I gotta say that the “Conservative MSM” have been giving this crazy broad the business for weeks.
She’s laying down the blueprint for how to destroy affirmative action. If white people would stop checking the box next to “White/Caucasian” and just check off Native american or whatever who has the right to say you’re not. It’s only backfiring on “fauxcahontas”(lol) because she’s running for office, but before this it seems like her career was given a nice boost just based on her race selection. Most white people would never do this though.
Indian ancestry is unquestionably the biggest urban legend in America.
I had the misfortune to be in one of her classes. I hated the class and I hated her teaching style – she was humorless and arrogant. I could tell she was a leftist, even teaching a dry class like the uniform commercial code. I never dreamed she would one day inflict herself on the country like this. Loathsome person.
The good thing about things like this is they reveal more and more to average people that the elite and their institutions are functionally insane and incompetent. No one of any sense can take for a minute seriously her claim that she is an Indian, and her insistance on it brings everything from Harvard to the U.S. Senate to affirmative action to even the very nature of U.S. elections into deserved disrepute.
Our elite, from the lowliest bureaucrat all the way up to the boardroom of Goldman Sachs and the Oval Office is filled to the brim with just this kind of person: petty, insufferable, incompetent, half-educated, arrogant and repellent.
All we European-American nationalists have to do is: 1) bravely and without fear proclaim our rights as a people; and 2) pull the green curtain aside to reveal all of these people…..and we win.
Note well here, though, who are enemy is: It is another European-American. Not the pitiful and quite helpless on their own blacks; not the rabbit-breeding Latinos; not the pushy and laughably materialistic Asians; nor even the hyper-competitive Jews.
This fight of our is an inter-European-American civil war, with all others merely as bit players and proxy warriors.
This is who we have to beat. This is the enemy.
This woman is being rewarded for her denial of her own genetics. Other White have done this. I used to have a blue-eyed hair dresser, that told me she was “Native American”.
I’ve heard it said: “When we were growing up, and you called one of them an Indian you’d have to fight them.” Now its: “If you don’t call them an Indian/native you have to fight them.”
It should be clear by now that for liberals, the hierarchical arrangement of race in a given society is a paramount consideration. The difference is these considerations are never motivated by a virtue like fidelity, but instead always by self advancement.
Fauxcahontas. I like this. Cue music – did you ever hear the wolf cry to the new born moon? Schaltzy chorus.
KevinV – Fauxcahontas looks like a crypto Jew to me.
“She looka like a man.”
The Catholic Knight said…
A reader sent me the following comment and question…
“Does J. Michael Hill and the League of the South promote moving people not of Euro-Caucasian out of the South or not allowing them the rights of political office? I read his statement on the LS website. If this is so, than I can not as a Roman Catholic endorse this in anyway. “
I have decided to post this question because, in deference to Dr. Hill, I believe such a question deserves a fair and accurate answer, especially since he, and the League of the South, have been victimised by repeated slander and libel.
First and foremost, let me post the official statement on race and racism from the League of the South. It is a statement that Dr. Michael Hill helped to craft…
“The League of the South has never before issued a statement denying that it is “racist” because racism is a wax nose charge. Those who resort to this charge can never be satisfied. The more we deny it, the more we will be forced to deny it, until at last all that we will have time to do is to repel the latest charge of “racism.” However, we make this one statement, to satisfy strangers of good will, that we bear no ill will or hatred to any racial, ethnic, or religious group.
We believe that Christianity and social order require that all people, regardless of race, must be equal before the law. We do not believe that the law should be used to persecute, oppress, or favour any race or class.
We believe that the only harmony possible between the races, as between all natural differences among human beings, begins in submitting to Jesus Christ’s commandment to “love our neighbours as ourselves.” That is the world we envision and work for.
We believe that the politics of race — baiting whites against blacks and blacks against white has been profitable for politicians but catastrophic for the South and Southerners.
We believe that all Southerners – black and white – want and need the same things: a safe country for their families, liberty, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
We believe that the last thing the South’s enemies want is to see black and white Southerners sitting down together to determine their common destiny and work for authentic harmony, a just social and economic order, and an independent South. We can’t foretell precisely what that order will look like, but certainly it will not make room for diversity police and political correctness. Rather, we hope it will bring the greatest freedom for the greatest number of all races, and good will among them all.
The League of the South Board of Directors
21 June 2005″
That in itself should be pretty self-explanatory. The statement that all races should be equal before the law, should suffice to answer the above reader’s question.
I have never read or heard Dr. Hill speak of deporting minority races from the South solely because of race, nor do I have any knowledge of him wanting to forbid them from public office solely because of race. I know this is not the will of the League of the South, as the above statement should sufficiently demonstrate. If the League of the South were a racist organisation of any type, yours truly (The Catholic Knight), would not be a member.
There are however, as the statement accurately points out, people who will never be satisfied with the League’s denial of racism, namely because it has been very profitable for them to use the League as a boogeyman to drum up more donations from frightened widows to their various organisations. For them, the politics of race-baiting is a lucrative business.
I assure the above reader that there are many MANY Catholics involved in the League of the South, and these are usually the most pious and devout of them all. If racism was what the League stood for, they would have no part of it either. You can rest assured that nothing the League stands for contradicts the teachings of Holy Mother Church.
At one point, the folks at Majority Rights were thinking that Elizabeth Warren was a net plus to White Nationalism with her book, Why Middle Class Mothers and Fathers are Going Broke. (The upshot of the book is, middle class parents are going broke because they have to spend so much to get a house in a neighborhood with good schools.) MJ thought that making the point that it’s not greed for designer labels on clothes that’s killing us Americans (i.e., Whites) but unavoidable costs of living, would help Whites shed their guilt.
I said at the time, nah. Ms. Warren isn’t telling WHY Americans (i.e., Whites) are willing to spend half the family income on a mortgage in a neighborhood with good schools. And that reason is integration. High-priced houses keep out poor blacks. It’s getting away from blacks that costs so much and is so very necessary.
But, I said, so long as Warren doesn’t tell the truth about integration and the low level race war being waged against us, she’s telling lies. A half truth is a whole lie.
Well, now I see WHY Warren failed to tell the whole truth. She’s been riding the minority gravy train all along.
Is she a lesbian?
“Warning, may cause viewer to despise negroes”
Yep. Thanks. For. Warning.
There ain’t no n*gra, like a US n*gra.
I want y’all freed from these obnoxious fools and these white red injuns so bad it hurts.
At one point, the folks at Majority Rights were thinking that Elizabeth Warren was a net plus to White Nationalism with her book, Why Middle Class Mothers and Fathers are Going Broke.
I think it was James Bowery who wrote a post or two about her. He commended her for basically being the only figure in the mainstream establishment and institutions to point to the collapse of the middle class i.e. whites in the US. She not only pointed to the collapse but directly countered the relentless propaganda and lies from the establishment which uses manipulated inflation and hedonics figures to argue that the middle class hasn’t been greatly damaged and even has increased its quality of living.
So for pointing out this serious problem from a mainstream position of authority, she is being viciously attacked in this campaign. Merely pointing out the problem to the public is dangerous to the establishment because she did it from a position of authority, and it gets people to start thinking about how bad it is and how, who, what, caused it. Even if she doesn’t supply the public with the reasons or causes, pointing out the problem gets the people thinking down a dangerous (to the establishment) path.
IN response to ‘catholic Knight’:
Let’s analyze these statements on the LOS, in light of the 5 Categories of Robertson:
“we bear no ill will or hatred to any racial, ethnic, or religious group.”
Observation: Nor do I, as long as the effing niggers, spics, and Jews are nowhere near my homeland’s borders. Just as Isra-Hell is exporting their “Black Problem” so, too, shall a White, truly Christian Republic… inculturation experts from the RCC notwithstanding.
Conclusion: The LOS is being a ‘useful idiot’ here, in saying such blather.
“We believe that Christianity and social order require that all people, regardless of race, must be equal before the law. We do not believe that the law should be used to persecute, oppress, or favour any race or class.”
Observation: The Law of God was given to the People of God, and to none other. It is meant (as Bahnsen and many of the Theonomists noted) to help Whites/Christendom to RULE over the non-Elect, the ‘goyim’, the duskier races. Thus, Imperialist India under the Brits, Africa under the White Man, and Injuns (Feather, not dot) under the Americans are the biblical model of proper rule by God’s People- Manifest Destiny, in other words. That is the only “equality” of the Law. Non-whites are not the White Man’s equal- whether legally or ontologically.
Conclusion: LOS is being disingenuous, as they know their own nation’s history. Either that, or they are acting as Old Believers as well as Pussyfooters.
“We believe that the only harmony possible between the races, as between all natural differences among human beings, begins in submitting to Jesus Christ’s commandment to “love our neighbours as ourselves.” That is the world we envision and work for.”
Observation: I am more than willing to ‘love my neighbor as myself.’ Trouble is, the word for ‘neighbor’ in the Biblical tongues, means (and the LOS should know this, as they are the SOUTH, after all… Bible belt, etc.) “one like unto myself.”
Non-Whites are, therefore, by their foreign race, culture, and dissimilar DNA, NOT our ‘neighbors.’ It is only universalist/Egalitarian heresy to believe otherwise. Jesus has NO connection to the ‘goyim’ of the world, except, as we can see in Revelation, to judge the unrighteous for their sins, and to save the Elect in spite of theirs.
Conclusion: LOS is lying here. They are being cultural ‘trucklers.’
We believe that the politics of race — baiting whites against blacks and blacks against white has been profitable for politicians but catastrophic for the South and Southerners.
“We believe that all Southerners – black and white – want and need the same things: a safe country for their families, liberty, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.”
Observation: Here is the crux of why the LOS and the Antebellum South are poles apart. Pre-Civil war society was clearly much more Augustinian (calvinist) while today’s “South” is Arminian/Universalist to the CORE. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is NOT meant for Any but the ‘Israel of God.’ Christ clearly pointed that out when He said, “I am come ONLY for the Lost Sheep of the HOUSE [oikos] of Israel.”
To have ANY dealings with the Papal/filioquist heresy of universalism- even while denying the ‘universal jurisdiction’ of the Pope- is to be an explicit heretic, as far as the Church is concerned.
Conclusion: LOS are using their religious cultic prescriptions as a means to avoid cultural battle with the Chosenites, and their fifth columnist hordes of non-Whites. LOS is acting as Proditor, here.
“We believe that the last thing the South’s enemies want is to see black and white Southerners sitting down together to determine their common destiny and work for authentic harmony, a just social and economic order, and an independent South. We can’t foretell precisely what that order will look like, but certainly it will not make room for diversity police and political correctness. Rather, we hope it will bring the greatest freedom for the greatest number of all races, and good will among them all.”
Observation: The greatest freedom for Whites is to live APART from Blacks, and other ‘gentiles.’ Just as in Antebellum society, treating the Negro as one’s ontological equal is utterly absurd. A ‘Just social and economic order’ is merely watered down Marxism. There is no place for either a) thinking of non-Whites as equal to us, or b) allowing them the legal fiction that they are. All they are good for, is to be slaves, or (as Lincoln noted) to be returned to their African homeland. That is the only ‘just and equitable solution’ for a decidedly UNEQUAL racial problem.
Conclusion: Here we see the Old Believer mentality again. “If we just throw enough dollars at them, give them scholarships, hire tutors, etc. MAYBE they’ll ‘become White.’ Nope, EPIC FAIL.
Finally, ” If the League of the South were a racist organisation of any type, yours truly (The Catholic Knight), would not be a member.”
“You can rest assured that nothing the League stands for contradicts the teachings of (un)Holy [Whoring] Mother [of Harlots] Church.”
Conclusion: Here the LOS shows her UTTERLY duplicitous nature, and here she loses all credibility. America long ago stated that they would not be ruled by a foreign despot- whether King, Pope, or Premier. Why have Whites, and Protestants today forgotten that? Because, today we are ruled by Jews, Papal incursions of greater and greater numbers of ‘catholic faithful’ that are: a) non-White, b) irreligious, c)syncretistic, and d) willing dupes of the Socialist NWO, as sponsored by the Demon-crapic party, who has clearly declared WAR on ALL whites.
And I quote: “Evans said that the Roman Catholic Church was also the chief leader of alienism. The Catholics could never become true Americans because the majority of its leaders were either “foreign born, or of foreign parentage and training.” Roman Catholics could not teach Americanism because they demand supreme loyalty to the church. In addition, the word Roman is not American in and of itself. Romans are from Rome, which means that Romans are Italians. The Klan considered Italians to be a big problem in the world of aliens and immigration. (PP. 12-14)”- http://www1.assumption.edu/users/McClymer/his261/KlanNotes.html
Conclusion: RC’s and the LOS here are acting (whether they know it or not.. but I bet many do, such as Ted Kennedy- a ‘faithful RC’ and Nancy Pelosi-another ‘daughter of the church.’) as Gracchites and Proditors- just depends on the mood, I guess.
I now fully grasp why the Colonies, and the South in particular, used the Klan (for just one example) against RC’s as well as blacks. THEY ARE CUT FROM THE SAME CLOTH. Anti-White, Anti-European, and Anti-American. NOW I get why Blanshard’s books elicited such a HUGE ‘PR’ push from Rome in the 1950’s- ALREADY, the ‘progressives’ that gave us Vatican II, were ‘itching’ to take down Protestant America, even then!
Just ask any social liberal RC parish priest or laity, from Dorothy Day and Daniel Barrigan, on down, today. Since Vatican II, the entire RC edifice in America (at any rate) has been seeking both: 1) Total power, via the ‘descamisados’ of the ‘Thurd world” (the ‘h’ is silent) and 2) dissolution of the Anglo-WASP hegemony that made this land what it was….
Mr. Knight- I’m glad you feel you can be in the LOS. I now understand why it is merely another ‘pussyfootin’ scalawag’ in the war for White Self-interest.
“To have ANY dealings with the Papal/filioquist heresy of universalism-even while denying the ‘universal jurisdiction’ of the Pope-is to be an explicit heretic, as far as the Church is concerned.”
What “Church” are you talking about? The Church of Fr. John+?
Having said that, anti-Whites must laugh up their sleeves whenever WN’s engage in sectarian or ethnic squabbles. Do you think anti-Whites really give a rat’s behind what church we belong or don’t belong to? Do you think it really matters to them what European country our ancestry is from?
Divide and conquer is an old and successful strategy. WN’s can be as good at it as anyone else. In the case of WN, however, it is completely counter productive.
More pompous twaddle from the bottomless pit of pompous twaddle ‘Fr’ John.
For people who want to seriously study the question of multi-culturalism in America (as opposed to pontificate, blame, rant and obfuscate), the following comments and links are offerred toward our better understanding of this most important subject.
The author of The Path to National Suicide: An Essay on Immagration, Multiculturalism and Huddled Cliches: Exposing Fraudulent Arguments That Have Opened America’s Borders to the World, Lawrence Auster has written an excellent precis of his reseach entitled “Mass Immigration – It’s Effect on Our Culture”. Lawrence Auster writes for Minnesotans for Sustainability.
In this essay, Auster argues for the 1965 Immigration Nationality Act (Hart-Celler Act INS, Act of 1965) as the watershed event in the transition from America the nation to American the multi-cultural ‘Great Society’ to use the label of the Lyndon Baines Johnson raft of social policies.
On a historical note -the INS removed immigration quotas favouring W European nations and it was primarily the population of these nations that comprised the majority demographic of America as a nation. The INS was greatly enabled by Republican Senator from NY, Jacob ‘open the floodgates’ Javits. The Jewish ACLU backed it the hilt. The ADL followed up on the passage of “World of Difference” program downloaded into the American public schools. The Jews in charge of the American Federation of Teachers implemented it. Br Nathanael Kapner who is ethnically Jewish and raised in Judaism has written an excellent article on this entitled “America’s Multicultural Nightmare” http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=611. Br Kapner was baptised into the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia and renounced Judaism at his baptism. He has the permission of his bishop to host his hard hitting website and has enjoyed the honour of being denounced on the website of ‘Fr’ John who is supposedly his fellow Orthodox.
The weakness of Auster’s essay is that he does not examine Multiculturalism from this POV, so he fails to draw the correct conclusion that Multiculturalism is basically a Judaic policy for goyim nations that is implemented to divide, dilute and conquer as it will leave a monolithic and tight ethnic cadre of Judaics as the united front against a multi-cultural population divided against itself.
The question Auster asks is: why the legions of mainstream conservatives – the patriotic and Christian Right, the Republicans and a host of Conservative organisations both religious and secular supported the re-definition of America from a nation defined by its majority demographic to a multi-cultural population.
He does not single out the Roman Catholic Church as being the sole enabling force behind the 1965 INS – but liberal Catholic organisations as well as Catholic bishops certainly did support it – along with Austers “legions of mainstream conservatives”. So why did these legions side with the “anti-American atheistic left that hates America and wants to destroy it” in the passage of 1965 INS?
Auster concludes that both liberals and conservatives hold to the ideology of liberalism and egalitarianism.
Don’t miss the pix of Cardinal O’Connor with his brother Masons in this article. O’Connor – a disgrace to the Church – would certainly have supported the 1965 Immigration Act – arguing with the Conference of Catholic bishops that the old immigration policy discriminated on the basis of religion, which it did. They supported that feature of the Act which placed an annual cap on immigration regardless of country of origin – a cap which which the Jews doctored once the Act was passed.
Among the Catholics, the Wile E. Coyote moment was experienced only the Roman Catholics holding to the Tradition of the Church on the Syllabus of Errors and rejecting Vatican II which Fr Karl Ratzinger appropriately designated as ‘a Counter Syllabus of Errors’. This is correct. The Vatican II documents teach the Masonic errors traditionally condemned by the Roman Catholic Church prior to 1963.
I find it of interest on this issue that it is the researchers of Jewish origins who really have the Jews’ number on the 1965 Immigration Act. Dr Henry Makow, the Jewish Canadian author, wrote a very hard hitting article on the personal assistant to Senator Javits – one Harold Rosenthal who claimed that the god of Judaism is Lucifer. He was speaking of Javits – a Zionist Jew. See “The Protocols of Zion – Updated The Harold Rosenthal Interview” by Dr Henry Makow http://www.rense.com/general49/prot.htm. Feb 15, 2004.