Reading through the Francis Parker Yockey essay, I am reminded of why I left behind that stage of my ideological career. I was initially enthralled with Yockey due to his sweeping knowledge of history and philosophy. As I learned more about these subjects in my own right, largely inspired by his influence, I began to see the flaws in his analysis.
Where to begin?
1.) Racial Consciousness – White racial consciousness organically grew out of black slavery and the American frontier experience. Creating a White ethnostate is a peculiarly American project. The whole tradition of using race as a marker of ethnic identity started in America and the other colonies.
Europeans never defined themselves in racial terms. The British and Spanish did to a lesser extent after accumulating their colonial empires, but most European nations were never “racially conscious” in the American sense.
Germany’s brief flirtation with racialism was due to Anglo-American influence. Eugenics and Darwinism were also imported into Germany from Britain and America.
The German school of anthropology, which Franz Boas brought to America, had traditionally stressed the importance of culture over heredity. By an accident of history, the German culturalist school of anthropology triumphed in “race materialist” America while Anglo-American hereditarianism was exported to Nazi Germany.
2.) Economics – The Yockey essay posits the existence of “continental Europeans attached to Listian economics.” List’s own “National System” of economics was inspired by his observations of America’s economic development and Alexander Hamilton’s theories.
In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, it was the U.S. that hid behind its high tariff wall and the American state that constantly intervened in the private economy to promote “internal improvements,” the greatest of which was the Panama Canal.
“Yurop” was the world epicenter of the “free trade” movement. America only switched to “free trade” after the Second World War when the rest of the industrialized world was laying in smoldering ruin.
3.) Tradition – This idea that Europeans were attached to authority, tradition, and landed property is widely off the mark. Europe was the site of the French Revolution and Bolshevik Revolution. There was nothing traditional about the NSDAP in Germany or the Fascists in Italy; it was the decline of traditional authority that led to the triumph of Fascism, National Socialism, and Communism.
4.) Liberalism – America was founded as a republic. The American Founders considered themselves republicans, not liberals. Liberalism has traditionally been associated with the Netherlands and British Empire. America became infatuated with “liberalism” in the 1920s and 1930s.
5.) Enlightenment – It is commonplace in racialist circles to deplore the Enlightenment. If only the Enlightenment had never happened, everything would be swell, racially speaking. This is another old chestnut.
Most of the Enlightenment philosophers were racialists. It was the Enlightenment that inspired the first systematic attempts to classify the human races. The Enlightenment lionized science which undermined the old Christian ideal of the unity of humanity.
The roots of anti-racism can be traced back to Romanticism. In reaction to the Enlightenment, the Romantics glorified the “noble savage” and the primitive. They deplored modern industrial civilization. The modern love affair with the negro and all the screeds about how European imperialism has “oppressed” the Third World can be laid at the door of Romanticism, not the Enlightenment.
6.) Destroying Europe – Europe immolated itself in two fratricidal World Wars. It is hardly the fault of Americans that Communism was so popular in Europe or that European nation-states could not get along. A thoughtful American might respond that if Europe had developed a greater sense of racial consciousness, it would never have blown itself to pieces and lost its world leadership.
7.) Jews – Europeans emancipated the Jews all by themselves. By the early twentieth century, the Jewish Problem was already far advanced in Germany. Jews were involved in subversive movements all across Europe.
8.) Corruption – European nationalists have claimed for centuries that poor, innocent Europe is being corrupted by hopelessly decadent America.
In fact, upon close examination, you will see that the opposite is true: communism, romanticism, socialism, feminism, anarchism, fascism, liberalism, anti-racism, anti-fascism, postmodernism, cultural relativism, and post-structuralism were imported into America from Europe.
American youth are indoctrinated in these subversive ideals in public schools which is another European innovation. The last thing they are taught is their own history and traditions.
Francis Parker Yockey was brilliant in many ways, but his demonization of America and his romanticized portrait of Europe is false and misleading. That said, I highly recommend reading him. No self respecting White Nationalist should be without a copy of Imperium in his private library.
Austrian economics was started by gentile Carl Menger, followed by Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk and Friedrich von Wieser.
I’m wary of European ideas.
1.) America got off to a shaky start because the Founders invoked the fashionable natural rights theories of their time, which came from France and England, to justify the American Revolution.
The “natural rights” nonsense has haunted us ever since. It mutated into civil rights, women’s rights, human rights, animal rights, etc. America would have been invariably better off if the Founders had never felt compelled to “justify” their little rebellion before the world.
2.) As noted above, Romanticism came along after the Enlightenment and glorified the savage, backward, and primitive peoples of the world. In the nineteenth century, Europeans were already wailing about the enslavement of blacks and mistreatment of the Indians who were positively contrasted with the grasping Anglo-American settlers.
3.) Liberalism was imported from Europe. The greatest thinkers in the liberal tradition are Europeans. Liberalism came from Britain, France, Germany, and the Netherlands. It took root here in the 1920s and 1930s and has proven as hard to eradicate as kudzu.
4.) The “cultural school” of anthropology was brought to America from Germany by Franz Boas. It was Germans who came up with the idea of explaining human behavior in terms of “culture.” Americans had traditionally assumed that racial differences in intelligence and behavior were heritable traits.
5.) The great nineteenth century cause of abolitionism was imported into America from France and Britain where it poisoned minds and stirred up enough internal division between Americans to sever the Union.
6.) In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, European immigrants to America brought the latest fashionable ideologies like anarchism and communism. The Communist Party USA and the Socialist Party largely consisted of foreign born agitators. Some of them were deported in the Red Scare of 1919.
7.) Ayn Rand, a Jewess from Russia, started the Objectivist cult.
8.) The Austrian School of Economics is the nucleus of libertarianism.
9.) The word “racism” was coined in Europe. The “anti-fascists” and “anti-racists” got their start in the European Left in the 1920s and 1930s.
10.) The “expressive individualism” of the beatniks and hippies in the 1950s first took root in America in Greenwich Village in the 1920s. It was brought to the United States from Germany.
11.) The avant-garde came from France.
12.) Since the Cold War, Europe has pumped out ideas like postmodernism, existentialism, cultural relativism, and post-structuralism.
France vs. the Algerian pied noirs is another example. It was the Europeans who abandoned their colonies, not the colonials who abandoned Europe.
Michael O’Mears wrote:
It’s great to see you posting comments here, Mike.
I think your question cuts to the heart of why any of us (as White Americans) bother to engage in this struggle. We realise that unless we preserve the biological matrix that created the Culture-Soul of Europe, we have no future.
The decades of failure by which our movement has been characterised are a testament to the fact that biological materialism is not enough. If White Americans are going to shake off the yoke of Jewry, it is necessary for us to reconnect with Europe and its spiritual Destiny — a “Destiny that does not tire, nor can it be broken.”
“Europa ist kein geographischer, sondern ein blutmäßig bedingter begriff.” – HH
“But it did happen. Why?”
1. White people invented cinema and later television.
2. America had the biggest domestic market leading to the dominance of Hollywood and this dominance over other national film industries gradually extended over other western countries in proportion to how Anglophone those countries were i.e particularly Anglosphere and north-west Europe.
3. jews dominated Hollywood.
I’m not sure a lot of Americans appreciate how powerful Hollywood is world-wide. The entire planet was made to think White Southerners are bad people because of Hollywood.
Obviously that’s not enough on its own but i think those Hollywood films made the first breach in the wall of European resistance to the multicult. It still required European leftists, gay-righters, feminists etc working on the ground but at the beginning Hollywood was like their cultural air force bombing the resistance.
I remember watching those films as a kid and being effected by them.
They’ve all merged together now but the basic pattern was:
1. Fat, ugly, sweaty, bad white people being nasty in some way to some innocent black person.
2. Nice clean-cut white hero who sided with the black people against the nasty rednecks.
That was the original mechanism.
Now that begs the question how did jews get so dominant in the first place to be able to use this new technology as a global weapon so the argument goes back round again to either.
America being too democratic and egalitarian and liberal or something
*or*
America being ok as it was was apart from not having a rational scientific racialism to counter universal ideas apart from the Southerner’s empirical experience which they couldn’t relate.
I think we are descending to simple finger pointing here.
You can make cases for each charge being leveled here. For example, were I a Brit or German reading this thread, I would probably come back and say, “well, at least we don’t have a nigger president.”
There is plenty of everything to go around. America is not fre from any of it. There is plenty of pro homosexual, pro nigger sentiments, pro this and pro that. No one at this point can say his country is even remotely free from Liberalism or is anywhere near pro white.
“If that were true, then such things as laws against ‘racist speech’, gay marriage and acceptance of homosexuality, opposition to capital punishment and life sentences, would have began in the US and then spread to Europe”
America was one of henchman that enforced such things and tortured, starved and murdered anyone who opposed them. America occupies Europe. Europe does not occupy America.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFkM8l-4SeM
Now that, as Patton described it, America has wiped out the only decent people in Europe, America is left rudderless in its own filth and can only condemn NS Germany for not defeating them, as Golem like it continues to torture, starve and murder others for resisting the global jewish hegemon.
So stop blaming those who you have ruled for more than half a century. You have to take some responsibility for your own actions sooner or later.
H. Rock White
“If that were true, then such things as laws against ‘racist speech’, gay marriage and acceptance of homosexuality, opposition to capital punishment and life sentences, would have began in the US and then spread to Europe, but the reverse is true: these things all happened in Europe before coming to the US.”
I think this goes back to things sometimes being both strengths and weaknesses at the same time. The American media and academia might be the prime source of multicult propaganda but the constitution protects it from some of the consequences – so far at least.
The decades of failure by which our movement has been characterised are a testament to the fact that biological materialism is not enough.
Are we talking the nation as a whole of the WN movement?
As regards the nation as a whole, that’s never been tried, as a mass movement. It’s always been cloaked in abstract concepts, and then the abstract concepts become ever more inclusive on nonwhites.
As regards the WN movement, we do need more abstract ideas to rally the people around, but the core and leadership has to be based around pure biology or else it will succumb to the same problems as libertarian puritanism, only worse. Also, the abstract ideas need to be something that resonate with the peoples’ experience (which this ‘spiritual destiny of Europe’ stuff doesn’t do, for most people) and guide people in the right direction, which it doesn’t really seem to do all that well either.
The leading anti-White force in the post-WW2 era was the Soviet Union, formerly known as Russia, which spent much of the Cold War financing and training non-White revolutionaries to overthrow European colonies in the Third World. See French Indochina, Algeria, Angola, and the Belgian Congo for several heartwarming examples.
It was anti-communist Cold Warriors like Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, JFK, and LBJ who dismantled segregation. Jim Crow was an embarrassment to American diplomats. The State Department supported the overthrow of segregation because the Soviets were exploiting the issue in their anti-American propaganda in the Third World.
I dispute the idea that anti-racism was spread to Europe by the United States. In fact, I will argue that the opposite is true: that anti-racism/anti-fascism is nothing more than one aspect of Communism, and that Communism was brought to America by European immigrants.
In the 1920s, the Communist Party USA alone promoted anti-racism and integration. In fact, the CPUSA was forced to adhere to the Moscow party line on the color line issue, even at the expense of alienating unemployed, desperately poor White Americans in the Great Depression.
The vicious, anti-White, anti-Western version of multiculturalism that we are all familiar with – as opposed to the happy colorblind version of anti-racism – did not evolve out of American liberalism. It can be traced backed to post-war French philosophers like John Paul Sartre, Frantz Fanon (negro), and Michel Foucault.
This postmodernist nonsense became popular in American universities, especially in the humanities, in the 1970s and 1980s.
H. Rock White
“As regards the WN movement, we do need more abstract ideas to rally the people around, but the core and leadership has to be based around pure biology”
I think it may turn out we need to be like two people collecting apples. One goes up in the tree and shakes the branches while the other stands below with a net to catch the apples as they fall. Two distinct philosophies for two distinct roles.
Millions of European immigrants settled in America, not the other way around.
HW,
“The leading anti-White force in the post-WW2 era was the Soviet Union”
In the ground war maybe. In the air war it was Hollywood.
“I dispute the idea that anti-racism was spread to Europe by the United States. In fact, I will argue that the opposite is true: that anti-racism/anti-fascism is nothing more than one aspect of Communism, and that Communism was brought to America by European immigrants.”
The idea of a filtered anti-racism that could be used against white people that had previously only been relevant among a small circle of intellectuals came to America from Europe, moved to Hollywood, and was then beamed to a mass audience via cinema and later television.
America wasn’t created by philosophers. It was created incrementally by the frontiersmen and their families who relentlessly pushed westward into the frontier … often at the displeasure of official Washington. See Worcester vs. Georgia.
The frontiersmen didn’t have a philosophy so much as an attitude. They thought in terms of their race and their interests. They confidently enslaved blacks, pushed aside the Indians, drove the Mexicans out of Texas. For the frontiersmen, “freedom” and “whiteness” were ethnic markers.
The Founders inherited a made society. The frontiersmen had already done the hard work of clearing the land and raising settlements. Soldiers fought and won American independence, not any ridiculous abstraction or proposition.
To his credit, Theodore Roosevelt understood this.
Wandrin,
From the 1920s to 1960s, Hollywood kept a low profile. The first examples of race-mixing propaganda like Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner appeared in 1967. The first interracial kiss on television was Captain Kirk and Lieutenant Uhura on Star Trek in 1968.
Hunter,
This debate is silly. How many more pressing matters require your pen then writing about this drivel?
Put your mind to proper usage and write about subjects that will attract the largest possible audience for your website, instead of aspiring to target niche individuals.
I’m a fan of OD because it discusses pertinent matters, instead of dwelling in the past and fantasizing about insignificant people as other websites do.
If OD ever publishes an article about the fall of Atlantis and how white people are the descendants of some ancient race from that mythological land, I will write off this website like I wrote off TOQ.
“that Communism was brought to America by European immigrants.”
You mean jews. Roosevelt’s government was the first American government to acknowledge the Soviet Union and America came to the Soviet Union’s aid. The American administration also made no bones about its intentions to destroy the European colonies nor did it fail to make its nature clear when it establish rule by Presidential edict which has not since been recinded. Yockey pointed out, that 1933 administration was jewish to the core.
Can’t you admit you are ruled by and for the jew? That at the jews’ behest you have been dismantling any defenses Europe might have had and that the difference between communism and the core values of American imperialism are nigh on, now, impossible to separate.
This has been documented many times. America became not only a part of, but the core of endless GLOBAL REVOLUTION in the fifties. The succor given to the forces of Mao. The betrayal in Korea. The money making, culture distorting war in Vietnam. You have been had, but you can’t admit it and point out the culprit, who is not some nebulous entity beyond the realm of sense, but are those perfedious ones whose tribal name you refuse to speak.
12 Angry men – 1957
To Kill a Mocking Bird – 1962
There was another about a southern mob trying to lynch someone and the sheriff trying to stop them. Another about a wandering guitarist getting beaten to death by southern rednecks – both with Brando IIRC. There were so many i can’t remember them all.
All with the same consistent message.
It may have started a bit later than i thought, more late 50s than late 40s, but those films had a big impact on people with no experience of non-whites who weren’t naturally racial.
“This debate is silly. How many more pressing matters require your pen then writing about this drivel?”
It’s not silly at all. WNs talk about the lack of progress. The power and agency of Hollywood is a critical factor in that and not just in America.
“I’m wary of European ideas.”
As opposed to American ideas?
Get serious.
You are right Hunter, Americans are NOT, and have pretty much NEVER been philosophers or deep thinkers outside of industrial uses. So you are really not doing anything here by pointing out that these negative ideas come from Europe. Of course they did.
I happen to have a “mentally challenged” relative. He did not invent rap music, MTV, the cell phone, etc. But I have not ever considered praising him for not inventing some things that are destructive to white people or holding him up for a model for us to immitate.
You are here engaging in what is so annoying about so many right wingers and conservatives. And that is endless talk about what ought to be and “if only…”
No, Americans did not come up with these ideas, but they sure as hell took to them like a duck takes to water.
If OD ever publishes an article about the fall of Atlantis and how white people are the descendants of some ancient race from that mythological land, I will write off this website like I wrote off TOQ.
You probably won’t like our new masthead then either, which we have created to better fit that sort of article:
Oh yeah, and Americans are sure as hell ADDING to these negative ideas and philosophies, no matter who first lit the fuse.
“Millions of European immigrants settled in America, not the other way around.”
One of the dumbest statements I’ve heard in quite some time. Tell me Hunter, without those “millions of European immigrants” what would the racial demographics of the country be today? Before you answer, try and remember you’re a WN.
“Soldiers fought and won American independence…”
Wrong. The French navy won your independence for you.
“The frontiersmen had already done the hard work of clearing the land… “
There is nothing particularly impressive about chopping down a bunch of trees.
This thread strikes me as yet another attempt to take the attention off of the Jews. Boasian anthropology is now a “European” idea? Give me a break.
Look, our problem is that our society is completely dominated by Jews, and not by whites. Jews control television, Hollywood, the Ivy League, Wall Street, both major political parties, etc. They control our institutions. If whites were running all the institutions, the problems would not be there. A healthy level of racialism would permeate the society as it does in all societies in the world not dominated by a hostile, parasitic elite. It really is that simple. It is a “single Jewish cause”. Anything else is important only insofar as it has facilitated the Jewish takeover of our institutions.
Yes, there have been aracial and anti-racial currents within American/European cultures that were not created by Jews, but these have not significantly contributed to the decline of the white race, and they would have been more than balanced by other factors were it not for Jewish control.
We already have plenty of ideas.
Let’s start with one: a White ethnostate. Why aren’t many people taking that one specific idea and working to implement it in the real world?
“This thread strikes me as yet another attempt to take the attention off of the Jews.”
Being pedantic i would say critical jewish cause rather than single jewish cause but it comes to the same thing.
I think one of the problems is a lot of WNs are naturally racial to the point where a lot of cultural things that effect the average white person don’t effect them, so they don’t understand how this happened and look around for complicated explanations when the critical aspects are actually very simple.
I’m over-simplying it now to make the point but,
Hollywood became the Church.
I don’t think anyone is disputing that Jews have lots of power in the modern world.
What I’m disputing is the premise that what is called the ‘European model’ by its promoters is somehow more resistant to takeover by Jews. I disagree with the assertion that a society which is controlled by a handful of elites in which people are conditioned to follow authority is more resistant to a takeover by Jews than a society in which power is decentralized and people are accustomed to individual rights. There’s some good posts on today’s other thread in regard to this.
“Let’s start with one: a White ethnostate. Why aren’t many people taking that one specific idea and working to implement it in the real world?”
Because its not serious…
And because they don’t want it… they want their asians, jews, negros, and hispanics…
An ethno state will be impossible to enforce even in the states with the highest numbers of white people (Maine, West Virginia, Alaska, etc).
Which takes us back to not being a serious idea…
NeoStirner,
I am content to say that Jews have caused us too many problems and should be excluded from a White ethnostate. End of story.
Let’s start with one: a White ethnostate. Why aren’t many people taking that one specific idea and working to implement it in the real world?
Better to work on the prerequisites: explicit white identity and reducing Jewish power. You’re not going to have a white ethnostate without first making progress on those two things.
I can’t tell if the masthead is T or A.
Andrew,
How so?
1.) In the 1860s, 11 states seceded from the Union and formed the Confederacy.
2.) In the Jim Crow era, the former Confederate states passed laws that were intolerable to millions of blacks. They self deported to the Northern states. Much of the South is whiter today than at any previous point in history.
3.) Blacks were expelled from thousands of “sundown towns” in the Midwest.
4.) The federal government relocated Indian tribes from the Southeast and Midwest to states like Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska.
5.) Under Hoover and Eisenhower, illegal aliens were rounded up and deported from the United States.
There is ample precedent in American history for both secession and ethnic transfers. The only novelty in White Nationalism is combining the two.
I can’t tell if the masthead is T or A.
Uhhh… then I feel sorry for you.
“Better to work on the prerequisites: explicit white identity and reducing Jewish power.”
I think explicit white identity and jewish power are a zero sum game but you have to start with increasing explicit white identity.
How do you increase the level of explicit white identity?
1. Identify and recruit people who are already racial into some kind of organization.
These organisations should not reinforce multicult conditioning. I would say the multicult conditioning that most effects white people who aren’t naturally racial is “it’s just about skin colour” and “white identity is violent and destructive.” They can be just about skin colour and violent and destructive *underneath* if you want but if it’s out in the open then you’re doing the multicult’s job for them. The KKK organizing around charity work among whites and social events for example.
2. Figure out what stops the majority of white people becoming racial even in the face of extinction. I keep nagging away at this. I think it requires treating the multicult as a cult and undermining it as a moral authority.
I think explicit white identity and jewish power are a zero sum game
I don’t get what you mean by this.
“Andrew,
How so?”
Because the policies you cite _in the past, may of which were hundreds of years ago_ had broad support among the people. A white ethnostate does not have that support. I don’t think you been with the “average” white man or women from a working class background in a while: they act like negros, talk like negros, and want to be negros. You’re essentially asking these youths to reject their hero’s. And that will never happen.
And neither will it happen in “white” places like Maine that have the demographics that could make something like that happen. Unlike Gwinnett, Alpharetta, or most other Southern counties.
Reader,
I may have used the wrong phrase. I meant reducing jewish power would automatically increase explicit white identity and increasing explicit white identity automatically reduces jewish power.
Unless you can reduce jewish power stealthily e.g attack the banking system under some kind of false flag e.g socialist, then you have to start by increasing explicit white identity.
Tell me Hunter, without those “millions of European immigrants” what would the racial demographics of the country be today?
Madison Grant, The Conquest of a Continent, p. 276
The White American ethnostate is an ideal that’s only been subsumed for a few decades and could well rise again within a few more. Heroes and worldviews are dictated from the elite, as the current crop of heroes from our current crop of elites demonstrates.
Would somebody have told Joseph Smith and Brigham Young that they couldn’t gather up a nation within a nation and establish paradise on earth in the barren wilderness? Would somebody have told George Washington that he and his rag-tag volunteers couldn’t defeat the most powerful empire in history? Would somebody have told Jesus of Nazareth that his adherents would one day outnumber the Pharisees who crucified him by a hundred to one?
We have a difficult goal to accomplish, but it’s not an impossible one.
I may have used the wrong phrase. I meant reducing jewish power would automatically increase explicit white identity and increasing explicit white identity automatically reduces jewish power.
Oh. Well, I somewhat agree with that. The two things are related, but they are not quite the same thing. Most of the challenges to Jewish power are coming from the white left, the “Green Party” types, who generally have only a mild, implicit white identity at best.
Madison Grant, The Conquest of a Continent, p. 276
Is this book available online?
This hypothesis, often known as Walker’s Law, assumes that the fecundity of a group is cut down by the competition of immigrants, and that the latter do no more than fill the places which would otherwise have been filled by natural increase.
No one would claim that such a generalization is exact, but as a general tendency it seems to be near the truth.
I doubt this is true in the case of the US, which has obviously increased enormously in population since Grant wrote those words, and could still probably support a much larger population. The white population of the US would be much lower if not for post-1790 European immigration.
Andrew,
The task before us is much easier than that of our enemies. It is much harder to pervert someone from their own interests and heritage than to reconnect them with it.
It is not like we are asking White people, as a demographic minority, to rise up and abolish anything as radical as chattel slavery or Jim Crow segregation. Imagine what it must have been like to be a black man facing Jim Crow or the Klan at the height of its power.
If you were a black man living in Atlanta in 1910, could you have imagined the American South in 2010? Certainly not.
Jews are 2% of the population. Blacks are 13% of the population. Hispanics are 15% of America. We can do this. It is only a matter of educating White people in the proper racial and cultural values and getting them to act on them in the real world.
What we’re really discussing here is Popper’s theory of “closed society vs. open society.” What follows is a general historical background…
The United States has always been an open society. It was born this way. Europe evolved from older closed societies which we might crudely label ‘tribalism.’ To a large extent America’s development could not have been any other way. There was too much open land and too many resources. A central authority wouldn’t have made sense when the people could always move further out and live free from government interference.
Closed societies, which existed to a degree in the various European empires, were much more resistant to the Jewish threat than America. Europe experienced Communist upheavals precisely because the Jews couldn’t take power without applying force to the old institutions of Europe. Europeans had to be physically conquered. Several million died in Russia trying to stop the Judeo-Bolshevik takeover. With the final victory of Bolshevism over Russia these ‘White Russians’ moved abroad and supported the far-right in places like France and Germany. There were many expatriates from Russia who joined the forces of the German Wehrmacht in 1941 to finish the struggle that started in 1917.
In the immediate aftermath of WWI the various closed-societies of Europe were shattered when the various empires collapsed. It was in this period of collapse that the Jews made their move against Europe – but they were beaten back almost every time. Germany, Poland, Hungary and other countries successfully crushed Judeo-Bolshevik uprisings. And make no mistake – these were not Europeans but Jews. All of the uprisings were led by people like Eisner, Kun, Levine, Luxembourg, etc.
After these uprisings most of Europe rallied and defended itself against the Jews. They still held prominent positions, especially in Germany, but this would change in 1933.
Now let’s contrast this with the United States. There were no Jewish uprisings precisely because they faced no resistance. With the confirmation of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court the ethnic group that founded the United States will have 0% representation on the Supreme Court and the Jews will now have 33% representation. Another example: Jewish males were 1% of the population in 1996 and 28% of Bill Clinton’s cabinet. No uprising put these Jews into power. It was simple power-grabbing within the open society.
I shall end with a quote that adequately states the weakness of the open society:
“One tenth of the dose of Bolshevism which has ruined and changed Russia would kill England stone dead.”
-Winston Churchill, March 11, 1924
Nice try Miggles. But Mad Grant isn’t an authority on anything. Far from it. sorry to break the news to you. Copying and pasting his rantings won’t do you any good. Now it’s off to bed with you, Mr. Miggles.
Well, that settles it then, doesn’t it?
If you believe that immigration did not depress native birth rates and displace the colonial stock, why don’t you present an argument or evidence to back up your claim?
Is this book available online?
Unfortunately, not that I can find.
I doubt this is true in the case of the US, which has obviously increased enormously in population since Grant wrote those words, and could still probably support a much larger population. The white population of the US would be much lower if not for post-1790 European immigration.
It is likely that 19th century immigrants from Northern Europe who helped settle the frontier were beneficial for the native American. However, the 1880-1920 cheap labor influx from Southern and Eastern Europe was detrimental to Americans.
http://books.google.com/books?id=gckWAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA67#v=onepage&q&f=false
Prescott F. Hall, “Immigration Restriction and World Eugenics”
http://books.google.com/books?id=G0TiAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA262#v=onepage&q&f=false
Lothrop Stoddard, The Rising Tide of Color, pp. 262-264
If you believe that immigration did not depress native birth rates and displace the colonial stock, why don’t you present an argument or evidence to back up your claim?
Canada.
Harry Truman desegregated the military because he was dependent on Jewish campaign contributions, there was no other reason. The claim that it was to improve our image in the Third World as part of the fight against communism is just one of many excuses Jews invented for their puppets to repeat when asked about their motivations.