Yes Virginia, Jews Suck on Immigration

50 Comments

1. I’ve tried all kinds of tactics to wake people up to the JQ. For people who are unaware, the topic is extremely uncomfortable. Especially for Christian Zionists, who make up the vast majority of the politically minded white right. Although it may be conisdered tactless, I’ve come to adopt the blunt approach. I’m tired of tiptoeing around the truth and feeling bad about it. Ultimately it’s a spiritual issue and so I use the technique of the master, Christ. My thought is, so, crucify me. I’m not going to dance for you.

2. Spooky says:
   December 20, 2010 at 5:26 pm (Edit)
   I’ve tried all kinds of tactics to wake people up to the JQ. For people who are unaware, the topic is extremely uncomfortable. Especially for Christian Zionists, who make up the vast majority of the politically minded white right. Although it may be conisdered tactless, I’ve come to adopt the blunt approach. I’m tired of tiptoeing around the truth and feeling bad about it. Ultimately it’s a spiritual issue and so I use the technique of the master, Christ. My thought is, so, crucify me. I’m not going to dance for you.

   Jack Ryan replies:
   Christian Zionists can be a very tough nut to crack. But my advice is to not try to attack their whole belief system – leave questions of Middle East foreign policy aside. That’s the main part of the Christian Zionist belief system that would be hardest to change.
   Most Whites in Conservative Christian Zionist churches don’t go for mass NW immigration/amnesty to the USA. They’ll get defensive about obvious Liberal/Left Jewish support of amnesty – but just say the problem is that these people are “liberals” not that they are Jews and things will be alright a more and more Jewish people become “conservative”.
   My next step is to just acknowledge the realty of White Jewish people are in the Senate/House of Reps – Al Frankin, Barbara Boxer, Feinstein, Schumer – these are liberal Democrat Jews. Let these Christian Zionists keep their world view about Conservatives (good) vs Liberals (bad) and Israel is always good. We’re talking about America here, not Israel – and the illegal immigration invasion is destroying America, that’s going to be bad for Israel – try that approach.
   It simply doesn’t work to use the David Duke approach to make Jews, Israel the bad guy in all things – it certainly doesn’t work with White Christian Zionists. If we are ever going to help decent Arabs, Muslims, Palestinians – we must win a lot of power in the USA – and that can only be done by making immigration control our winning issue. It is a winning issue for us here in America, this is where we live. We don’t live in Palestine/Israel – folks there are on their own.

3. Yeah, you’re right. That’s a tough pill to swallow though.

4. This is an good article on it’s merits, but I think it could also be useful as a tool to use to examine your beliefs and others on the forum. The facts in this matter speak for themselves, and it’s well and good for you to call attention to them. The place where I begin to question this analysis is in your comments on Eric Cantor. You have a seeming refusal to admit that some Jews may be on our side. Or that any Jew can sincerely hold beliefs outside the main body of Jewish opinion, such people are (apparently) obviously fakes and frauds, and not to be taken seriously.

   To date Eric Cantor has been a very solid conservative. Not only did he vote the right way on this bill, but he votes the right way on most things. He’s been leading the charge to cut the budget, something lots of White congressmen seem to have trouble doing.

   When I’ve heard him on various news programs I have always felt that he is a real force for good in the GOP. (Something I don’t feel about some other GOP leaders who happen to be White, like Sen McCain, Lindsey Graham. Boehner has gone up in my estimation beginning with his impassioned speeches of last year opposing the stimulus) .

   My take on it would be to “trust but verify” in the immortal words of the gipper. I take him at face value, but at the same time it makes sense to keep an on him (and everyone else in a position of responsibility) — an knowing his background it would be especially fair to look for wavering on his positions in the direction of typical Jewish views.

   But to dismiss his actual behavior in favor of pure ‘ethnicity is destiny’ analysis seems short sighted on a tactical level.

   It reminds me of blogger TANSTAAFL’s endless targeting of Lawrence Auster. Does anyone really think that whatever his faults Auster is really a net-negative for our society? His blog last week looked identical to this: post after post urging people to call their Congressmen and Senators and urge the defeat of the DREAM act, outrage at the DADT repeal, etc.

   To create such high barriers to coalition within politics, to write people off completely from working with them because of their ethnic background strikes me as another aspect of ‘vanguardist’ philosophy.

   Non-SWPL Jews are few enough they can be appreciated for the anomolies they are.

   (I suppose the neo-Con’s are a significant counter example, but then the neos have also included many WASPs who have been at the top of the foodchain such as Bush, McCain, Boulton, going all the way back to Scoop Jackson.)

   Or put more simply – the liberal position is that ‘race is meaningless’ or ‘race is a social construction’. The race realist position is that race is real and race matters, and race is a good predictor of things. The vanguardist position is that ‘race is ALL that matters. Both sides of that position seem slightly mad to me.

   Here in the Northwest we have, on the one hand a cadre of leftist true believer SWPL types who run the city of Portland, which includes many Jews in positions of power. We also have a huge problem with the white-trash segment on the east side; massive meth epidemic, a slacker culture, dependency on government social services as way of life, etc.

   The vandgardist postion, made explicit by HAC in his novels is that somehow if we remove the Jews the White-SWPLs with stop being leftist crazies, the white-trash will revert to being productive, upstanding white working class circa 1955.

   And to do this we must forcibly remove not just the leftist leadership that has been promulgating destructive policies (ie: the Jews) but also ever last Republican-voting Indian PhD and Chinese doctor in the city.

   HAC admits he is a a mystic, so his feverant religious belief in ‘tribe being everything’ is at least consistent. For the rest of us who are in the middle of the nature/nurture debate, where race is real and important, but not the only thing or the everything — plans like HACs and comments such as those made about Cantor seem uncalled for, unproductive and somewhat the sign of an obsessive and disconnected view of reality.

5. The fact of the matter is most Jews are really bad on every issue which affects the well being of the white race. Remember, anti-racist means anti-white. Having said that most of our fellow non racially aware whites are clueless about the JQ but still have strong anti immigration sentiments. I think it best we leave their ethnic identity out of our discussions since this will only alienate those we wish to win over. What counts is getting the right kind of legislation. All you really need to know is who is for us and who is against. Let those we are trying to educate fill in blanks and connect the dots. It took me a number of years. it won’t happen over night.

6. The VAST majority of Jews do everything in their power (and we all know they have FAR TOO MUCH power in this country and England – another hellhole they helped create). Although I don’t doubt there are GOOD Jews, there are FAR TOO FEW and most of them aren’t vocal. You reap what you sow and it will be no different for the vast majority of this scum come the day of reckoning for all of us. The Zionist Christians can go with them as far as I’m concerned. They’re part of OUR problem, too!

7. “Present the facts of Jewish support for Third World immigration alone…the Jewish role in Communism, and so on.”

   I think this is key. Only make one point at a time.

   Specifically on immigration one angle is to present it in a relatively non-attacking way i.e jewish politicians are so paranoid about white people waking up one morning and painting swastikas on their faces that they can’t be trusted on immigration. No matter how good they might be on other issues they have a weak spot on immigration because they’re obsessed with Nazis.

   You can spin it as them not being able to control themselves because of all the holocaust films rather than them being specifically anti-white.

   This would work better on softer hearted people.

8. The editing is fine – think this post came out great. I hope folks like the picture of Waxman – the guy makes NKVD Chief Beria look like a handsome, honest White Christian.
   🙂
   I also like the new title:
   Yes Virginia, Jews Suck on Immigration

   I think this is just mainstream enough to send out to all respectible “Conservative” forums, it’s not hateful or anything just noting basic facts of life.

   Thanks to all who contributed to this one.

   And I note that AH – had Rudolf to edit and assist him in writing M.K. – that was once “mainstream”, but times change….

   in the last few months, things have changed for the better.

   Thanks again to everyone here who helped us defeat the Dream Act amnesty.

9. Take heart:

   The Jewish “Wave” that hit America after WWII has crested and is starting to recede.

   After a healthy dose of “natural selection” and a near-universal understanding on the part of Jews of all classes that they have to work together to avoid annihilation (a lesson we should learn, as well), the Jews fielded an incredible intellectual and administrative cohort.

   What did whites do?

   Play sports, get divorced, and otherwise slack off.

   The Jews essentially displaced the old WASP elite in America.

   Even when I was a kid (which wasn’t that long ago) people were constantly referring to themselves as Irish, Italian, Polish, etc. etc. etc.

   Even Nixon was bashing the Italians, Irish etc, who often voted for the Democrats because they were not treated as full partners by the old line WASPs.

   Now we’re all “white”.

   What does that mean?

   First, we can produce a new unified cohort of intellectuals and managers to wrest power form the Jews.

   Secondly, we can practice international nepotism; a tactic which gave the International Jew a huge leg up in a globalizing world.

   Apart from the long-since hollowed out Catholic Church (no sane man can believe that shit anymore), whites had no internationally cohesive force to resist Jewry. Thus we got our clocks cleaned.

   Now that we are all “white”, we can hit them from at least 30 directions (majority white nations). Weak movements such as America’s white nationalists, can be buttressed and supported and legitimized by media and money from countries like Russia (consider how much air time folks like Alex Jones, Ron Paul, and Gerald Celente get from Russia Today!).

   Genetic engineering can de-mudify borderline nations like Iran, Armenia, Georgia, etc. AND THEY WILL BE HAPPY TO DO IT in order to be “white” again!

   We can also make the pitch to Chinese, Indians, Africans, Hispanics and Arabs that a force-blended humanity will destroy them as well; we will all benefit from a different kind of globalism, one where good fences make good neighbors.

   All in all I am VERY optimistic about the awakening of our race and the displacement of the Jewish elite with a new White (not WASP) elite.

10. I meant to respond to a comment about Eric Cantor the other day. He voted against the DREAM Act. Cantor also condemned the SPLC and is a member of the House Immigration Reform Caucus. That probably has more do with his constituents in Culpepper though than anything else.

11. “You have a seeming refusal to admit that some Jews may be on our side. Or that any Jew can sincerely hold beliefs outside the main body of Jewish opinion, such people are (apparently) obviously fakes and frauds, and not to be taken seriously.”

    Purely by the law of averages there will be some jews who wholly identify as white and will on our side.

    Purely by the law of averages there will be some jews who see jewish interests as being aligned with white interests and they will be on their side but aligned with ours.

    There will certainly be jewish entryists who pretend to be on our side but in reality are there purely to steer things in a safe direction.

    The question is judging which is which. Personally i’m not convinced i could tell the genuine ones from the fake ones.

    There’s another point as well. If you believe that jewish political organisations have been involved in a stealth war against white America since the 1880s (as shown by Professor MacDonald) then genuinely non-hostile jews are in a bit of a Catch 22 situation. If 80% of jews are hostile to white people then that could mean 80% of a non-hostile jew’s relatives.

    (When i say hostile i mean maybe 10% of them at an ADL or SPLC level of anti-white hatred and maybe another 80% who are simply paranoid about white people.)

    My personal compromise is to not trust jews on principle but at the same time try and avoid being abusive about it in case the individual in question is genuine.

12. It’s one thing to accept support from Jews who appear to working for the same things we are. But these people can never be given leadership posistions. Christian Zionists are not given leadership posistions in Israel or American Jewish organizations.

13. I sometimes try this line of reasoning:

    (first, understand that I am a Midwestern White Anglo)

    I say:

    “Look, certain people are very good at some things, not so good at others. Take “my people” – Midwestern Anglos. We don’t have a whole lot of super successful stand up comedians or leading man, Hollywood actor stars. I can think of maybe Bob Newhart being an exception on the comedian side and that was ~ 30 years ago. As for Jewish people – it’s the same; they are good at many things, not so good at other things. One thing Jewish people are not so good at is immigration. Most Americans want common sense laws, programs in place to keep out terrorists, drug cartels, millions of third world people with TB, AIDS or just millions of people from cultures that are traditionally extremely hostile to our Western, American culture. But, virtually every single Jewish elected official has supported unrestricted immigration, supported every single illegal alien amnesty in the last 50 years. It’s not hateful to say that Jews are bad on immigration, it’s just stating basic facts”

    And then note that Jews have completely different views about immigration to Israel – Jews want immigration to Israel to be exclusively Jewish. We can understand that, but this doesn’t give American Jews the right to mess up American immigration.

14. So the 35 or so Jews who are Democrats all voted with the other Democrats, and the single Republican Jew voted with the Republicans on the DREAM Act. And how are these Jewish votes any more relevant than the many more Catholics and Protestants that voted for or against the DREAM Act?

    I know what the answer will be here at OD…the point is, if you want to make headway on having the “JQ” go mainstream, you gotta have an answer to this sort of question for anti-illegal immigration activists. You’re saying without the Jews that there would be no pro-immigration sentiment? Not even among people of Irish or Italian descent, whose Catholic religion and family history of discrimination at the hands of WASPS gives them similar suspicions about being told who is and who isn’t an American?

    Rather than wake up the so-powerful Jews with an explicitly anti-Jewish message, why not just get whites to look out for their OWN self-interests? That’s the problem with “dog whistles,” the other side hears them most loudly. Find me one person who was planning on staying home but who decided instead to vote for Sharon Angle in Nevada after they saw her dog whistle immigration ad, and I’ll find you ten people who never would have bothered to vote for Harry Reid had they not seen the ad.

15. crypto aryan says:

    ” You’re saying without the Jews that there would be no pro-immigration sentiment?”

    I am the author of this post (others edited it) and I said no such thing. There are certainly many pro- mass NW immigration people/forces that are not Jewish. Agribusiness owners in CA, idiot Judeo X’tian do gooders who want to adopt every poor Black they see on vacation or on some world hunger program, ethnic power blocks, yes, now some Catholic power blocks that want to add Mexican Catholics to dwindling Irish Catholic pews.
    But the main point of the post is:
    Yeah, Jews really suck on immigrationi and it isn’t just one party line vote on the Dream Act.
    Go to NumbersUSA and check out the immigration grades of every single Jewish Congressman, Jewish Senator – except for Cantor who’s constitutents would drive him out if he was bad on immigration, CA Sen. Jewess Barbara Boxer received the best grade at a D+
    All the other Jews in Congress from Al Franken, to Harry Waxmen to Schumer to that Cohen in Tennessee that tried to be accepted in the Black Congressional Caucus, they all rated grades of F!
    Jews suck on immigration – that’s an unpleasand fact of life in these Dis United States year 2010.

16. So we should oppose Satan because he has a few parking tickets and didn’t call his mother on her birthday?
    Allright, so we should go easy on the Jewish Question because we’ll frighten people otherwise. I can see that, but it is really hard to hold your tongue when some White can’t see the turd on his plate. My only useful suggestion here is to know very specifically what you are talking about, and be able to make your points from information that is easily verifiable and very mainstream. Be just another White guy who discovered (OMG!) that Jews own Hollywood. (How many studio bosses are Jewish?) If affirmative action comes up, note how Jews are so greatly overrepresented among lawyers and what have you. If your buddy doesn’t like Wall Street and Big Banks, point out how Jews dominate finance. Work with simple, verifiable facts, like “Obama’s three main financial advisors, Bernanke, Summers, and Geithner, are all Jews.” Be ready to gently deal with the mantras that people will use to hide from the facts: “Oh, Jews are just good with money”. If you can only get someone to think about the Jewish names that pass before their eyes, you’ve done a good day’s work.
    Note: Don’t say “He’s a Jew”, say “He’s Jewish”. Not “Jews” but “Jewish people”. Avoid tripping that particular philo-Semitic gag reflex.

17. History repeats, history rules. Like it or not, the One who leads White Civilization to victory will be an apostate Jew. Not, however, Mr. Cantor.

18. Specifically on immigration one angle is to present it in a relatively non-attacking way i.e jewish politicians are so paranoid about white people waking up one morning and painting swastikas on their faces that they can’t be trusted on immigration. No matter how good they might be on other issues they have a weak spot on immigration because they’re obsessed with Nazis.
    Wandrin

    Another less honest but probably more palatable way to explain it (without bringing in racial issues) would be to say that Jews are soft on immigration because their grandparents came to the United States recently, and they still identify themselves as immigrants. Just say that their hearts will never be in the fight against immigration because they’re too sentimental.

    I’d also suggest taking the Moral Majority approach and use code language. Rather than get too much into why Jews are our enemies, just make sure all the anti-white, extreme leftist views and votes of Jewish Senators and Representatives are publicized among White conservatives and Christians.

19. ““Like it or not, the One who leads White Civilization to victory will be an apostate Jew.”

    No doubt one would have the chutzpah to claim that and even jockey himself to the front of any torchlight parade celebrating the victory of White Civilization.

    LOL, sort of like Hunter Wallace here trying to take the credit for all the anti immigration sentiment in the country and the recent House anti immigration victories in the House.

20. We should point out that Jewish organizations do not hide their involvement in the perpetual campaign for more immigration. On the contrary, they are proud of it. That is because they think immigration is great: it brings diversity and gives us strength. The Jews love us so much that they want to make us happy by bringing in a lot of diversity. They think that their activism in favor of mass immigration is proof that they are moral and good people. So, I think it can not be wrong to point out that they are the most active organizers of mass immigration. It is absurd to see politically correct white people trying to deny or downplay Jewish involvement in mass immigration, even though Jewish activists keep boasting that they support immigration because it is so great.

    A few books have been written to help people accept the obvious fact that ideas, even loony ideas, have consequences. But it is not simply ideas, it is also Jewish activists. One of the consequences of Jewish activism is mass immigration. We should help people accept the obvious fact that Jewish activism is highly effective. If not, what is the purpose of Jewish activism?

    Of course, in the real world, the Jews are not completely honest about their involvement in the immigration disaster. And they know it isn’t good for Whites to be replaced by third-worlders. We may feel stupid explaining to our fellow Whites that the Jews are nice people who honestly think that race replacement is good for Whites. But after all, that is what the Jews say.

21. “We may feel stupid explaining to our fellow Whites that the Jews are nice people who honestly think that race replacement is good for Whites. But after all, that is what the Jews say.”

    The only point you need to make is these anti-whites only think non-white immigration is “good” for white countries and only white countries. They do not campaign for it in the case of Israel, or for any other non-white nation. Once you have made your point, people will figure the rest out on their own.

22. The above pic is not Waxman- this one is:
    http://zebra3report.tripod.com/zebra3report/art_waxman_gi.jpg

23. Mea Culpa.

    The CA Jew Congressman featured here is Howard Berman, not Henry Waxman.

    Both Jew CA Jew Congressmen received grades of F from NumbersUSA

    It’s not like we want to say all Jew Congressmen from California are the same. They just received the same grade of F on immigration.

24. Missing from the discussion is the question of immigration is affirmative action. If millions of Hispanics gain citizenship, they will move to the head of the line in getting jobs, promotions, scholarships, etc., because of affirmative action. They will have preferences over native-born American citizens. And how did the US move from equal opportunity to anti-white affirmative action? See “White Male Privilege: A Social Construct for Political Oppression,” J. of Libertarian Studies 1988, and on line. Also, “The Elite War against White Men.” Barnes Review. One might also read on line, “Affirmative Action and the Nazis,” at anthonyflood.com

25. Jack Ryan: Waxman and Berman are true soul mates, so I can see mixing them up. Together, they formed the Waxman-Berman machine that controlled Los Angeles. Jews and Blacks together had a majority on the City Council, and the Black figurehead Mayor Tom Bradley did their bidding. The Blacks wanted government jobs and wanted the Mexicans kept out of the trough. The Jews wanted to have all the entry-level elected offices that had been held by Whites for themselves, so they could boost their tribe. The Board of Education, Community College Board, residual agricultural entities like the Resource Conservation Board, everything on the ballot had Jews running for it, with Hollywood money backing them. That’s how Waxman and Berman got to the U.S. Congress. In the White areas, Jews with non-Semitic names were run, so that Whites wouldn’t realize that they were living in a kosher slaughterhouse. And the Jews weren’t about to share any power with the Mexicans. For years, there was only one Mexican on the City Council, Edward Roybal. I’m certain that the current occupiers of L.A. haven’t forgotten. You’d think that smart Jews would have better sense than to bed down with the people they were shitting on.
    Yeah, off topic, but this story taught me a lot when I got the facts sorted. My thanks to the arrogant people at The New Republic for spelling so much of it out for me, years ago.

26. Discard says:
    December 23, 2010 at 12:15 am
    Jack Ryan: Waxman and Berman are true soul mates, so I can see mixing them up. Together, they formed the Waxman-Berman machine that controlled Los Angeles. Jews and Blacks together had a majority on the City Council, and the Black figurehead Mayor Tom Bradley did their bidding.

    Jack Ryan replies:
    Thanks for sharing this information with us – it’s to be expected. I lived in San Diego for 6 years, East of Del Mar. Jews were coming down but had not taken over. San Diego is very Midwestern Anglo Navy Town. Very sad to see these Jews leaving LA and coming down to mess up such a perfect place. They were even pretending to join the LDS Mormon Church, but they have a large private Massada type compound. The Congressmen in and around San Diego are some of the best in the USA – Brian Bilbray and Duncan Hunter Jr. – I worked for both.

27. “As for Jewish people – it’s the same; they are good at many things, not so good at other things. One thing Jewish people are not so good at is immigration.”

    On the contrary, Jews are VERY “good at immigration”. They are the world’s classic migrants, having been doing it for many centuries. They’re masters at it and have more experience than anyone else.

    Especially, they’ve had spectacular success at getting control over America’s immigration policy, and they’ve been running the show since 1965. And now (largely via us) they control that of the whole white, western world — which they are determined to transform into non-white, and non-western.

    They may not be “good at immigration” from OUR point of view. But they don’t care about that. That’s your problem! They’re handling it from THEIR point of view. And their management of immigration has been VERY good for the Jews.

    Anyway, the analogy to comedians and Hollywood actors is a poor one, frivolous at best.

    Regarding the discussion of “good” Jews vs. “bad” Jews (as it pertains to us), I do agree with ATBOTL that they must not be allowed in leadership positions, or soon the organization will be serving Jewish interests, not ours — but that is precisely where they always tend to gravitate, to positions of control, whether by chance or by purposeful design. But once they are inside the organization, how do you keeep them out of the upper echelons? It would seem the only way is to keep them out of the organization.

    As for those “Christian Zionists”, frankly, I find them so screwed up mentally, lost in all their far-out religious fantasies and imaginings, that they are beyond the reach of intelligent discussion. Until they come down to earth and get in touch with reality, they are hopeless. They are certainly not rational. I would not even bother to try to reason with them.

    Oh, btw, those 35 or so Jews estimated by the Wash. Post would be ONLY those who self-identify as Jews. What about the (surely many) others who are of Jewish background or are married to Jews? They will be influenced by traditional Jewish attitudes, whether they are religious, practicing Jews or not. Take, for instance, Sen. Herry Reid of Nevada, a Mormon convert, married to a Mormon convert who was born (and remains) an ethnic Jew, the daughter of Jewish immigrant parents. I’ll bet there are many others like that. Personally, I am not interested in what their religion is; we all know they can change their religion every month. But they can’t change their ethnicity or tribal affiliations. And rarely do they change their outlook.

28. Jack Ryan: BTW, you ought drop that “Anglo” business. That’s the anti-White’s word for Whites, taken from the vocabulary of the Hispanics of New Mexico. Irish, Scots, Germans, Scandinavians, French, Italians, Baltics and Slavs are White, but are not Anglo.

29. “Jack Ryan: BTW, you ought drop that “Anglo” business. That’s the anti-White’s word for Whites.”

    I agree. By that term, they mean English-speakers, since to them anyone who speaks English IS English. I’ve run into that casual assumption many times. Once, some years ago, some Puerto Ricans referred to the people in a nearby Polish/Ukranian neighborhood as “the English”. I pointed out that there probably wasn’t a single English person living anywhere in that area, but they couldn’t understand what I meant. To them, if you spoke English, you WERE English. And that was that. (Well, to be fair, how many Americans refer to Guatemalan Indians and Dominican mulattoes as “the Spanish”?)

    It points up the interesting difference between how the Latins and Germanics see things. Germans (and formerly, but today less so, the English) tend to see distinctions in racial and ethnic terms. Latins heavily emphasize culture, and especially language. Perhaps that is because Latins are already so racially jumbled (probably, I suspect, as a result of the Roman Empire and all the area’s many wars, slavery, and invasions). The Mediterranean is a racial borderline. I once read an anthropoligical description of the Mediterranean as “racially chaotic” [perhaps Carleton Coon?]. I thought that was a perfect description.

    Hence, Latins are more racially forgiving. They find other distinctions to emphasize. That explains how a black or brown Brazilian can consider himself white, if he is culturally “white”. That is how the Mexican white elite can pretend they are descendents of Aztecs. That is how the French can assume that a black African can come to France and become a Frenchman, so long as he learns to speak proper French and which wine to order with his fish. To them, it is cultural. To us, it is bizarre and incomprehensible! We tend to identify a person’s ethnicity VISUALLY. They don’t.

    I was once in a shop in Toulouse (France), and the owner, a very pleasant man, asked me if I were English. I said no, American. He laughed and replied, airily, “To us it’s all the same”. I replied that to us, it isn’t; there’s a difference. I don’t think he “got it”. He laughed it off. The man was friendly and meant absolutely no harm; but he illustrated the way in which the French put language (and culture) above all, while they dismiss racial/ethnic considerations as just some silly nazi-type nonsense. I suspect this is partly a reaction to Nazism and the German occupation, but the philosophical roots of it go way back into the 1800s.

    This is how France was able to accept and assimilate immigrants from all over Europe for several centuries. As soon as they became gallicized, they were considered French. No problem! But now, with immigration pouring in from all over the world — particularly the dark countries and non-Christian countries, it is proving much more difficult to transform these recalcitrant new immigrants into good “Frenchmen”. And the French don’t know quite what to do. They can’t understand what is wrong. Certainly, it worked very well for centuries before this! And with the Marxist blinders they are required to wear, they refuse to consider race as a possible factor. That would be thinking outside the permissible boundaries — a forbidden thought. Heresy!

    Wikipedia has a very good article on this overall subject, well worth reading.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_people

    [Excerpt] Ernest Renan’s famous conference at the Sorbonne, “What is a Nation” (1882): According to Renan’s republican conception, a nation-state is not composed of a single homogeneous ethnic group, but of a variety of individuals willing to live together. Renan’s definition, which forms the basis of the French Republic, is diametrically opposed to the German ethnic conception of a nation, first formulated by Fichte.

    According to the French Republic, the French people are those who are in possession of French nationality [citizenship]. Since the mid-19th century, France has experienced a high rate of immigration, mainly from Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, the Maghreb, Africa and Asia. According to a 2004 report, France has approximately 14 million persons of foreign origin (immigrants, or with at least one immigrant parent or grand-parent).

    The absence of official statistics on French citizens of foreign origin is not accidental. The idea of French ethnicity is NOT one which informs mainstream discourse in France. Under French law passed after the Vichy regime, it is forbidden to categorize people according to ethnic origin. Moreover, all French statistics are forbidden to have any references concerning ethnic membership. In France, as in many European countries, censuses do not collect information on ancestry.

    Thus, the French government’s assimilationist stance towards immigration as well as towards regional identities and cultures, together with the political heritage of the French revolution, has led to the development of a French identity which is based more on the notion of “citizenship” than on cultural, historical or “ethnic” ties.

    For this reason, French identity must not be associated with the “ethnic French people”, but can be associated with either citizenship, or a cultural and language-based group. The latter forms the basis for La Francophonie, a group of French-speaking countries, or those with historical and cultural associations with France.

    The concept of “French ethnicity” does [sometimes] exist outside of France’s borders, particularly in Quebec where some people claim membership in a “French ethnic group”. But here too many view it as not so much ethnicity-based as language-based, and that would also include immigrants from, for example, Haiti.

30. “By that term, they mean English-speakers, since to them anyone who speaks English IS English.”

    I should add that I do not necessarily consider “Anglo” to be a hostile term. At least, I don’t hear it that way. It is simply incorrect.

    But south of the border, all Americans are considered “Anglos”. Just as all are referred to as Yankees — a term with which many a Southerner would disagree! And gringos. (I wonder if Canadians are considered gringos? Probably. Again, they wouldn’t see any distinction.)

    But, to them, we’re just hair-splitting. They don’t see the difference. To them we’re all the same, if we speak English … just as to many North Americans, all Latin Americans are the same (while they would find an enormous difference between a Bolivian and a Puerto Rican).

31. Discard says:
    December 23, 2010 at 6:05 am (Edit)
    Jack Ryan: BTW, you ought drop that “Anglo” business. That’s the anti-White’s word for Whites, taken from the vocabulary of the Hispanics of New Mexico. Irish, Scots, Germans, Scandinavians, French, Italians, Baltics and Slavs are White, but are not Anglo.

    Jack Ryan responds:
    I disagree. In many instances “Anglo” is a very good word to describe who we are. With NW Hispanics – it’s a word that divides “us” from “them” and is a nicer word than “Gringo”. With Whiter, White Hispanics “Anglo” is along the same lines more respectful, but just shows the truth that while our groups are both Indo European – their culture derives from Spain, where ours derives from England/Britain.

    “Anglo” also denotes a whole range of Whites who have basically assimilated in to the British White American core, accepted White British American language, culture, history as theirs. When Whites have truely assimilated and become “Anglos” there is little or no White vs White fights like we often have with Irish Americans with some chip on their shoulders. Anglo also denotes the reality of White Americans and White British people’s common culture – maybe we shouldn’t have taken our British kinsmen’s side in World War I and World War II, but we did and it was mainly because of ties of blood.
    A White American “Anglo” can still go to any White British culture community in the world – Canada, Australian, New Zealand, Scotland, Wales, England and find common ground, know that with just a few adjustments we are home with our kinfolk.

32. First, any name given me by enemies of my race is not one I wish to accept, unless it’s “Master”. “Anglo” belongs in the same dictionary as “African-American” and “Asian” (for Oriental).
    Second, I am not English. Call me White, call me Caucasian, call me American, call me European, all of which are true. Don’t call me what I am not.

33. (1) Present the facts of Jewish support for Third World immigration alone. Don’t try to package this with any of the other negative Jewish programs like loyalty to Israel, sponsorship of neocon wars in Asia, the War Against Christmas, ADL sponsorship of hate crime legislation, the corruption of the Federal Reserve banking system, the Jewish role in Communism, and so on.

    To Jack Ryan. I saw your article on David Duke’s site. The facts, if they’re correct, would be very valuable to put in a purely factual form that could reach a much larger audience, and I would be very interested in working with you on the project (with the usual warning that it can happen that people do not have the same enough ideas or energy for it to work in putting a project together. One of the first questions to talk about is exactly what facts do you have. Do the newspaper articles that you read in anyway list names – that is very important.)
    If you’re interested in talking about this further, one natural restriction I have is that we communicate in a way that we can be reasonably sure I am talking to you, and you to me, probably somehow with emails.
    I don’t know if a first step for you to be sure you are talking to me might be to click on my name above which will take you to my website that I am (very) slowly building, but I don’t yet know how to add to word press a way for people to leave me a message.

34. Bob in Idaho,

    Thanks for noticing that my post was reposted on DavidDuke.com

    I have many years working with David Duke – he is very good in many areas.

    I tried to go to your web site, but my comments didin’t seem to make it through. Oh well.

    Hope you are doing well in Idaho.

35. Jack Ryan,
    For some reason your comment was classified as spam – maybe the “david duke” in it? Anyway, I un-spammed it. I also learned that people can post to the “about” section. By saturday I’ll send an email.

36. Jack Ryan,
    I meant I will send an email by sunday.

37. Bob in Idaho says:
    December 25, 2010 at 2:25 am
    Jack Ryan,
    I meant I will send an email by sunday.

    Merry Christmas Bob. Please give David Duke my very best. He should recognize me under many names.

38. Sarah Palin would never come out and say it, but she basically identifies as Jewish more than white. She would slaughter America for Israel in a heartbeat, just like nearly all Christian Zionists.

    I am anti-Israel. I think it’s bad for Jews and I know it’s bad for the world.

39. “Sarah Palin would never come out and say it, but she basically identifies as Jewish more than white.”

    You really think? She’s Alaskan fer crying out loud. How many Alaskans identify with the bookish Judaics?

40. How many Alaskans identify with the bookish Judaics?

    At least one.

    “The only flag at my office is an Israeli flag…”

    -Sarah Palin

    http://www.nysun.com/national/palin-only-flag-in-my-office-is-israeli/86671/

41. Off the cameras and away from reporters, Sarah Palin most likely doesn’t give a damn about Jews.

42. Her Dad was Jewish. She had an Isreali flag on on her desk in Alaska. Cripes, why do you think she was catapulted to the head of the class? She’d take out the entire world for Israel if asked.

43. No way. Sarah Palin is as True Believer as they get. That’s why she looks and sounds like an imposter. She is.

44. Family tree:

    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_iG2qILKBjms/SPEtmg1129I/AAAAAAAABS8/B1w-wvA3flo/s1600-h/palintree.jpg

45. Is that family tree accurate?

46. “She’d take out the entire world for Israel if asked.

    All those bastards would, but not because they are more Jewish than American, but because they want to be president. Now if the family tree is accurate I might have to rethink all this.

47. Hunter Wallace was wise in his decision to stick to stopping immigration, amnesty, Affirmative Action, etc., and leaving behind all the other baggage. This thread and another are clearly showing why it is a wise decision, what with the Anglo debate and people not being able to hear guy talk about women.

48. And other subjects, too.

    I will now concede Wallace’s point. Get off the main points we can mobilize normal people on and drift into all the other areas, and we descend into being ridiculous.

49. I don’t know if it’s real.

    Come on, think about it. Do you really think she reached such astounding heights so quickly on her merits? She’s a plant. She’s there for a reason. She’s going to hit the button.

50. I think we’re safe being ridiculous on Christmas Eve. I’m pretty sure Joe 6-pack isn’t reading up on his politics tonight.