide tone, sort of the Eurospherewide standard, and the Eurosphere adopts that tone, adopts that standard. Euros in Europe are race-replacing themselves right now because the U.S.’s Jews, who are a community something like 7 million strong, have set a pro-race-replacement tone in the U.S. which both percolates by osmosis across the oceans to Europe and gets actively imposed on them behind the scenes by U.S. government agencies that have dealings with them, and there are literally hundreds of those, and NGOs, all the above heavily influenced in turn by Jews.

   Europe dwellers such as A Finn simply don’t see lots of Jews in their countries so have a hard time believing there’s a basis for citing the Jews as a huge factor. They accept Jews are a factor but not a huge one. I believe they’re wrong.

   Societies are controlled by élites. Everyone asks, “How can 2½-3 percent of the U.S. population have the influence you claim?,” but they forget Jews aren’t 2½-3 percent of the élites running the show, they’re probably more like 60% of those. Add in the fact that the average Jew has a hundred times more ethnocentrism than the average Euro-race person, and furthermore is constantly plotting to implement that ethnocentrism against Euro-race/Euro-ethnicity rivals, and it’s not hard to see how plausible it is that Jews exert huge influence. To exert huge influence you don’t have to be a big proportion of the population but a big proportion of the élites who control that population (that élite group normally being tiny, with or without Jews in it). Jews fill the bill nicely.

   When a spider or cetain snakes or marine moluscs, etc., inject their venom in prey they disable the prey’s nervous system so he can’t react, leaving him at the predator’s mercy. When the mass media are taken over it’s like bringing the nervous system of your victim under your control: he’s absolutely at your mercy. Like stung spider prey, he may still be alive but there’s no way he can react: nervous system’s taken over. The hyper-ethnocentric Jews have taken over the U.S.’s mass media. Draw your conclusions.

   “Hey, how come that fish that was just grabbed by that squid doesn’t seem to fight back? What’s wrong with him?”

   “Maybe his nervous system was disabled by the squid’s neurotoxins? Ever think of that?”

   Draw your conclusions in regard to taking over the mass media of a society (the society’s nervous system) and the power that gives to disable the society’s power to resist.

   With some other group controlling the U.S. mass media David Duke and Larry Darby might be viewed very differently than they are. It all depends on who controls the mass media, so the question, “How come more mainstream white leaders haven’t arisen? How come they’re all fringe?” can be answered, “Maybe they HAVE arisen, but maybe every time one does, he gets successfully tarred with the tar brush by the ethnic group that controls the mass media. Maybe plenty HAVE arisen who aren’t fringe but got, every one of them, ‘effectively made into fringe’ by the ethnic group controlling the mass media.”

   So, maybe everyone can stop scratching their heads over the “mystery” as to “Why no mainstream white leaders have arisen?” — but for mass media bias, maybe Larry Darby and David Duke would have been “mainstream.” So, it’s not a matter of “Why aren’t our guys mainstream?”, it’s a question of “Why aren’t our guys controlling the mass media to make sure we don’t get tarred with the tar brush every time and changed from potentially perfectly mainstream to irretrievably fringe through the mind-control miracle of mass-media propaganda?”

   Euros like A Finn don’t see this.

   “Jobling sincerely believes that ‘anti-Semitism,’ as he calls it, is counter-factual — and rejects it for that reason.”

   Jobling probably knows something’s up with Jewish behavior, something’s not right with it, otherwise he wouldn’t be so hypersensitive on the issue. He just thinks it’s less important as a factor then others of us do and he doesn’t want it as a distraction slowing down progress. The good thing about Jobling is, whatever else you accuse him of, there is no more staunch opponent of race-replacement out there. Some equal him in that, none surpass him. (Ditto CvH, whatever faults he may display notwithstanding.)

   “And I fear that Jobling’s treacherous ideas on the Jewish question are catching like wildfire within the nationalist Right in Europe — but not in consequence of any ‘activism’ on Jobling’s part.”

   They don’t get if from Jobling, they simply don’t see the Jewish influence emanating from the big centers of Jewish presence, the U.S. followed by France and Britain in second place and Canada in third.

   “For Jobling is merely part of a wider and growing trend within the racialist movement — a moving away from the ‘anti-Semitism’ of traditionary pro-white activism in light of the so-called Moslem Question (or rather, diversion — for make no mistake about it, the Moslem question is a red herring intended to divert our attention from the Jewish problem).”

   Of course the European “right’s” emphasis on Islam is completely the wrong main emphasis: the main emphasis should be on race and explicit rejection of race-replacement. Islam should be unwaveringly rejected at the same time but not “ahead of” race-replacement. Race-replacement comes first. FJ is one of the worst in this regard, as is BrusselsJournal.com (and obviously dozens of others as well, of both writers like FJ and blogs they write for). Big big big mistake, agreed.

9. If Jews are the Drivers of anti-racism, then non-Jews are the wheels. It just doesn’t make sense to only attack Jews, society should be collectively attacked.

10. Basically Prozium, Jobling says “embrace liberalism as white chuavnism,” you say “blame Jews,” and I say “Blame the entire country. Rage against the mainstream.”

11. “Add in the fact that the average Jew has a hundred times more ethnocentrism than the average Euro-race person, and furthermore is constantly plotting to implement that ethnocentrism against Euro-race/Euro-ethnicity rivals,” ( — my comment above)

    OK, they’re not all “constantly plotting” in that way (although plenty of them ARE, most definitely so, the Abe Foxman types and so on, and there are plenty of those in government and elsewhere among the élites) — maybe a better way to put it would be they’re hyper-, hyper-, hyper-, hyper-, hyper-sensitive to anything that might not be in Jewish best interests as they see things, more hyper-sensitive than any Euro-race person who ever existed since the world began, and as a result are ever pushing things in the direction of what’s good for the Jews against the comparatively clueless Euro-race persons who surround them in whatever office, agency, or bureaucracy they work in.

12. I never said Jews were the only cause. Many other historical factors were at work. See my previous post on the subject.

13. It is fair to say that Jews have always been the “vanguard” of anti-racism and several other destructive social movements. They have “led the charge,” so to speak.

14. “It just doesn’t make sense to only attack Jews” ( — Iceman)

    To echo Prozium just above: I also never said Jews were the only cause.

15. Agreed that they’re the vanguard, the leaders of the charge. I’ve used the term “ring-leaders” before: I see the Jews as not the sole cause of the race-replacement crisis, not by a long shot, but as the ring-leaders of it.

16. “It just doesn’t make sense to only attack Jews” ( — Iceman)

    Excluding them should obviously be at the top of any serious racialist To Do list. Need I remind you that is their attitude toward us?

17. For example, in my view if women’s suffrage had never come to pass, race-replacement would never have come to pass, Jews or no Jews.

18. Women’s suffrage handed Jews a golden opportunity. They picked it up and ran with it.

19. Silver has been attempting to pry personal information out of me via e-mail. He seems to think that by cursing at me and calling me a “nutzi” I’m going to be wooed into telling him my life story. Shithead.

20. Ah, I guess I blame democracy, capitalism, technology, forms of government etc. that allowed Jews to succeed and view Jews as more of the symptom than the cause. Even without Jews, if you had capitalism and liberal democracy and high technology to propagate it, the results would still be racial chaos. Maybe slower. But it would get there eventually.

    Don’t get me wrong Prozium, I respect you more for having a hardcore ideology and sticking to it than I respect others who seemingly agree with me on Jews but are just out for mainstream popularity. But I’d take a non-Trotskyite Jew who criticizes the system over a republican/democratic non-jew any day.

21. Yosemite,

    I can’t take Jobling seriously. He clearly isn’t willing to dispassionately discuss the facts. Instead, he reacts emotionally and bans everyone at his website who disagrees with him. I don’t mind when Iceman, Dunadan, and silver come on here and present their case.

22. But that’s what I mean, Proze — he’s too hypersensitive, as if overcompensating for something. Unlike Yosemite, I think he does know the Jews are a bad influence and his overdone hypersensitivity is a sign of that.

23. I mean Jews have been an accelerating factor. I estimate (just on a hunch) that without Jewish influence, America would perhaps have lasted 10-15-20 years longer than it did.

    There are a lot of accelerating factors though. Catholicism, liberal capitalism, German Americans who feel that they must “repent” for Nazism by embracing liberalism, just plain individualism and stupidity. And some non-whites and Mexicans are anti-white just because they are capable of it, not because anyone directs them. Jews are a factor. But Democracy and capitalism are the real enablers that let Jews have their way.

    When I say Jews, I mean Jewish political opponents, not Jews just because they are Jews.

    So I guess what I’m saying is that in an ultranationalist “state capitalist” country, Jewish influence would be inconsequential. Plus I don’t mean to imply that Jews are only capable of bad.

24. There’s just no getting around it, the Jewish immigrants were most definitely the vanguard of anti-racist leftism in the U.S. with notables like Adorno, Marcuse, and Boas. A very strong argument could made that racial egalitarianism couldn’t have triumphed so completely in the U.S. without the essential contributions of these people. Of course, they didn’t work alone, more than a few White American natives signed up for the cause of egalitarianism.

    However, my problem with pinning all the woes of the White race on Jews is that once you get outside the Anglosphere (and also France) the Jewish population in White nations just plummets (i.e. there are more Jews in Iran than in Denmark). For me it doesn’t really make sense to blame Jews (even contextually) for the anti-racist leftism of various European nations like the Netherlands, Austria, Denmark, Sweden, etc.

    Just my two cents I guess.

25. Chaos, you’re an incurable dickwad. I was curious about the background of someone as strident as you. Trying to “pry” personal information out of you, sheesh, what a loon. I half expected such a reaction and now that I’ve received it I think I can quite safely dismiss me you as an unserious actor. (Btw, I do have your name, you know. Relax, it’s safe with me.)

26. Until we recognise that our enemies have positive reasons for adhering to their doctrines

    Are you sure they are positive (offensive) and not merely defensive?

    Essentially, your qualm is that Jews prevent a racial solution (of whatever form you desire — separation, ethnic cleansing, whatever). That should be the focus of your attack, not that “Jews started it.” Of course, all who stand in a way of a racial solution should be attacked, not just Jews.

27. Silver, the racial reality website is a good one and the site that claims to refute it is garbage.

    Just saw your blog, haha.

28. This story should make Scrooby orgasm.

    Iceman, I disagree. Refuting RM is harsh but fair. The infamous “n/a” is responsible for the refutation. I think you’ll agree he knows racial bs when he sees it.

    I notice you paid a visit to my blog. Why the laugh? By your own admission you find it interesting.

29. Goddam it, I can’t be bothered waiting for comment moderation to pass.

    I noted that there’s a CNN story about a black rabbi that should make Fred Scrooby orgasm. From my perspective, it’s just a consequence of multiracialism and example of how well identified groups (not just Whites) suffer dismemberment.

30. Iceman, I disagree. Refuting RM is harsh but fair. The infamous “n/a” is responsible for the refutation. I think you’ll agree he knows racial bs when he sees it.

    I notice you paid a visit to my blog. Why the laugh? By your own admission you find it interesting.

31. Quoting Prozium here:

    “Both of you are driven by the false assumption (one that I admit to briefly entertaining years ago) that the isolation that has been imposed on racialists is due to internal dysfunctions instead of external interest and force.”

    I think that this should be the key point for this comment thread. Racialist thinking, in all its forms, is constantly being suppressed, even to the point where a scientist like Watson (co-discoverer of DNA and nobel laureate) loses control of his laboratory over a few sentences in his autobiography. And if Watson isn’t allowed to express a little pessimism over the intellectual endowments of Africans (at the genetic level!) then what room could that possibly leave for any kind of White identitarianism?

    If the racialist community is nothing more than a few slightly unhinged froot loops it’s because others would rather avoid the high social costs (imposed by our managerial elites) that may come with racialist beliefs.

32. No I’m not against your blog but have a lot of respect for racial reality, the anthroscape community and the way they approach anthropology.

    Who is “n/a?”

33. http://racialreality.110mb.com/refuting_rm.html

    People like “n/a” and “western biopolitics” don’t deserve to call themselves anthropologists.

34. Except I’ll admit RR handled the accusations of hardcore pornography very poorly in that thread.

35. In the case of the latter (Rienzi/JWH) I’m inclined to agree. Of course, Rienzi doesn’t attempt to pass himself off as an anthropologist, but his racial thinking is muddy, self-serving and ghoulish enough to discredit him. His insistence on perfect incompatibility between “EC’s” and “NEC’s” says it all, really.

    As for n/a, please. I don’t see how you can possibly compare the quality of his and Racial Reality’s respective retorts and find the latter coming out on top. I don’t know what n/a’s specialty is but I’ve seen nothing to indicate that it isn’t anthropology; conversely, his ability to hold his own against professional anthropologists gives me every reason to believe that it is.

    Regarding the anthroscapers, they’re just hobbyists aren’t they? The place has the atmosphere of a bar full of stormfront rejects drowning their sorrows. Alternatively, a more generous impression is a stormfront for medicists.

36. Not really. It isn’t a racialist forum. It discusses race but it isn’t an activist forum.

    It’s an anthropology forum that tends to be grounded in traditional anthropology. Stormfront doesn’t draw its influences from Coon and modern science but from Hitler and the Confederacy.

37. You are probably thinking of diablo blanko’s forum.

    Anthroscape is more related to dodona and human biodiversity forum, but it tends to draw in the dienekes / coon crowd more than the boas crowd.

38. Silver,

    I cannot take any “off the record” exchange with you seriously unless you approach it in a serious manner. Which you did not. I would be willing to have a discussion with you without the usual silverific antics; only under that circumstance.

    “Btw, I do have your name, you know.”

    Yup, I know that. My name might as well be John Smith. There are literally dozens of people in my county alone by the same name.

39. “Race-replacement is off the radar in the female mind: doesn’t exist because the “us-them” way of seeing race doesn’t exist. ”

    I am a White woman. I certainly can see the “us / them” reality of race, and I recognize the race replacement going on, and I don’t like it one bit.
    I know, I know, I am just one woman, and all generalizations have exceptions. Perhaps I am merely an exception to the rule. BUT, I cannot read other women’s minds, and so I can only come to conclusions of truth about women’s viewpoints from my own thoughts and the women I get the chance to talk to — most of whom see race as us/them, too, at least the older, non-Cultural-Marxism-brainwashed women.

    Consider:
    Much of the feminist movement was led by, agitated for pushed by Jewish women. Is it not at least possible that the inability to see the us/them reality of race among so many women in leadership positions is due to the Jewishness, rather than the femaleness?

40. As for n/a, please. I don’t see how you can possibly compare the quality of his and Racial Reality’s respective retorts and find the latter coming out on top.

    Jesus, talking about behaving like a spurned little bitch. Get over it, Silver. JWH doesn’t give a shit about you, unlike you, who never misses the opportunity to throw barbs his way. You have no idea what the hell you are speaking of and you sound utterly pathetic. But hey, if that’s been your goal, you’re right there!

41. Cap, you need to loosen up. You need to bend like a reed not snap like a twig. A point I grudgingly concede to zee Scroob is the utter normalcy, the complete and utter normalcy of what gets discussed in these circles. But you don’t convey that fact by uttering every syllable through clenched teeth, the gravity of the situation notwithstanding. Normal people, especially during moments when they have little better to do, laugh and joke, even about very serious matters — Monty Python did more to lessen religious reverence (or inspire outright atheism) than a thousand Richard Dawkinses ever could have.

    As for claiming to have your name, yes, I’m aware of how common it is: that’s the point of the joke. Sigh, another one goes sailing over Cap’s head.

    (Oh, and my attempt to “pry” information from Cap was asking what quadrant of the country he lived in. John Smith from the NE? We’re gone git that racist bastard!)

42. Congratulations on removing White America from your blog roll, by the way. Now you should take the next logical step and remove the philosemitic websites of American Renaissance and Steven Sailer. Let’s not give these scum a platform, shall we?

43. Get over it, Silver. JWH doesn’t give a shit about you, unlike you, who never misses the opportunity to throw barbs his way.

    That’s not what I recall. Who had the blog and the free rein to make up rebuttal free facts about whom?

    Where’d this come from anyway? I didn’t reference “western biopolitics,” Iceman did.

    I don’t give a shit about Rienzi either — just his bogus ideas.

44. Dude secondary to fade’s old forum (which he left behind), my second biggest enemy on the history of the internet is JWH. I mean that guy was a total asshole. I’d support Silver in that conflict any day.

45. JWH is one of the greatest racialist bloggers on the internet, in my opinion. It would be a mistake if Prozium were to remove his website from the blog roll. I do not support any kind of conflict with this remarkable and highly educated individual.

46. Silver, I simply will not respond to a discourse “off the record” that is colored by childish invective, and from jump street at that.

47. Good call, Captainchaos.

48. Iceman opposes JWH because he advocates the exclusively life of a genetically distinct people – Europeans. A people Iceman can never fully be a part of due to his mixture of non-European ancestry. The Rosenberg study, which clearly establishes that, has the final word. Not to say that those of us northwestern Europeans ought not wish, and indeed act to, preserve our very being as such.

    Iceman will not, nor can he, offer any substantive response to the above. That is, as is said, “ballgame”.

49. The shift in attitudes towards Jews by nationalists in Europe is largely a result of political calculation. Talking about Jews doesn’t win elections. Remember, nationalists in Europe are actually involved in politics. Nationalists in America only talk about politics.

50. But doesn’t that go against what Prozium was saying earlier — that downplaying the Jewish question will have not improve the marketability of nationalism/racialism? If what you are saying is correct, then that strategy seems to be working in Europe. I don’t think it is a good strategy in the long run, for it is impossible to reverse race replacement without identifying the underlying root cause thereof, namely Jewish political activities.