A response to Jeffrey Imm and R.E.A.L.
Growing up in the 1990s, I found myself pondering all sorts of mysteries as a teenager: why did my black classmates consistently receive lower test scores; why were black students always in the lower track courses; why did people on television claim that blacks were as smart as Whites; why did blacks act in such a peculiar way; why were the smart White kids herded into the same schools with black thugs and drug dealers. I didn’t get it. Something didn’t feel right.
The inclusion of blacks at my school always bothered me. It struck me as an obstacle to my education. Blacks often assaulted the White kids in the school cafeteria. They sold drugs in school. They disrupted the classroom. They didn’t show any interest in their studies. Their sordid underclass culture rubbed off on the poorer Whites. My teachers were constantly forced to waste their time catering to the lowest common denominator. It was one long farce from kindergarten to graduation.
When I arrived at college, I was catapulted into a whole different world. Suddenly, there were lots of bright people around me with similar interests. A magic filter whisked away all the troublesome blacks who took up space in high school. In their place, I had an enormous college library to mine with thousands of books that interested me. I had a slew of courses that I could take to satisfy my intellectual curiosity. There was no comparison between my new segregated environment and my old integrated one.
I plunged in head first. When I emerged five years later, I was a different person. I had come to realize that my generation was the subject of a cruel liberal experiment in social engineering. In the name of “equality,” a small group of federal judges and ideologues had overthrown Alabama’s segregated school system and forced raw negroes into the White schools. This was done solely to uplift the negro, not to improve the White schools. Integration was based on the flawed premise that segregated schools were the cause of black academic underperformance.
Fifty years later, the segregationists have yet to be vindicated. The racial gap in average test scores failed to disappear in the integrated schools. It has stubbornly persisted into the Obama presidency. The traditional social problems of the black underclass (illegitimacy, vulgarity, drug abuse, violence, indolence, teen pregnancy) were imported into the White schools where they became a common problem. America’s public schools once inspired envy throughout the Western world. Thanks to our growing black and mestizo population, they now rank near the bottom.
The segregationists were right about other things. Theodore Bilbo had predicted that the end of segregation would unleash a tidal wave of black-on-white violent crime. Even Bilbo though couldn’t imagine that the day would come when negroes would rape over 35,000 white women per year in the United States. This was unknown in the Jim Crow South. Interracial crime is a one way street. Whites are overwhelmingly the victims of murders, thefts, rapes, and assaults by negroes, not the other way around. Even when blacks murder, rape, and steal from other blacks, White taxpayers incur the costs of their incarceration. This is another unsavory aspect of Martin Luther King’s so-called “dream” that is deliberately ignored in the mainstream.
Why do Whites accept inferior schools? Why do they endure unbearable levels of interracial violent crime? Why do they put up with racial discrimination in the form of affirmative action? Why do Whites accept an immigration policy which displaces them from their neighborhoods and reduces their political power? Why do Whites accept the redistribution of their wealth to non-Whites?
Let’s travel further in this vein: Why do Whites accept the degeneration of their culture? Why do Whites accept the spread of poverty, disease, filth, and ignorance in their midst? Why do Whites accept economic underdevelopment? Why do Whites accept the surrender of their culture and identity to placate hostile minorities? Why do Whites think their displacement in their native lands is a good thing? Why do Whites confuse decline with progress?
From a perspective of self interest, White racial suicide doesn’t make any sense. It becomes explicable though in the light of ideology and altruism. Our enemies have twisted Christianity and republicanism to justify our demise as a people. The intellectual fraud they have perpetrated doesn’t stand up to close historical scrutiny. The real impulse to annihilate Whites comes from outside both of these traditions.
Two centuries ago, Whites didn’t have these debates. Republicanism and Christianity flourished alongside a vigorous racial nationalism. Slavery was a contentious issue, but Whiteness itself wasn’t attacked by even the most radical egalitarians. No one believed that “liberty” and “equality” mandated or required the demographic submersion of America’s White majority. If a Christian minister or priest had invoked “love” to justify the racial displacement of his flock, they would have laughed him out of church. They probably would have tarred and feathered him to boot.
The attack on Whiteness began in the twentieth century. It came from three primary sources: Jewish academics, black intellectuals, and Marxists. More often that not, blacks and Jews mingled in the same radical fringe. It was an extremely secular milieu. Collectively, they dreamed of overthrowing the bourgeoisie republican order and replacing it with a classless Marxist utopia in which all racial and social distinctions would be abolished.
The Soviet Union was the first European nation to permanently incorporate this revolutionary ideal into law. In the 1920s, the USSR became a mecca for radical black intellectuals alienated from America. In the United States, the Communist Party USA was the only political party that fully championed the colorblind ideal that gradually triumphed after the Second World War. It was instructed to unfurl the banner of racial equality by the Comintern. Within the CPUSA, the Moscow party line was controversial, as it tended to alienate White working class voters.
This is a rich story that no one has completely told. The term “racism” made its debut on the Marxist fringe in the 1920s, entered American public discourse in the 1930s, and penetrated the mainstream in the 1940s. The Civil Rights Movement had close ties to communism in its earliest years. The U.S. dismantled Jim Crow largely because of the appeal of communism in the Third World. The ruling class neutralized the racial threat of Soviet communism (the possibility of a black fifth column) by mainstreaming the Soviet racial ideal here in America.
The spearhead of anti-racism hasn’t changed in our own times. It is still composed of Jewish academics, black intellectuals, and Marxists. The common thread uniting them is communism, atheism, and hatred of Whites. They have since moved on to creating a new radical discourse about “white privilege” and new forms of subversion like “critical race theory.” These ideals are then smuggled into the mainstream through left-wing front groups as the newest form of Christianity and republicanism.
This is where Comrade Jeffrey enters the picture. His apparent role is to put words into the mouth of Jesus Christ or Thomas Jefferson that were never spoken. The true progenitors of his ideal can trace their footsteps back to Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin. He doesn’t want you to find that out though.
We can fight over IQ points, later, when the World is White.
“Now Fatherland, Fatherland, show us the sign
Your children have waited to see
The morning will come
When the world is mine
Tomorrow belongs to me”
Hasten the Day.
Profile:
And to succeed, it would not need any supermen of vast powers of thought and planning. It just needs a few buck-toothed bubbas with backbone, ignorant of Nietsche but with the will and persistence to make it happen.
LOL
Profile:
the Tea Parties are totally co-opted. I know. Personally. I got booted out of one (but not another) for being “too racist”. The original group, I was booted from, has already begun cannibalizing itself (my spies report back to me). One of the founders is a Crypto, and she behaves true to her vile, demonic Jew blood. She posted a link to a subversive Leftist website – I called her out – I got the boot.
LOL
Question:
What can you do with a counter-factual assumption?
Answer:
You can prove anything you want.
“Ethnocentrism is correlated and associated with lower-class behavior patterns.”
There goes NN again injecting class-warfare in to the discussion instead of focusing on the main matter, which is White racial survival. Now he claims that people (he especially means Whites) who are ethnocentric are “lower-class” — but this is of course a recent development, as in the not-too distant past (before culture-distorting Jews propagandized Whites via their owned mass-media, academia, corrupt legalisms, etc) almost all Whites were vigorously ethnocentric, segregationists, racial purists, and so on.
Are you a classist or something, NN? Would you prefer to live amongst and breed with Black billionaires or working-class Whites? Would you ever be tempted to completely sell out the White race for a big pile of ZOG bucks?
“Ethnocentrism is correlated and associated with lower-class behavior patterns.”
There goes NN again injecting class-warfare in to the discussion instead of focusing on the main matter, which is White racial survival.
And the question in that regard is what class of tactics is to be emphasized.
Now he claims that people (he especially means Whites) who are ethnocentric are “lower-class”
I see no denial/refutation of this “claim” in this comment.
— but this is of course a recent development, as in the not-too distant past (before culture-distorting Jews propagandized Whites via their owned mass-media, academia, corrupt legalisms, etc) almost all Whites were vigorously ethnocentric, segregationists, racial purists, and so on.
As is no longer the case, however the blame is apportioned, and with the consequence I have “claimed”.
Are you a classist or something, NN?
My serious academic and avocational study of World and Comparative History (BA, Summa Cum with Honors, 3.9/4.0 in 2 years, Head of Class) prevents me from overlooking the prominence of the issue of class in the human experience.
Would you prefer to live amongst and breed with Black billionaires or working-class Whites?
The latter. And your preference?
Would you ever be tempted to completely sell out the White race for a big pile of ZOG bucks?
No. Would you?
Neo – you posted “LOL” in reposnse to my account of my Tea Party expulsion. The thing is – I WAS “too racist”. I had really ramped up the Racial Rhetoric, after Christmas. I had been getting bored, and I wanted to see how far I could push things.
A bunch of us WN entered the local outfits, and attempted to “racialize” the various members. I DID succeed, as I am still on excellent terms with a number of members, and I have fully informed them at to my true beliefs. I am getting them on the White Team. One of the guys was spouting “Those that bless Israel…blah blah blah”, when I met him last Spring. He just bought me a Nazi coin, a few weeks ago, as tribute. There are others (my spies)….coming right along.
That first group is very affluent, educated, and “high end”. The 2nd group I belong to is much more working class, and much rowdier. I have toned down the rhetoric, to a degree. I have been admonished, thus far, cone, and it was over 9/11 Truth posting. Not Race. I, and other “civilians” have gotten into totally free exchanges over racial issues – and how taxation is abused to award non-Whites – and not a peep has been heard from the Mods, on this site.
So – the “intelligent” Whites, in my area, have already been co-opted by ZOG. The “redneck” ones have not, and are completely open to free debate on the practical, real world results of social engineering.
I’m gonna move to the Trailer Trash Free State. I’m bettign on them. The Salt of the Earth types will hold the line. The Ejimakated types are the craven sell-outs, necks willingly outstretched to offer, as sacrifice, to Madame Guillotinesky.
Denise,
Attitude and administration are two different things.
You misconceive the human circumstance – as did the pastor at my church, long ago, who claimed that, were the Earth full of none but Christians, this world would be a Heaven on Earth.
I suggest that you do as I did, and spend the next several years clearing the shelves at a local university of their works on economics and political science, with an eye to the ethical implications, limitations, and prospects of and for political-economy, implicit in what you read. Learn about the principles involved in the origins, organization, and maintenance of post-tribal human society.
Then you might be intellectually equipped to gauge the wisdom of the political affiliations and tactics you choose that fundamentally affect your life.
I write this with affection for your spirit.
NN
“Would you prefer to live amongst and breed with Black billionaires or working-class Whites?” (Wiki)
The latter. And your preference? (NN)
There is, however, one confession that I could make in this regard:
When I was in the stockade at Ft. Dix, many years ago, I found that I much preferred the company of black militants, on the basis of mutual respect and understanding, to association with pussy whites on the basis of mutual contempt and misunderstanding.
On the pension given to Mennasseh ben Israel:
More from Henriques’s The Jews and the English Law:
http://www.heretical.com/British/jewlegal.html
Note that the subject of this essay, William Prynne, was a Puritan. As were the clergymen and others who opposed the admission of Jews at Whitehall.
NN was asked: “Would you prefer to live amongst and breed with Black billionaires or working-class Whites?”
And replied: “The latter. And your preference?”
So despite the fact that NN is ‘spiritually a Jew’ he is loyal unto death to his allegedly lesser brethren. I think I’m getting misty-eyed. LOL!
NeoNietzsche
Sorry, OR, but I am so sated by the savor of your incontinent indignation that there’s nothing further you can offer me of pleasure at your expense.
Not that this is any news to me, but I hope your admission that you’re a griefer troll helps put to rest the all too common assumption that you’re arguing in good faith.
…but I hope your admission that you’re a griefer troll helps put to rest the all too common assumption that you’re arguing in good faith
Perhaps it would if I had.
But the fact is that your latest foam-flecked outburst was not deliberately elicited – it was merely an unanticipated bonus addition to the “Tards on Parade” file (which has fallen into neglect lately). Also, you might note that your lack of composure is (but for Antonius Cincinnatus’s own ) *singular* in this venue. Hardly the basis for a generalization as to my motives.
Neo, Honey Britches – you are making the error of assuming that we are in a post-tribal society.
We were.
Not no more.
Things are breaking down.
Things are falling apart.
We are re-tribalizing.
Uh-huh. It’s true.
Do you ever converse with non-intellectual, but intelligent and energetic Whites, that live in Post America (Mexifornia, and Mexizonia, etc?). I do.
Whites are finally boarding the last train, on the Racial Survival Express. Whites are the last to get on board – but the ones that do will overtake all the others. You also assume that the Hyper Refined Intellectuals, and the Dirt under the Fingernails Whites are going to remain mutually exclusive. It jest ain’t so.
Do you know how to make practical things? I don’t. I done read a lotta readin’, and them there fancy-pants book ya talk about – I’m more concerned with the practical applications of growing food, raising and butchering domestic animals, acruing fuel gathering skills, manufacturing bullets, etc, than ingesting some high-falutin’ e-co-nomic Theory-orems.
I’d rather make economies, than read about ’em.
Can you make things? Can you do plumbing, or ‘lectricty? I can’t. Mebbee I’ll take up welding, Pookie Sweetums.
Neo, Honey Britches – you are making the error of assuming that we are in a post-tribal society.
D-girl, my Candy Pants – whatever the marginal tendency and the prospects for the future of which you seem to hope, a continent of 300 mil population remains solidly and necessarily post-tribal in culture and administration. A generally and genuinely tribal population on the continent would allow of only a few million inhabitants. So you betray the lack of instruction in political economy for which I have prescribed suitable remedy. That instruction might allow you to contribute to the avoidance of the loss of the hundreds of millions of lives, likely including your own, that is the difference between the present circumstance and the demographically primitive Dark Age of tribalism that threatens.
Do you ever converse with non-intellectual, but intelligent and energetic Whites, that live in Post America (Mexifornia, and Mexizonia, etc?). I do.
As do I.
Whites are finally boarding the last train, on the Racial Survival Express. Whites are the last to get on board – but the ones that do will overtake all the others. You also assume that the Hyper Refined Intellectuals, and the Dirt under the Fingernails Whites are going to remain mutually exclusive. It jest ain’t so.
A cheerful prospect, my dear. No Night of the Long Knives for *our* Revolution, eh?
– I’m more concerned with the practical applications of growing food, raising and butchering domestic animals, acruing fuel gathering skills, manufacturing bullets, etc, than ingesting some high-falutin’ e-co-nomic Theory-orems.
A worthwhile skill set to have for the few days you would likely have yet to live in a circumstance where you would have to resort to those provident measures.
I’d rather make economies, than read about ‘em.
A virtuous aspiration! And such courage displayed in disdaining to profit from the experience of others, left as a legacy for the literate!
Can you make things? Can you do plumbing, or ‘lectricty? I can’t.
I can.
Mebbee I’ll take up welding, Pookie Sweetums.
That might be more than you will have the opportunity to put to use, Gum Drop.
NeoNietzsche,
In regard to the secession movement by the human “cattle” (as you refer to them), you seem to concede that there is not much that the US could do to counteract their efforts, if they had the will to endure. Billions of people around the world live in comparatively squalid conditions, and thrive therein. There is nothing that prevents Whites from doing so as well, if they had conviction and commitment to a cause.
Stored food supplies to last a few years are cheap, so are trailers, seeds, gardens, home-made bunkers and cameras to document suppression. If leaders were captured, their show trials would attract a great deal of attention. The conservative republican base would certainly have a lot of sympathy for them, especially after some innocents had been shot on film. A few incidents like those can be enough to bring down an administration. There is a great deal of unsettled law about the right of a state to secede, which would be debated across the nation. Every month that went by with their state remaining intact would increase their legitimacy, and bring it closer to de-facto independence. A small independent White state with low taxes would be a haven for Europeans fleeing from their displacement around the world, and would mark a precedent for other states to do likewise.
I think that your talk of our super-state being all powerful is ill conceived. How well is the state doing against Afganistan, and what are its prospects to quell that part of the world? I dont see the state having much success against the Polygamists, who you would no doubt classify as untermensch. A group of Hoi Polloi with commitment to an idea cannot really be dealt with by this state. Kievsky is exactly right about this. All of this defeatist talk just makes no sense, and from someone who claims to understand history, its unfathomable, as the past is replete with examples of successful secession movements. So dammit, put on your wife-beater shirt, buy a pickup, saw off your shotgun and get ready for the revolooshun!
“You might review the discussion and note that I did not assign responsibility for that development. If you will study “superhuman,” this matter will be explained at a length that is not appropriate on this thread.”
Which post? Can you provide a link?
“And what has been the fate of Elite Jews?”
I suppose you mean Boxer. We’ll just see how long the State keeps churning out Jewgirl Israel Firsters once Hispanics are an absolute majority of voters.
Then it will stop being about building a Leftist Coalition, where the Jews have something of value to trade, and instead just be pure Hispanic demographic power running over everyone else and leading to de facto Genocide.
A Hispanic wouldn’t even need Jewish money to win in Cali, if he was running against a Non-Hispanic in a State where the absolute majority of voters are Ethnocentric Hispanics.
“Neither. It’s out of control in a death spiral, evidently as it suits High Quality Jews, on balance. Same thing in Iraq.”
At this time, that is a lie. The Hispanic Birthrate in California is MASSIVE, and the infant mortality for Hispanics is low.
Also it is clear that California is controlled by Hispanics when you consider that Hispanic Women are paid by the State Government to have children.
Nazi Government paid Germans to have Babies = Germans controlled Nazi Germany.
California Government pays Hispanics to have Babies = Hispanics control California Government.
Now at some point the fleeing of Whites will lead to some starvation, but that no more proves that Hispanics don’t control the State than the starvation of Blacks in Zimbabwe proves that Blacks aren’t in control of that Country.
You clearly have no understanding of what the word control means.
“One would think so, but the evidence to that effect is questionable.
As has been referenced here and as general observation indicates, Ethnocentrism is correlated and associated with lower-class behavior patterns. This brings it into disrepute with those who have the power to influence events.”
Yeah sure, that’s the reason the Elite are Anti-White! If they were Pro-White it would make them be too much like White people who don’t make enough money or go to the right schools.
It couldn’t possible be because they actually believe Anti-Discrimination Liberalism, now could it!
And the proof of this is that while they normally treat Pro-White people with savagery, when you’re talking about the erudite and Harvard Educated Pro-White Activist Jared Taylor, they treat him with a deference and respect that is due to his class.
Except when they’re treating him like a Terrorist and looking the other way as Thugs Attack him every time he tries to speak before a neutral audience.
Give me a break, Neo: The Elite are against our ideas, and not their association with people of lower socioeconomic status.
If they were against ideas associated with poor people, they’d be deadest against the Welfare State as the Welfare State’s strongest support comes from the economic dregs of the Human Race.
In regard to the secession movement by the human “cattle” (as you refer to them), you seem to concede that there is not much that the US could do to counteract their efforts, if they had the will to endure.
If you will review, I did not concede. Such an effort would most likely be interdicted at the organizational stage, and I merely allowed you past that obstacle for the sake of instruction in the outcome, even granted the improbable.
Billions of people around the world live in comparatively squalid conditions, and thrive therein. There is nothing that prevents Whites from doing so as well, if they had conviction and commitment to a cause.
You misunderstand the issue. Unless you have a sovereign, armed administration already in place in your refuge, the refugees will tear one another apart in short order, whatever their wealth or lack thereof. That’s Bubba history and culture.
I think that your talk of our super-state being all powerful is ill conceived. How well is the state doing against Afganistan, and what are its prospects to quell that part of the world?
I do not recall such talk as you describe. The circumstances and interests involved in domestic secession and remote foreign wars are not parallel.
I dont see the state having much success against the Polygamists, who you would no doubt classify as untermensch. A group of Hoi Polloi with commitment to an idea cannot really be dealt with by this state. Kievsky is exactly right about this.
The measures taken by the State tend to correspond to the threat posed to the State. Polygamists and other eccentrics are not much of a threat, in terms of armed force seeking territorial amputation. And I again point out that the State need not aggressively “deal” with a Bubbaville – the problem will cure itself with time.
All of this defeatist talk just makes no sense, and from someone who claims to understand history, its unfathomable, as the past is replete with examples of successful secession movements.
Like the War of Northern Aggression? What else of significance did you have in mind? Bar Kochba? The Cathars? Pakistan and Bangladesh? Tibet and Nepal? Ireland? The alleged “collapse” of the USSR? South Yemen and South Sudan? Buganda? Vermont? Please list the true parallels to what you propose of developments in an advanced culture that are successful more often than not. And remember that you propose not simply the creation and secession of a State amidst a long-settled population, as is the history of the event – you would have this emerge from the congregation of strangers *intruding* upon such a population.
So – a ludicrous proposal it is. And it is portentous of the prospects for successful administration of such a refuge and redoubt that, once again in history, quarrelsome barbarians will be on the move thereto and will require the collaboration of an alien international entity in order to establish and maintain order in their dominion. But this requirement will not be met, of course, as having been ideologically excluded, and North Dakota will start looking like Pitcairn Island in short order.
So dammit, put on your wife-beater shirt, buy a pickup, saw off your shotgun and get ready for the revolooshun!
I was thinking rather of cheerleader outfits for you and my D-girl.
“You might review the discussion and note that I did not assign responsibility for that development. If you will study ‘superhuman,’ this matter will be explained at a length that is not appropriate on this thread.”
Which post? Can you provide a link?
Read the Black Column and the attached comments. It will be amongst that material.
“And what has been the fate of Elite Jews?”
I suppose you mean Boxer. We’ll just see how long the State keeps churning out Jewgirl Israel Firsters once Hispanics are an absolute majority of voters.
No, I mean the Jewish elite that runs the Greater Judean Empire and suffers not the fate of merely wealthy white goyim in CA.
Then it will stop being about building a Leftist Coalition, where the Jews have something of value to trade, and instead just be pure Hispanic demographic power running over everyone else and leading to de facto Genocide.
Thus we have it from yourself that the purposes of the *true* quality elite are being served in CA.
“Neither. It’s out of control in a death spiral, evidently as it suits High Quality Jews, on balance. Same thing in Iraq.”
At this time, that is a lie. The Hispanic Birthrate in California is MASSIVE, and the infant mortality for Hispanics is low.
Sounds like a symptom of a situation that’s out of control, from the standpoint of whites (like my in-laws, in LA).
Also it is clear that California is controlled by Hispanics when you consider that Hispanic Women are paid by the State Government to have children.
California is in a fiscal death spiral that will leave no one locally in “control”.
Nazi Government paid Germans to have Babies = Germans controlled Nazi Germany.
Weimar issued trillions in worthless currency = Allies controlled Germany.
California Government pays Hispanics to have Babies = Hispanics control California Government.
California Government is running out of money to pay Hispanics = California becomes a literal Welfare State controlled by the GJ government, lest CA descend into anarchy in consequence of lower-caste attempts at administration.
Now at some point the fleeing of Whites will lead to some starvation, but that no more proves that Hispanics don’t control the State than the starvation of Blacks in Zimbabwe proves that Blacks aren’t in control of that Country.
And we certainly look forward to the national administration of our affairs under such “control”. Imagine a Zimbabwe-esque entity as the (temporarily) sovereign power in North America as a whole. Of course, anarchy would soon ensue, and a coup or invasion would place a more capable oligarchy in a position to govern a continent that plays a pivotal role in international events. And that capable oligarchy would not resemble the Brotherhood of Bubba’s, Hispanics, or Africans.
You clearly have no understanding of what the word control means.
So it seems when one thinks of the word as applicable to third-world regimes on a downward trajectory.
“One would think so, but the evidence to that effect is questionable. As has been referenced here and as general observation indicates, Ethnocentrism is correlated and associated with lower-class behavior patterns. This brings it into disrepute with those who have the power to influence events.”
Yeah sure, that’s the reason the Elite are Anti-White! If they were Pro-White it would make them be too much like White people who don’t make enough money or go to the right schools.
It couldn’t possibl[y] be because they actually believe Anti-Discrimination Liberalism, now could it!
I certainly could and is – but no one reason accounts for the matter.
Class distinction *is* an element allied and aligned with the moral self-righteousness that you suggest is solely the issue
And the proof of this is that while they normally treat Pro-White people with savagery, when you’re talking about the erudite and Harvard Educated Pro-White Activist Jared Taylor, they treat him with a deference and respect that is due to his class.
Except when they’re treating him like a Terrorist and looking the other way as Thugs Attack him every time he tries to speak before a neutral audience.
Again, both elements are present, now in the example of the treatment of JT.
Give me a break, Neo: The Elite are against our ideas, and not their association with people of lower socioeconomic status.
The evidence is otherwise.
If they were against ideas associated with poor people, they’d be deadest against the Welfare State as the Welfare State’s strongest support comes from the economic dregs of the Human Race.
The “ideas associated with poor people” involve polarities that allow *some* varieties of poor people to be celebrated as noble in their ideas consonant with the Liberal Utopianism of the upper elements – as you well know. You just didn’t think that one through.
@Reginald
“You might review the discussion and note that I did not assign responsibility for that development. If you will study ’superhuman,’ this matter will be explained at a length that is not appropriate on this thread.”
Which post? Can you provide a link?
Read the Black Column and the attached comments. It will be amongst that material.
The post, “LAW, ETHICS, AND MORALITY: PRETENSE AND ILLUSION,” and the comments attached, are the most pertinent.
NeoNietzsche:
Knowing in advance that the probability of me convincing you of anything is about the same as winning the lottery, for the record the points that I was trying to make with the hypothetical scenario were:
1) In a modern democracy, it is quite viable for a population to separate if it has a majority of the vote in a region and the endurance to outlast the state. Some examples are the breakup of the Soviet Union; look at Moldova, the Baltic countries, etc. Elsewhere in Europe we have Czech/Slovakia and Yugoslavia. There are movements afoot in Belgium and Italy that would succeed if they had the votes behind them. Quebec could have easily seceded with a few more percentage points of the vote, and any Canadian province could do so today using the same process. Other older examples are England’s colonies separating (including Canada, Australia and New Zealand). The list goes on.
2) The US cannot resort to the authoritarian measures needed to crush a real movement, especially a non-violent one. Your suggestion of imprisoning leaders during the organization stage, or “walling in” a state attempting to secede is not realistic. This nation is bound by a net of laws on what it can do. We didnt see kidnapping, assassinations, wallings-in or other interference with Quebec’s independence movement, neither do we see that in other existing European independence movements. Whether or not there is a shadow elite that controls real affairs, hard-core repression is not an option for the US or other Western democracies (and certainly not dropping a nuke on them as you mentioned).
3) The “regular people” (sans Supermen) are fully capable of carrying out a secession strategy if they have the commitment, the willpower to see it through, and the ability to endure hardship. Whites have shown these qualities in the past, and it stands to reason that they could do so again (non-Whites can do it in the third world, why cant my kin?). The polygamists are an important example, they have thrived under siege for a long time.
4) The Afganistan situation is relevant, because it shows the problems that rebels with primitive weapons can cause. The US is extremely vulnerable to a domestic insurgency which could be used as an arm of a secession movement.
You will of course discount the above, which requires some psychological analysis, which I am not qualified to provide, but will provide it anyway because I have a big ego. I think that some of the problems you experience are:
1) Excessive rigidity: If its not in the book (Nietzsche’s book), then something must be impossible. Its very difficult for you to think outside the Nietzsche box.
2) Belief in the Shadow Elite: In your mind, all major events are attributed to shadowy powers. I am open to the possibility that these secretive combinations exist, but at the same time, this is the real world, where the government can hardly wipe its proverbial butt correctly, much less carry out hidden agendas. In your mind, if California is turning into a gigantic mess, this the revealed purpose of the shadow elite. I just dont see any method in that madness, just poor planning and incompetence on the part of the elite.
3) Writing off the commoners: You can only sneer at the feeble attempts of average Whites to handle their affairs, seeing them as worthless pawns. This kind of elitism blinds you to the potential of what could be, to what could be achieved through proper organization and leadership.
In conclusion, I do realize that in the campaign to convince you, defeatism is probably the best strategy, because its a herculean task, requiring a veritable Nietzschian Superman to have any chance of success. Nevertheless, these things must be said.
Andrew,
Knowing in advance that the probability of me convincing you of anything is about the same as winning the lottery,…
The probability depends solely upon the “thing” involved, and the skill you bring to handling it. I have no predisposition to a conclusion that is not the product of having handled this and related matters with much due consideration. Your remark shows that you are epistemologically unsophisticated and thus given to confusing your conviction with demonstration. But I thank you for your persistence, lest any point be overlooked in discussing this important matter.
…for the record the points that I was trying to make with the hypothetical scenario were:
1) In a modern democracy, it is quite viable for a population to separate if it has a majority of the vote in a region and the endurance to outlast the state.
But this is not a democracy. And your generalization has no basis in prior experience. And you beg the question with your final clause.
Some examples are the breakup of the Soviet Union; look at Moldova, the Baltic countries, etc. Elsewhere in Europe we have Czech/Slovakia and Yugoslavia.
The “breakup” of the USSR involved both crude pretense and reliance upon a delusional and wishful West for its acceptance as such, and was the long-planned strategic initiative and decree of the State itself. Elsewhere of your offerings, developments in small intermediate “states” contain no lessons for world-historic, globally-pivotal polities such as Greater Judea.
It is a disappointing aspect of modern White-wingery that it publicly betrays itself as mere emotive bigotry in failing to apply its putative standing for “truth” to much more than indulging and rationalizing its animosity for other races. A reflection of this is manifest in the fatuous regard for developments in the former USSR as having left Russia behind as the Great White Hope, and as having demonstrated that some hot air can blow down the iron wall of pseudo-imperial containment for the sake of racial secessionists and separatists. This is politico-economic nonsense in principle, confirmed as such and in fact by refugees from the internal organization of the deception involved.
There are movements afoot in Belgium and Italy that would succeed if they had the votes behind them. Quebec could have easily seceded with a few more percentage points of the vote, and any Canadian province could do so today using the same process.
Ah, much “would have” and “could have”. Our requirement was for examples of *success*, more often than not. But this goose egg offers us no hope at all. And again, you adduce no parallel with what you propose. Which involves an uninvited *intrusion* of strangers to the region, who are strangers, even, to one another. Thus, Pitcairn II, 10,000 times over. And again, these polities are of little import to the New World Order organizers who must retain both the fact and appearance of mastery of the *central* polity, Greater Judea.
Other older examples are England’s colonies separating (including Canada, Australia and New Zealand).
As if your tiny North Dakotan refuge, territorially contiguous with the State in question, in the modern era of communication, transportation, and weaponry, is to enjoy the separatist prospects of the gigantic, globally-remote, old English colonies. I’m *slightly* surprised that you would resort to this silly example.
The list goes on.
With no parallels, successful or otherwise.
2) The US cannot resort to the authoritarian measures needed to crush a real movement, especially a non-violent one. Your suggestion of imprisoning leaders during the organization stage, or “walling in” a state attempting to secede is not realistic.
LOL. Does “Kennedy assassination” or “WACO” ring any bells?
This nation is bound by a net of laws on what it can do.
More laughter. How old are you, son?
How many lawyers do you know personally? Have you been to law school? (I know many, and attended Law School long enough to know about the application and enforcement of “a net of laws”).
We didnt see kidnapping, assassinations, wallings-in or other interference with Quebec’s independence movement, neither do we see that in other existing European independence movements.
Because none have succeeded and are important and are the parallel of what you envision.
Whether or not there is a shadow elite that controls real affairs, hard-core repression is not an option for the US or other Western democracies (and certainly not dropping a nuke on them as you mentioned).
Did I say “dropping”? It appears that others who are monitoring this discussion appreciate, based upon past episodes, that the *planting* of devices as part of false-flag operations is quite do-able – in *any* part of the world.
What are the odds that the few non-jew leaders in the US armed forces will carry out NeoNietzsche’s plan, a WN coup?
The answer to that question, that the odds are close to zero, reveals NeoNietzsche’s malign agenda: to promulgate despair among the most intelligent white nationalists.
Whether this is due to his own sadistic abnormal psychology or because he’s on the jew payroll is immaterial.
[to continue:]
3) Writing off the commoners: You can only sneer at the feeble attempts of average Whites to handle their affairs, seeing them as worthless pawns.
You are mistaken. It is *obvious* to the student of the logic and history of political economy that the elite and the common are *indispensable* to one another. It is likewise obvious, and the immediate implication, that the *absence* of either element is a recipe for the quixotic and catastrophic.
This kind of elitism blinds you to the potential of what could be, to what could be achieved through proper organization and leadership.
You beg many a question. See previous message re: epistemological sophistication.
In conclusion, I do realize that in the campaign to convince you, defeatism is probably the best strategy, because its a herculean task, requiring a veritable Nietzschian Superman to have any chance of success.
Some instruction in Nietzschean concepts might correct your misapprehension and mischaracterization of the overman notion. And it is evident that you are not yet equipped to “convince” others, who are not of your convictions, even as to points that *are* sustainable on the merits.
Nevertheless, these things must be said.
And I thank you for saying them – that others might be instructed by their subjection to analysis.
What are the odds that the few non-jew leaders in the US armed forces will carry out NeoNietzsche’s plan, a WN coup?
The answer to that question, that the odds are close to zero, reveals NeoNietzsche’s malign agenda: to promulgate despair among the most intelligent white nationalists.
Indeed, the odds are close to zero. But the implication drawn neither follows nor is the truth.
I draw the following analogy:
Our task is to reduce a hill of dirt. A pool of water is nearby.
I am equipped with a tablespoon. Another is equipped with a pail.
I am busy reducing the hill. The other is bailing the pool.
I am making slight, if any, progress. The other is making slightly more, in bailing the pool.
What is our task?
Whether this is due to his own sadistic abnormal psychology or because he’s on the jew payroll is immaterial.
Not to me.
[To clarify:]
I am working at a task that, if achieved against the heavy odds, means success through autocracy in a time appropriate thereto.
The alternative, even if achieved against lesser odds, nevertheless represents failure, in a “democracy” long extinguished as such.
Basically, NeoNietzsche has inculcated the martial aristocratic biases of his master. He should be PaleoNietzsche or NeoGiles. 🙂
He should be PaleoNietzsche or NeoGiles.
Evidently, Wiki, you’ve not violated yourself with further study of N.
“PaleoNietzsche” would refer to early Nietzsche, whereas I promote him in terms of his mature thought and the implications thereof, hence the propriety of “NeoNietzsche”.
And I think you intend to say something other than is implied by “inculcate,” which means “to impress (something) upon the mind of another”. If you mean to allege that I have adopted or assimilated biases, then those reflexive (“directed back on itself”) terms are to be employed.
[Are you seriously going to associate the aristocratic NN with the intemperate non-com, J.Giles? Give that some more thought, please – you’re riding high in my general estimate right now.]
NN,
My apologies for the inculcated/adopted faux pas.
I attempted to take your advice and read more Nietzsche, but the librarian told me that he is dead and won’t be publishing anything more. Any additional works would probably be philo-Semitic excerpts that his sister (Denise’s great-great-grandmother?) decided to hide.
My comparison to J. Giles was a superficial reference to the fantasy of conventional military triumph.
I attempted to take your advice and read more Nietzsche, but the librarian told me that he is dead and won’t be publishing anything more. Any additional works would probably be philo-Semitic excerpts that his sister (Denise’s great-great-grandmother?) decided to hide.
To be (once again) precise, Wiki, I did not prescribe “reading more” Nietzsche.
I wrote “further study”. Are you familiar with this approach to the work of scholars past?
And might you reflect upon the distinction between the two and what is involved in the latter?
I can offer you assistance with “study,” lacking further product from N. that would be a waste, anyway, given your grasp from what evidently was a mere “reading” of what he *did* produce.
So, to that end, I refer you to the Black Column of “superhuman,” much of which is devoted to illuminating the thread in N.’s writings that amounts to, contra Lena, a reasonably coherent philosophy of polity.
And I will be happy to clarify any material that again eludes your grasp.
NeoNietzsche
Our task is to reduce a hill of dirt. A pool of water is nearby.
I am equipped with a tablespoon. Another is equipped with a pail.
I am busy reducing the hill. The other is bailing the pool.
I am making slight, if any, progress. The other is making slightly more, in bailing the pool.
What is our task?
You say your task is convincing high ranking white officers in the US military to overthrow the civilian government and institute an authoritarian white nationalist state.
Needless to say you’re not “moving any dirt” in that direction by posting here insulting working and middle class white nationalists.
So why are you here?
Which brings us back to the agent provocateur, troll or nut theories.
Agent provocateurs don’t typically provoke boredom. Perhaps NN is attempting to instigate acts of nihilism. Self-amused trolls don’t host and maintain blogs which develop their theories in depth. NN is very obviously a nut, a nut who frequently adds depth to our discussions.
Pleas stop accusing people of being agents without evidence. It creates an atmosphere of paranoia and tension which ruins the forum.
Wikitopian
NN is very obviously a nut, a nut who frequently adds depth to our discussions.
Pleas stop accusing people of being agents without evidence. It creates an atmosphere of paranoia and tension which ruins the forum.
Let’s just say he’s not very helpful to the cause.
They’ve conquered us to the point where we even send our precious young sons 9,000 nautical miles away to fight their wars, to protect their people, in their interests, not our own. Meanwhile, their sons sit in seats at Harvard and Princeton–places that have locked out our own White sons–while your sons are sent home in body bags.
*
To understand what is happening to NATIVE BORN WHITE AMERICANS (I see Jupiter is here) and to understand why this is happening–why we Whites are being marginalized, debased, and eliminated in the country we WHITES created for ourselves and our posterity, how and why our culture, academia and government have been hijacked, we MUST have an open forum–a completely open forum– AmRen does not allow this. — Bon, ‘From the Land of Babble’ (LOL)
—
Bon,
Consider some of these passages, and who possibly it could be speaking of and of whom it could realistically apply to:
Deuteronomy 28:15-68 — Curses for Disobedience — New International Version
Sounds amazingly like it is describing modern-day ‘Amerikwa’ and ‘Amerikwans’ — doesn’t it?
DOESN’T IT?
Needless to say you’re not “moving any dirt” in that direction by posting here insulting working and middle class white nationalists.
All of whom, to your exhaustive knowledge of their affiliations, are related to, or associated with, no one of the target group?
I think that unlikely.
In any case, what does it say about the prospects for *any* tactic and strategy, if the elite is absolutely, uniformly, detached from and presumably opposed to it?
I would say then, move along, Old Man – nothing of interest here other than fantasy and the opportunity for organizing another catastrophe.
So why are you here?
To pass along a summation of several decades worth of inter-disciplinary work concerning the issue before the house.
Thus to educate the uneducated, where willing and educable.
Disappointingly and admittedly, however, few have qualified in those terms. The many have lacked aptitude or intellect or sufficient grounding in pertinent disciplines or freedom from superstition and/or parochial outlooks.
The few, however, hold more promise than none that the tablespoon will reduce the hill.
Needless to say you’re not “moving any dirt” in that direction by posting here insulting working and middle class white nationalists.
BTW, OR, did you ever do Basic (bootcamp)?
Explain to us why Drill Sergeants insult and abuse soft, bourgeois, smart-ass civilian boys, fresh from their mamma’s tender good-byes, as they attempt to instill obedience and self-discipline into those who’ve known little but the authority of women?
Why don’t they just politely formulate and suggest their requirements of and to their recruits?
NeoNietzsche,
I didnt even know you had a blog. Whats the link? Up to the present I have been trying to figure out what your ideas were. Its kind of like a Sudoku puzzle, you have to fit all the little clues together in the attempt to form a bigger picture. Knowing what little I know about you (get ready for more psychological analysis, which is my specialty), you seem pretty smart, from the way you string together these 50 cent words, using precise vocabulary to economize in your writing. You talk down to me from your high throne of pomposity like Im a nitwit, but “I’m smart! Not like everybody says… like dumb… I’m smart and I want respect!” (thats from Godfather II). Ahem. Anyway, from your writing, I would almost even guess that you are one of those brainiacs with an IQ of 160 or something. But, when I see how you analyze events, I am inclined to decrease my estimate a fair amount. I dont think you are a nut (of course I havent read your blog so this is subject to change), I think that you just have a world view that doesnt quite align with the reality of most people. Everything you say probably makes perfect sense in the frame of your reality, but if that is a little skewed, it will make the output problematic.
“But this is not a democracy” I guess that you mean this is not a democracy in the sense that the powers that be have the ability to influence the masses in whichever way they want to. While media campaigns can influence the vote to a great extent, I dont think it is reasonable to consider normal people to be mindless cattle that are just “plugged into the matrix”.
“your generalization has no basis in prior experience.”
Regarding a part of the country voting itself out of the Union, what law of physics, thermodynamics or politics that prevents people from being convinced of something and then voting for that?
“Elsewhere of your offerings, developments in small intermediate “states” contain no lessons for world-historic, globally-pivotal polities such as Greater Judea.”
None of my examples are valid? Then consider that most of the colonies of the world have gained their sovereignty through independence movements. Could not Puerto Rico get its independence tomorrow if the population voted for that in a referendum? Nations have been splitting off from each other and forming new entities since the days of the Sumerians. Also, consider the fact that it is not necessary to formally secede. It is enough to have regional autonomy (control of borders, citizenship and certain laws). There are many autonomous areas similar to this around the world.
“Ah, much “would have” and “could have”. Our requirement was for examples of *success*, more often than not.” Assuming that no previous example of secession meets your strict qualifications, there is still no real reason why it could not be done, no barrier preventing this.
“As if your tiny North Dakotan refuge, territorially contiguous with the State in question, in the modern era of communication, transportation, and weaponry, is to enjoy the separatist prospects of the gigantic, globally-remote, old English colonies. I’m *slightly* surprised that you would resort to this silly example.”
Dont be surprised, I have a well-stocked arsenal of silly ideas where that one came from. Note that this is just one scenario, simplified for the purpose of illustration. A more thorough plan would involve hijacking a state over a period of time, and using planned strategy to provoke the federal government into committing errors that helped to gather support and ignite a wider movement. What you have not taken into account is the opportunity that lies in the future for separation. Are you not aware that this nation is on a path to bankruptcy and strife? Our current mild recession is a small taste of what lies ahead once the baby boomers retire. This will create the fertile soil where a real secession movement can grow and thrive.
“LOL. Does “Kennedy assassination” or “WACO” ring any bells?” Lets assume that the Judeo-elite was responsible for Kennedy’s assassination. Was this unnoticed by the public? There was outrage, it was not an acceptable act. The perpetrators could get away with it a few times, but the public would not put up with a government campaign of this type. Look at the reaction to the US torture campaign: it shook the Bush presidency. This kind of thing is very difficult to keep quiet. Regarding WACO, its an example of the difficulty the government has in shutting down secessionists. The standoff lasted for months, and cost huge sums. It was also a public relations disaster for Clinton, a few such incidents could have brought down his presidency. It led to the Oklahoma City bombing, and energized many gun owners. If the US attempted to repeat that fiasco a few times, it would have millions of angry voters marching in the streets, demanding accountability.
“How many lawyers do you know personally? Have you been to law school?” It is true that people in high places evade the law at times. But overall, the laws do hold. Nixon was impeached, in more recent cases Scooter Libby ended up in prison, there are a number of other relatively high ranking politicians in prison at the moment (especially those from Alaska). The two main political parties keep an eagle eye out for the other’s wrongdoings, to gain advantage.
“We didnt see kidnapping, assassinations, wallings-in or other interference with Quebec’s independence movement, neither do we see that in other existing European independence movements.
Because none have succeeded and are important and are the parallel of what you envision.” Canada had announced that if the Quebec secession had succeeded, it would abide by that referendum. There were times when polling suggested the voters would support the move. If the birthrate of the French Canadians had been just a tad higher a few decades earlier, or if a better public relations campaign had been waged, it would have succeeded. Just because it fizzled does not negate the importance of this example: it shows that this type of scenario is very possible.
“Did I say “dropping”? It appears that others who are monitoring this discussion appreciate, based upon past episodes, that the *planting* of devices as part of false-flag operations is quite do-able – in *any* part of the world.” The fact that this has not happened to date indicates the low probability of such an event. This is an extremely high-risk strategy for a group to engage in, and not something that can be easily explained away. Nukes get everyone’s attention, including foreign intelligence, who will want to know the facts behind the matter (if a group got away with this, it would be a direct threat to China’s and Russia’s security, for example).
I didnt even know you had a blog. Whats the link?
Click on the pseudonym “NeoNietzsche,” above any of my comments, to be taken to the “superhuman” blog.
Up to the present I have been trying to figure out what your ideas were. Its kind of like a Sudoku puzzle, you have to fit all the little clues together in the attempt to form a bigger picture.
Which is why the blog exists – to piece together the puzzle of Nietzsche’s ideas.
I think that you just have a world view that doesn’t quite align with the reality of most people.
The reality of most people is one of faith in that which is not – as you ought to know, as one whose “specialty” is psychology.
Everything you say probably makes perfect sense in the frame of your reality, but if that is a little skewed, it will make the output problematic.
So, we are agreed that my worldview is coherent. We just need to check on its correspondence with reality.
“But this is not a democracy” I guess that you mean this is not a democracy in the sense that the powers that be have the ability to influence the masses in whichever way they want to.
That – and also that other devices are applicable. Like monopolizing the choice of candidates, killing those that don’t work out, monkeying with vote tallies, etc.
While media campaigns can influence the vote to a great extent, I don’t think it is reasonable to consider normal people to be mindless cattle that are just “plugged into the matrix”.
When you are able to altogether step outside it yourself, you might have another perspective.
“your generalization has no basis in prior experience.”
Regarding a part of the country voting itself out of the Union, what law of physics, thermodynamics or politics that prevents people from being convinced of something and then voting for that?
Your premises are not coherent. But let’s assume that you mean “convinced of the desirability of *secession*” Have you heard of the Supreme Court of the United States? It has a habit of frustrating the will of the people, all around the country – on the basis of convenient interpretations or inventions of law, regarding which they are the final authority. The people can vote and legislate all they want, but if the SCUSA is agin it, it won’t happen, legally.
“Elsewhere of your offerings, developments in small intermediate “states” contain no lessons for world-historic, globally-pivotal polities such as Greater Judea.”
None of my examples are valid?
None meet all three requirements of success, importance, and comparability.
Then consider that most of the colonies of the world have gained their sovereignty through independence movements.
In areas remote from relatively small European states, intruding upon prehistoric natives – long ago.
Could not Puerto Rico get its independence tomorrow if the population voted for that in a referendum?
That depends upon many things – particularly the ideological complexion of the sponsoring organization.
Nations have been splitting off from each other and forming new entities since the days of the Sumerians.
And being reacquired and dissolved.
Also, consider the fact that it is not necessary to formally secede. It is enough to have regional autonomy (control of borders, citizenship and certain laws). There are many autonomous areas similar to this around the world.
No difference, as far as the opposition is concerned. And as I have pointed out, the problem will eventually cure itself, from their point of view. Have you noticed Wiki and Junghans writing about the chronic incapacity of Whites for self-administration?
“Ah, much “would have” and “could have”. Our requirement was for examples of *success*, more often than not.”
Assuming that no previous example of secession meets your strict qualifications, there is still no real reason why it could not be done, no barrier preventing this.
The reason it has not been done is that it violates the laws of political economy, wherein the Iron Law of Oligarchy gives an insuperable advantage to an interest that has one, over an opposition that does not. See the Spartacus revolt and the White Russian resistance to the Bolsheviks for an illustration of the principle.
“As if your tiny North Dakotan refuge, territorially contiguous with the State in question, in the modern era of communication, transportation, and weaponry, is to enjoy the separatist prospects of the gigantic, globally-remote, old English colonies. I’m *slightly* surprised that you would resort to this silly example.”
Dont be surprised, I have a well-stocked arsenal of silly ideas where that one came from. Note that this is just one scenario, simplified for the purpose of illustration. A more thorough plan would involve hijacking a state over a period of time, and using planned strategy to provoke the federal government into committing errors that helped to gather support and ignite a wider movement.
Gonna put one over on the Jews, eh?
What you have not taken into account is the opportunity that lies in the future for separation. Are you not aware that this nation is on a path to bankruptcy and strife? Our current mild recession is a small taste of what lies ahead once the baby boomers retire. This will create the fertile soil where a real secession movement can grow and thrive.
I had no idea. Where is my couch? [Hand to forehead, NN elegantly collapses in a faint.]
“LOL. Does “Kennedy assassination” or “WACO” ring any bells?”
Lets assume that the Judeo-elite was responsible for Kennedy’s assassination. Was this unnoticed by the public? There was outrage, it was not an acceptable act. The perpetrators could get away with it a few times, but the public would not put up with a government campaign of this type. Look at the reaction to the US torture campaign: it shook the Bush presidency. This kind of thing is very difficult to keep quiet.
Doesn’t matter – the public’s knowledge has no effect – this is not a democracy.
Regarding WACO, its an example of the difficulty the government has in shutting down secessionists. The standoff lasted for months, and cost huge sums. It was also a public relations disaster for Clinton, a few such incidents could have brought down his presidency. It led to the Oklahoma City bombing, and energized many gun owners. If the US attempted to repeat that fiasco a few times, it would have millions of angry voters marching in the streets, demanding accountability.
“Doesn’t matter – the public’s knowledge has no effect – this is not a democracy.”
“How many lawyers do you know personally? Have you been to law school?”
It is true that people in high places evade the law at times. But overall, the laws do hold. Nixon was impeached, in more recent cases Scooter Libby ended up in prison, there are a number of other relatively high ranking politicians in prison at the moment (especially those from Alaska). The two main political parties keep an eagle eye out for the other’s wrongdoings, to gain advantage.
And how is the agenda of the Permanent Secret Government affected by their having to substitute one stooge for another?
If the birthrate of the French Canadians had been just a tad higher a few decades earlier, or if a better public relations campaign had been waged, it would have succeeded. Just because it fizzled does not negate the importance of this example: it shows that this type of scenario is very possible.
In Canada, where it doesn’t matter and where you are not intruding and where an execrable ideological agenda is not involved.
“Did I say “dropping”? It appears that others who are monitoring this discussion appreciate, based upon past episodes, that the *planting* of devices as part of false-flag operations is quite do-able – in *any* part of the world.”
The fact that this has not happened to date indicates the low probability of such an event.
Seems you need some 9/11 “truth”.
This is an extremely high-risk strategy for a group to engage in, and not something that can be easily explained away.
You would think. But crude impostures, insulting the intelligence of attentive observers, were a regular feature of the “collapse” of the USSR and the collapse of the WTC structures.
Nukes get everyone’s attention, including foreign intelligence, who will want to know the facts behind the matter (if a group got away with this, it would be a direct threat to China’s and Russia’s security, for example).
And what are they going to do about it? Nothing. Knowing and doing are two different things.
So, we are agreed that my worldview is coherent. We just need to check on its correspondence with reality.” Exactly, your ideas are certainly coherent. From what I can see, you are attempting to piece together information and theories from a wide variety of sources and disciplines to create a sythesized whole. Your project reminds me a little of Chris Langan’s attempt to create a synthesis of all human knowledge (http://www.ctmu.org/), he is the guy with an IQ of 195, apparently. Its a pretty difficult task, especially because many theories disagree with each other (Newton’s Laws versus Relativity Theory, for example). Its probably something that is beyond the capacity of even the most intelligent.
I think that as you are widely read, you have gained a thorough understanding of many of the processes that are behind world events. However, I think you may have overlooked some things. Although I dont have any higher degrees in education to impress anyone with, it is possible that even the humblest of us can sometimes see things that the Wise have missed.
All of us have a paradigm, which represents our view of the world and where everything fits in. If someone else offers information that is not consistent with that paradigm, our immediate reaction is usually to throw out that unassimilable information, which we do reflexively and without much contemplation. You have implied that you are open minded, and I will therefore hope that you will give what I have to say some consideration, in the hope that we can patch a small defect in your world view. However, before I can do that, I need to understand where we differ. In the hope of discovering this, I am going to present you with a basic description of how I see the political world working. If you have the patience, you can critique this, to show me where I have gone astray.
First, lets start at the beginning, with the basic element of the White human world, the White human. Whites’ IQ is 100 of course, but it is not accurate to describe them as mindless cattle. Jews are one standard deviation about Whites in IQ, but this does not make them as superior to Whites as Whites are to Negroes. The difference between an IQ of 85 and 100 is much greater than that between 100 and 115, just as an IQ of 145 is not vastly superior to an IQ of 130. The IQ-100 individuals can easily hold down a fairly well-paying job, pay the mortgage and understand important concepts (IQ-85 individuals have great difficulty with those tasks). Average IQ individuals are also surrounded by a cadre of more intelligent types, and are influenced by them on a daily basis.
Moving on, every human is born as pretty much a blank slate, and depends on what he is taught taught to determine his views of the world, what group he belongs to, and so forth. Once reaching adulthood, he is not easily converted to another belief system. Most Americans are brought up to have a basic morality, such as not telling lies, being kind to others, etc., and are not easily led to commit acts that violate that code. You can imagine that the vast majority of people would have great difficulty forcing themselves to shoot a non-threatening dog for no good reason, and would feel remorse about such a deed afterwards. Your average voter is appalled by events or situations seen as unfair or morally wrong, and will usually vote against those that perpetrate them. It is therefore difficult to get a normal politician on board with an extreme act (such as committing a false flag involving the deaths of innocents), or bringing them into a larger secretive group that would plan such acts – especially as its is hard for people to keep their mouths shut about something for an extended period (this is not to say that such conspiracies do not exist, just that they are not common).
Next, lets talk about how the world is organized. In our human world, we have are several billion beings, which are organized politically at different levels. There is a complex web of organization at different levels, including various groups, associations, political parties and coalitions, from the neighborhood type to the local government type to those at the national and international levels. Each human being and organization is attempting to pursue its own interests, many competing with each other or finding common cause. We have the Association of Potato Farmers seeking expanded water rights, pro-life groups seeking to influence judge nominations, retirees seeking greater benefits, and a vast array of tens of thousands of others, each pushing its own agenda and working towards various goals. This is a very complex system, where flux and change are constant. Political theory helps in understanding certain aspects of it, but the system itself defies man’s ability to represent the whole theoretically. Its more of a big, chaotic, unpredictable churning soup of people, groups and events.
Next, lets look at individuals in the lower echelons of power (neighborhood and local government). In the US, these officials are usually honest in their dealings. I have never been asked for a bribe by a government worker, and those who commit crimes in our society have a fairly good chance of eventually being caught and prosecuted. If you went to your local political party office, you will probably find a generally honest person in charge. He typically isnt “in the know” of any larger conspiracies, and probably has idealistic notions about government (the pay isnt that great at this level). These are the people who usually certify the vote in elections (including national ones).
Next, lets look at the governing elite (that we know about). I am assuming that the elite consists of major state and national government officials (state legislature, governors, congressmen) as well as the higher ups in major political parties and special interest groups. The governing elite is constantly changing and shifting with each election cycle, as the political parties vie for support. Every event is taken advantage of to make the other side look bad. These people generally arise from the local level. A local guy gets elected as city councilman, then becomes mayor or state representative, then runs for higher office such as congressman. In the process, candidates often do have to cater to special interests and compromise themselves. National groups also have a lot of say in the process, and will carefully vet candidates and block those that are seen as unsuitable. There is corruption in the sense of taking special interest money and benefits in exchange for political support. However, the majority of the elite at this level are still usually normal people, who continue to have the sense of morality ingrained from childhood. They are typically part of any larger conspiracy. Lets look at an example. The recently elected Scott Brown is not the scion of an elite family, coming instead from a fairly normal background. He had to make deals with whatever special interests exist in his state, but he didnt “sell his soul” to them. He is probably basically someone who enjoys all of the attention and influence that accrues to a Senator. His campaign was (at least to his knowledge) not backed by a hidden group, he just found a way to appeal to enough voters in a time when they were angry at the Obama administration. Scott Brown is probably typical of conservative republican types (a loosely applied term), who feel that they are fighting for the American Way against “liberals”. If I was to randomly pick out some Republican senator from a red state, we would probably find a generally honest guy who, although compelled to serve the special interests in his territory, is not a secret supporter of a Judaic world government (though he would probably be pro-Zionist). It is true that all national figures must pass inspection by AIPAC and other groups, but the candidates are not converted into slaves; the influence of special groups remains limited.
We also of course need to mention the media. Others have documented the heavy Jewish influence here, in Hollywood, the news and entertainment. There are sophisticated methods used to form opinions, which begin at a young age. However, there are limits to the influence of media. An advertising campaign can persuade an additional 3% of the market to change its toothpaste, but usually not cause people to extreme acts such as jump off a cliff.
Now lets look at the Jewish influence that is in the open. There is a large constellation of associations containing every variety under the sun of politicians, activists, advocates, watchdogs, all with large probosci and beady eyes. Supposedly Jews supply 70% the funding for Democrats, and 50% of the funding for Republicans. Jews are to be found occupying many high-level political party positions, positions in administrations, advisorships as well as a fair share of congressional seats. Groups such as AIPAC dictate much of US foreign policy, and are very influential in other areas. However, this is not a case of complete domination, as its not easy for the 2% to steer the other 98%. The funds sent to Israel are a small part of the overall budget. Attempts to encourage the US to attack Iran have been unsuccessful. The Jews tend to concentrate their influence on a limited number of vital topics, such as Israel and immigration. Your average Jew is socialist, and looking out for “whats good for the Jews”, and supports the anti-White initiatives that Kevin MacDonald explains. However, your average Jew is not part of any larger conspiracy. They have a high rate of intermarriage, and even some big cheeses like Edgar Bronfman Jr. have out-married (to a black in his case), as well as Rupert.
Lets look at the shadow elite. I have read about 9/11, the art students (including those apparently monitoring Atta), the moving company, the suspicious reaction of the air defenses, the Israeli airport security, steel melting at low temperature, evidence of steel-cutting explosives, insurance deals, etc. This is alarming stuff. While I would really like to see a real investigation, it seems too early to conclude that this was a false-flag operation, but lets assume that it was one, perpetrated by a Judeo-elite. The Kennedy assassination is equally suspicious, with Oswald consorting with Jews in the Soviet Union, then returning to deal with other Jews here (Ruby), and knowing where to be when the motorcade passed by (not to mention the autopsy). Lets also assume that this was also an action of the Judeo elite. For the purpose of this discussion, I will assume that there is a Judaic conspiracy formed at some time in the past, that gained significant ground with the rise of the Rothschilds, that helped to foment world wars, and plans to create a new World Order centered in Jerusalem, to subjugate the “human cattle/goy” spoken of in the Talmud. Certainly a number of founders of Israel wrote about this, so its not too far-fetched. Lets also assume that currently this organization is heavily funded (over $1 Trillion in Rothschild assets).
Those are the main ingredients in the system as I see them. If you would kindly deign to tell me where I am wrong, it will allow me to understand your position better. In the off chance that I have identified anything correctly, it will allow me to discuss how the system works and draw conclusions that might be of service in repairing a perceived problem with your world view.
“…Jews are one standard deviation about Whites in IQ, but this does not make them as superior to Whites as Whites are to Negroes. …”
Just to let you know, I get what your saying, however the ‘White’ (ashkenazi) Jewish IQ is not a full standard deviation above the ‘mean’ IQ average of the heterogeneous White population of America — it has rather been readjusted to approximately 1/2 a standard deviation, i.e. around 107-109.
The ‘115’ score was from one, and an older, of about ten published IQ studies on estimations of Ashkenazi, rather than ‘Jewish’ intelligence. Of course Jews cite it over all others.
Also, there are other White sub-groups who score high in IQ as well, though you rarely hear about them. Wonder why? 😉
Your project reminds me a little of Chris Langan’s attempt to create a synthesis of all human knowledge (http://www.ctmu.org/), he is the guy with an IQ of 195, apparently. Its a pretty difficult task, especially because many theories disagree with each other (Newton’s Laws versus Relativity Theory, for example). Its probably something that is beyond the capacity of even the most intelligent.
I accept that you are reminded, but let me point out that you have a misconception of Langan’s questionable “contribution”.
His is not a “synthesis” of knowledge – it is not synthetic in any respect. He has devoted much effort to a mere “framework” for knowledge that is explicitly tautological and which is yet to offer anything of value. It would not be applicable to a resolution of any question in physics or any other discipline.
In a true showing of the vigor of even the most murky genepools within the White race, some hillbilly named Jimbo already went and created a damn good repository of global knowledge.
First, lets start at the beginning, with the basic element of the White human world, the White human. Whites’ IQ is 100 of course, but it is not accurate to describe them as mindless cattle.
I have to disagree.
The IQ to which you refer merely characterizes vocational/technical aptitude.
Many a genius, measured by this yardstick, is a social/ethical idiot.
In fact it seems that technical IQ and social IQ are inversely related.
I have found that reduction of central *social* issues to their most basic elements, for purposes of explanation, is uniformly met with bovine expressions of incomprehension.
And one could put this down to a profound lack of any introduction to the analysis of the phenomena in question – as if one were speaking to a four-year-old, yet to be instructed in counting his fingers and toes, about putting little boxes under curves (calculus).
But what condemns the goyim to a likening to cattle is their profound lack of curiosity about that which they don’t understand.
They are content with comforting little fairy tales. It would be kinder to refer to them thus as children (of whom one takes care). But Jewry, of course, understandably and appropriately refers to them as cattle, to be exploited and eliminated.
It is therefore difficult to get a normal politician on board with an extreme act…
You need to stop with the question begging. You have not established that a “normal politician” is a normal person according to your prior analysis. Indeed, the presumption would seem to be otherwise, both in theory and as suggested by the history of the subornation of politicians who get elected locally on one platform and pursue another when they get their heads turned in DC.
…(such as committing a false flag involving the deaths of innocents), or bringing them into a larger secretive group that would plan such acts – especially as it is hard for people to keep their mouths shut about something for an extended period (this is not to say that such conspiracies do not exist, just that they are not common).
But you grant that there is such a thing as a homicidal “false-flag operation” and a dark “conspiracy”. How do you account for the personnel who participate therein if you are not acknowledging exceptions to your rule about “normality”. And what is the basis for excluding politicians from this violation of your expectations.
Those are the main ingredients in the system as I see them. If you would kindly deign to tell me where I am wrong, it will allow me to understand your position better. In the off chance that I have identified anything [in-?]correctly, it will allow me to discuss how the system works and draw conclusions that might be of service in repairing a perceived problem with your world view.
I would have mentioned (in no particular order):
The Fed’s ownership of the Greater Judean money supply and the intrinsic “systemic” instability thereof.
The duality of, and tension in, historic Jewish objectives as between Judeo-Fascism and Judeo-Communism, reflected in the Greater Judean “system” and past policies.
The fact and success of the subterfuge involved in the “collapse” of Communism, allied to the success of promotion of the misconception of form-of-government as a moral/ethical issue.
The evident decline in quality of the “White” population since the fall of the Classical High Culture, such that the JQ is not merely an issue of manipulative Jewish evil-doing.
And what, if anything, of traditional superstition must be preserved in order to keep primitives such as “OldRight” in line, in any system that is otherwise aristocratically clear-eyed in defense of the nation against its cloaked enemies.
[If I think of something else, after this off-hand investigation of my memory, I’ll comment further]
Also, Andrew – and most importantly – the question of “how the system works” is of secondary importance to the question of the identity and agenda of the Oligarchy that governs a polity.
“System” and form-of-government tend to correspond to, and most suitably serve, the true agendas of the oligarchs who employ state forms as the means toward their objectives.
There is no steady-state or ideal form of government/system – there is no oligarchical persistence without a unifying agenda and thus a teleology and evolution to state forms at the highest level.
You would prosper and be protected, to the best of its ability, under a dictatorship that had your interests in mind (Augustus Caesar/Hitler) – and would decline and disappear under a “democracy” (Greater Judea) intent upon your elimination. Don’t imagine that the general population of a large, post-tribal, political entity can, franchise-wise, choose the identity and agenda of its oligarchy. The form of government under which you proceed with your little life will be (effectively, if not cosmetically) a dictatorship (Lincoln/Wilson/FDR) or a polity of little consequence or character (Calvin Coolidge) as it suits the purposes of the elite.
“…a *public regime* of little consequence or character…”