Category Archives: Survival of the West

Ethnic solidarity is good!

So says Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs … as long as it’s solidarity among the right people. Here, he posts a video that denounces Senator Marco Rubio for the horrendous crime of enforcing federal immigration laws. The video is entitled, “SEN MARCO RUBIO SIDES WITH HIS PARTY OVER HIS PEOPLE.”

Can you imagine how Prince Charles would sniff and scowl over a video that accused a White politician of working against his own people?

Obama’s Two-Front War

Interesting, isn’t it, how tactics and objectives dovetail in D.C.’s ever-escalating war to impose multiculturalism at home and abroad? In defense of the principle of “inclusion” in Iraq, Obama is quietly ramping up efforts to prop up D.C.’s puppet regime in Baghdad:

Monday of this week, the first combat troops came, with the promise now shifting to a “no combat missions” one.

Even that seems absurd, as the Pentagon sends Apache attack helicopters into Iraq for the combat troops to use in these “non-combat” missions. The administration appears to recognize the unpopularity of a new Iraq War, but seems determined to escalate quietly until it is no longer a potential move to warn against, but a simple reality.

Similarly, Obama’s response to the invasion of our southwest border is to present defenders of traditional America with a fait accompli of a Third-World occupation that will impose “inclusiveness” on the American people:

“Either we’re going to enforce our laws and remain strong, economically or otherwise, or we ignore the rule of law and go to being a Third World country,” Rep. Louie Gohmert, a Republican, told Fox News. “You’ve got to follow the law. You cannot bring hundreds of thousands of people in this country without destroying the country. Then there’s no place that people can dream about coming.”

No one knows this better than Barack Obama. Making the United States over into a Third World country is exactly what this president is about. He is of the Third World. He spent his formative years in the Third World, and when his mother, obsessed with the Third World, brought him back to America, he sought out the company of those who dreamed of making America over into the world’s largest welfare state.

You have to feel for the patriotic protesters in Murietta standing up to the government’s importation of tax-consuming invaders. But they’re trying to defend a nation that NO LONGER EXISTS. It’s past time trying to reform D.C. and imagining we’re going to shame the federal government into protecting and representing us. That’s exactly the opposite of what the powers that be want.

It’s time for a hundred mighty secession movements to rise up and form governments that represent them and their interests. The first step is to recognize the utter illegitimacy of the corrupt regime in D.C. The good news is that only 21% of Americans believe the federal government is based on the consent of the governed. Do the math, and you’ll see that we’re half-way to the goal of self-determination.

The Green March of 2014

Don’t look now, but we’re being overrun by illegal immigrants from Latin America. And no, this isn’t the opinion of VDare or FAIR but the New York Times:

Last weekend alone, more than 1,000 unaccompanied youths were being held at overflowing border stations in South Texas, officials said.

The flow of child migrants has been building since 2011, when 4,059 unaccompanied youths were apprehended by border agents. Last year more than 21,000 minors were caught, and Border Patrol officials had said they were expecting more than 60,000 this year. But that projection has already been exceeded.

By law, unaccompanied children caught crossing illegally from countries other than Mexico are treated differently from other migrants. After being apprehended by the Border Patrol, they must be turned over within 72 hours to a refugee resettlement office that is part of the Health Department.

What’s the one fool-proof, most direct way to create a pro-socialist, pro-immigration majority in this country? Simple – just import a new people that will support such an agenda. Demographic revolution isn’t anything new. In 1975, an unarmed exodus of Moroccans was able to tip the scales in favor of what was once Spanish Sahara to become part of Morocco:

The Green March was a mass trek of 350,000 Moroccans into Western Sahara (former Spanish Sahara) on November 6, 1975 to claim the mostly desert territory from a regional insurgency and to declare control over the territory as a contiguous and connected subset of a “Greater Morocco.” The “march” allowed the Moroccan state to triumph over countries in the Western Sahara region, which was contested by the Polisario Front, an acronym for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Saguia el-Hamra and Río de Oro (Frente Popular de Liberación de Saguía el Hamra y Río de Oro), a national liberation organization formed by Moroccan students of Sahrawi descent. While neighboring Algeria and Mauritania claimed the territory, the Green March proved decisive in consolidating a large territory of 103,000 square miles with fewer than 500,000 people composed of Sahrawi and Moroccan descendants. The goal of Moroccan King Hassan II was to present the world with a fait accompli occupation that would be irreversible.

I can just hear the Koch Brothers, Mark Zuckerberg, and all the other billionaires sniggering with delight at the prospect of all that cheap, exploitable labor rushing into their arms.

Why we will win

We know the DC Empire is immoral and spending itself into oblivion. It’s unsustainable, largely because its own ideology is killing it, just as socialism killed the Soviet Union. The Empire’s central article of faith about the equality of all peoples and cultures dictates that Western standards are no better than others.

The latest manifestation of this is a real doozy: There’s a bizarre new style of college-level debate that’s replacing real debate. Instead of making a logical case for or against a debate topic, participants change the topic at will, ignore the rules, and base the power of their arguments not on the standard of logic but on which debater has more “nigga authenticity.”

No, I’m not making this up. It’s from an Atlantic article entitled, so help me, “Does Traditional College Debate Reinforce White Privilege?” Here’s an excerpt:

Many of their arguments, based on personal memoir and rap music, completely ignored the stated resolution, and instead asserted that the framework of collegiate debate has historically privileged straight, white, middle-class students.

Indeed, to prevail using the new approach, students don’t necessarily have to develop high-level research skills or marshal evidence from published scholarship. They also might not need to have the intellectual acuity required for arguing both sides of a resolution.

This “new approach” means that instead of presenting relevant facts to build a case, the “debaters” scream, curse, toss insults, and demand they be declared the winner. Not everyone in collegiate debating likes what they see:

[Debate coach] Aaron Hardy and others are also disappointed with what they perceive as a lack of civility and decorum at recent competitions, and believe that the alternative-style debaters have contributed to this environment. “Judges have been very angry, coaches have screamed and yelled. People have given profanity-laced tirades, thrown furniture, and both sides of the ideological divide have used racial slurs,” he said.

The Western ideals of objectivity and detached reason are dismissed as tools of oppression of minorities whose cultures stress subjective, emotional justifications for making choices. The Atlantic article continues:

Liberal law professors have been making this point for decades. “Various procedures—regardless of whether we’re talking about debate formats or law—have the ability to hide the subjective experiences that shape these seemingly ‘objective’ and ‘rational’ rules,” said UC Hastings Law School professor Osagie Obasogie, who teaches critical race theory. “This is the power of racial subordination: making the viewpoint of the dominant group seem like the only true reality.”

If you’re not familiar with “critical race theory,” here’s a definition from one of its proponents: CRT as applied to court cases, for example, “seeks to highlight the ways in which the law is not neutral and objective, but designed to support White supremacy and the subordination of people of color.” It’s Cultural Marxism, which sees everyone and everything through the lenses of socialist ideology. If minorities aren’t as successful as the majority, it’s all due to oppression. Period.

Can you imagine the real-world consequences if abiding by the rules of logic are discarded? Imagine if the NASA engineers during the Apollo 13 crisis, instead of scrambling to find a way to rescue the stranded astronauts when the ship’s air supply was running out, just stood and screamed “Screw the time limit!” and declared the problem solved?

This country has been propping up its official ideology through willful blindness. But despite affirmative action, prohibitions against the use of IQ tests, and racial gerrymandering, sooner or later reality is going to smack us in the face. Signs of that are already evident, and the longer we make believe everyone’s equal, and that Western standards are no better than others, the worse things will get.

Buchanan Hearts Putin Too

Steven Seagal isn’t the only one showing Putin some love these days. So is Pat Buchanan.

Putin is entering a claim that Moscow is the Godly City of today and command post of the counter-reformation against the new paganism. Putin is plugging into some of the modern world’s most powerful currents. Not only in his defiance of what much of the world sees as America’s arrogant drive for global hegemony. Not only in his tribal defense of lost Russians left behind when the USSR disintegrated. He is also tapping into the worldwide revulsion of and resistance to the sewage of a hedonistic secular and social revolution coming out of the West.

In the culture war for the future of mankind, Putin is planting Russia’s flag firmly on the side of traditional Christianity.

The international hypocrite

Vox Day cites that notoriously “neo-Confederate” propaganda mill known as the New York Times on the explosive issue of secession in Crimea. The editorial writers at the Times are having a little difficulty making sense of Obama’s opposition to a popular referendum on Crimea seceding from Ukraine:

Consider the different American views of recent bids for independence.

Chechnya? No.

East Timor? Yes.

Abkhazia? No.

South Sudan? Yes.

Palestine? It’s complicated.

It is an acutely delicate subject in the West, where Britain wants to keep Scotland and Spain wants to keep Catalonia.

To which Vox Day adds:

And the USA murdered hundreds of thousands in order to forcibly “keep the Union together” and deny the sovereign Southern States their right to self-determination. This has not escaped the attention of the world’s second-rate powers, some of whom have indicated support for the Russian position.

What the ruling elite can’t grasp is that the peoples of the world do not share their globalist vision. Crimea has a majority Russian population that does not want to be part of Ukraine. This is just one more problem caused by the anti-human policies of the old Soviet Union. And it wasn’t just the Reds who violated natural borders; the West is largely to blame for the unnatural and unsustainable political lines drawn in Africa during colonial times. As the folks in Sudan recently made clear, those borders are being redefined by history and culture.

The lessons of this worldwide trend apply here, too. As our rulers in DC import a more docile population from the Third World, the actual result is not a flowering of diversity but a loss of identification and loyalty to the old American nation. Already, secession is gaining steam in America, and ethnic and racial divisions are openly recognized as the reason. No people anywhere in the world wants to be governed by others – self-determination is just another term for secession. So as DC continues to reconstruct the old America, look for REAL secession movements to arise here at home.

Why Inbreeding is Unwanted

Razib Khan has a recent post at The Unz Review entitled “Why Inbreeding is Bad“, which links to a shocking Australian case of multigenerational first-degree incest, where many of the children are impaired.

Garbage In, Garbage Out

Inbreeding doesn’t create mutations; it reveals them if two copies of a preexisting recessive gene are expressed. Inbreeding to the Colts’s extent is shocking and especially bad for the social issues. A parent should never sleep with his children, nor siblings with one another!

However, the term “inbreeding” can refer to varying degrees of relatedness. A false implication from today’s condemnation of “inbreeding” is that the less related a couple is, the stronger their children will be. The result: increased miscegenation and a population that holds a more globalist, less clannish, less nationalist worldview.

HBD Chick recently posted a quote from Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologica (pg. 2749) on inbreeding:

“Hence in olden time marriage was forbidden … within … degrees of consanguinity, in order that consanguinity and affinity might be the sources of a wider friendship”.

So, the motive then was to discourage clannishness.

Aquinas continues with:

Afterwards, however, towards these latter times the prohibition of the Church has been restricted to the fourth degree, because it became useless and dangerous to extend the prohibition to more remote degrees of consanguinity. Useless, because charity waxed cold in many hearts so that they had scarcely a greater bond of friendship with their more remote kindred than with strangers: and it was dangerous because through the prevalence of concupiscence and neglect men took no account of so numerous a kindred, and thus the prohibition of the more remote degrees became for many a snare leading to damnation.

So the ideal, as with most things, is moderation.
Continue reading

Bogus sign language interpreter was perfect for Obama’s Mandela tribute

Somehow an unqualified man pretended to sign for the deaf as the U.S. president gave his gushing tribute to Nelson Mandela. People are asking how this could happen:

The key address in the memorial service for Nelson Mandela was given by Barack Obama, whose words were brought to life for deaf spectators and TV viewers by a “sign language interpreter”, who could be seen gesturing energetically behind the sombre US President.

Yet the man, not only seen by the tens of thousands in Johannesburg’s FNB stadium where the memorial took place on Tuesday, but also by millions across the world on television, was a “fake”, according to Bruno Druchen, the national director of the Deaf Federation of South Africa.

Mr Duchen told the Associated Press “there was no meaning in what he used his hands for”. He and other language experts pointed out that the man was not signing in South African or American sign languages and could not have been signing in any other known sign language because there was no structure to his arm and hand movements.

As one ANC member put it, “What this man was doing was making no sense.”

But in a way, it made perfect sense.

Many commentators criticized the entire event as poorly planned and managed. Security was laughable. And for the ANC to put an unqualified sign language interpreter to stand beside the president of the U.S. was just the icing on the cake. The “interpreter” has explained his erratic performance by claiming he was “hallucinating, hearing voices.” Yes.

So this was perfect. What better way to communicate the message that it is “progress” to dismantle a society that worked and replace it with one that does not? That a man caught in the act of plotting mass murder is to be hailed as a saintly peace maker? Or that an African advocate of communism, the most bloody anti-human ideology the world has seen, should be honored with U.S. flags flown at half-mast?

I’d say a nonsense medium for a nonsense message is entirely appropriate.

GK Chesterton Crushes Nietzsche

[T]he curious disappearance of satire from our literature is an instance of the fierce things fading for want of any principle to be fierce about. Nietzsche had some natural talent for sarcasm: he could sneer, though he could not laugh; but there is always something bodiless and without weight in his satire, simply because it has not any mass of common morality behind it. He is himself more preposterous than anything he denounces. But, indeed, Nietzsche will stand very well as the type of the whole of this failure of abstract violence. The softening of the brain which ultimately overtook him was not a physical accident. If Nietzsche had not ended in imbecility, Nietzscheism would end in imbecility. Thinking in isolation and with pride ends in being an idiot. Every man who will not have softening of the heart must at last have softening of the brain.

This last attempt to evade intellectualism ends in intellectualism, and therefore in death. The sortie has failed. The wild worship of lawlessness and the materialist worship of law end in the same void. Nietzsche scales staggering mountains, but he turns up ultimately in Tibet. He sits down beside Tolstoy in the land of nothing and Nirvana. They are both helpless — one because he must not grasp anything, and the other because he must not let go of anything. The Tolstoyan’s will is frozen by a Buddhist instinct that all special actions are evil. But the Nietzscheite’s will is quite equally frozen by his view that all special actions are good; for if all special actions are good, none of them are special. They stand at the crossroads, and one hates all the roads and the other likes all the roads. The result is — well, some things are not hard to calculate. They stand at the cross-roads.

Source: GK Chesterton. Orthodoxy. Year: 1908.

There might be some Nietzscheite defence since Nietzsche did write “the spirited triumph over the strong” (their defence is often “Nietzsche is misunderstood”), but Chesterton’s slash appears to me to have connected with Nietzsche’s neck, resulting in a clean decapitation, Chesterton perhaps proving himself Nietzsche’s sought after Übermensch.

Note: I’m leaving the Nietzsche quote uncited for now.

Another worthy slash at Nietzsche comes from Inazo Nitobe (Bushido: The Soul of Japan, also from 1908 and a classic):

The profit and loss philosophy of Utilitarians and Materialists finds favor among logic-choppers with half a soul. The only other ethical system which is powerful enough to cope with Utilitarianism and Materialism is Christianity, in comparison with which Bushido, it must be confessed, is like “a dimly burning wick” which the Messiah was proclaimed not to quench but to fan into a flame. Like His Hebrew precursors, the prophets—notably Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos and Habakkuk—Bushido laid particular stress on the moral conduct of rulers and public men and of nations, whereas the Ethics of Christ, which deal almost solely with individuals and His personal followers, will find more and more practical application as individualism, in its capacity of a moral factor, grows in potency. The domineering, self-assertive, so-called master-morality of Nietzsche, itself akin in some respects to Bushido, is, if I am not greatly mistaken, a passing phase or temporary reaction against what he terms, by morbid distortion, the humble, self-denying slave-morality of the Nazarene.

Mr Prime Minister, There Is Only One Important Question Facing Us

I rediscovered the following in this site’s “media library”. From the book The Scientist as Rebel by Freeman J. Dyson (published 2008):

The last stop on our tour was the city museum of Vladimir. Here we found the densest concentration of schoolchildren. The museum is in a tower over one of the ancient gates of the city. Its emphasis is historical rather than artistic. The main exhibit is an enormous diorama of the city as it was at the moment of its destruction in 1238, with every detail faithfully modeled in wood and clay. Across the plains come riding endless lines of Mongol horsemen slashing arms, legs, and heads off defenseless Russians whom they meet outside the city walls. The armed defenders of the city are on top of the walls, but the flaming arrows of the Mongols have set fire to the buildings behind them. Already a party of horsemen has broken into the city through a side gate and is beginning a general slaughter of the inhabitants. Blood is running in the streets and flames are rising from the churches. On the wall above this scene of horror there is a large notice for schoolchildren and other visitors to read. It says: “The heroic people of Vladimir chose to die rather than submit to the invader. By their self-sacrifice they saved Western Europe from suffering the same fate, and saved European civilization from extinction.”

The diorama of Vladimir gives visible form to the dreams and fears which have molded the Russian people’s perception of themselves and their place in history. Central to their dreams is the Mongol horde slicing through their country, swift and implacable.

It took the Russians 150 years to learn to fight them on equal terms, and three hundred years to defeat them decisively. The horde in the folk memory of Russia means an alien presence moving through the homeland, ravaging and consuming the substance of the people, subverting the loyalty of their leaders with blackmail and bribes. This is the image of Asia which three centuries of suffering implanted in the Russian mind. It is easy for us in the strategically inviolate West to dismiss Russian fears of China as “paranoid.” If we had lived for three centuries at the mercy of the alien horsemen, we would be paranoid too.

British prime minsters, soon after they come into office, customarily visit Washington and Moscow to get acquainted with American and Russian leaders. When Prime Minister James Callahan made his state visit to Moscow he had two amicable meetings with Chairman Leonid Brezhnev. At the end of the second day he remarked that he was happy to discover that there were no urgent problems threatening to bring the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union into conflict. Brezhnev then replied with some emphatic words in Russian. Callahan’s interpreter hesitated, and instead of translating Brezhnev’s remark asked him to repeat it. Brezhnev repeated it and the interpreter translated: “Mr Prime Minister, there is only one important question facing us, and that is the question whether the white race will survive.” Callahan was so taken aback that he did not venture either to agree or to disagree with this sentiment. He made his exit without further comment. What he had heard was a distant echo of the Mongol hoofbeat still reverberating in Russian memory.

It took them three hundred years to drive out the Mongols but only four years to drive out the Germans.

During the intervening centuries the Russians, while still thinking of themselves as victims, had become in fact a nation of warriors. In order to survive in a territory perennially exposed to invasion, they maintained great armies and gave serious study to the art of war. They imposed upon themselves a regime of rigid political unity and military discipline. They gave high honor and prestige to their soldiers, and devoted a large fraction of their resources to the production of weapons. Within a few years after 1941, the Russians who survived the German invasion had organized themselves into the most formidable army on earth. The more they think of themselves as victims, the more formidable they become.

Pages 98-101.

James Callaghan was Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1976 to 1979.
Continue reading

“A World Split Apart” By Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Columbia University’s copy is not working at the time of this post, so it’s being republished here.

Text of Address by

Alexander Solzhenitsyn

at Harvard Class Day Afternoon Exercises,

Thursday, June 8, 1978

I am sincerely happy to be here with you on this occasion and to become personally acquainted with this old and most prestigious University. My congratulations and very best wishes to all of today’s graduates.

Harvard’s motto is “Veritas.” Many of you have already found out and others will find out in the course of their lives that truth eludes us if we do not concentrate with total attention on its pursuit. And even while it eludes us, the illusion still lingers of knowing it and leads to many misunderstandings. Also, truth is seldom pleasant; it is almost invariably bitter. There is some bitterness in my speech today, too. But I want to stress that it comes not from an adversary but from a friend.

Three years ago in the United States I said certain things which at that time appeared unacceptable. Today, however, many people agree with what I then said…

A World Split Apart
by Alexander Solzhenitsyn

The split in today’s world is perceptible even to a hasty glance. Any of our contemporaries readily identifies two world powers, each of them already capable of entirely destroying the other. However, understanding of the split often is limited to this political conception, to the illusion that danger may be abolished through successful diplomatic negotiations or by achieving a balance of armed forces. The truth is that the split is a much profounder and a more alienating one, that the rifts are more than one can see at first glance. This deep manifold split bears the danger of manifold disaster for all of us, in accordance with the ancient truth that a Kingdom — in this case, our Earth — divided against itself cannot stand.
Continue reading

“White Widow” is prime suspect in Kenyan mall massacre

** UPDATE **

White Widow reported killed by Kenyan security forces

Here’s everything you need to know about Samantha Lewthwaite:

A British official told Andrew Malone of the London Daily Mail that a British woman known as the “White Widow” was suspected to be among the terrorists involved in the Kenya attack. Samantha Lewthwaite, 29, converted to Islam and married a Muslim man, Jermaine Lindsay, she met through an online chat room when she was 17. Lindsay killed himself in a suicide bombing that was one of the so-called “7/7? attacks on July 7, 2005, that killed 52 people in bombings on subways and buses in London.

Self-hating whites are as misguided and evil as the adherents of any other suicide cult. It’s a pity they have to take others down with them.

“American Exceptionalism” = Yankee Supremacy

In a recent open letter to the American people, Russian president Vladimir Putin assured us he likes and respects us, but asked us to realize we’re embarrassing ourselves and doing a lot of harm with our delusion of “American Exceptionalism.” Both the mainstream American left and right rushed to prop up our most beloved myth against this iconoclastic Cossack.

What’s interesting is that both wings of accepted American thought agree on what “exceptionalism” means–and more significantly, that both, though supposedly rivals, are actually in lockstep on all other major issues as a result.

For example, liberal columnist Dana Milbank shot back at President Putin with this bristling retort:

When we say we are exceptional, what we really are saying is we are different. With few exceptions, we are all strangers to our land; our families came from all corners of the world and brought all of its colors, religions and languages. We believe this mixing, together with our free society, has produced generations of creative energy and ingenuity, from the Declaration of Independence to Facebook, from Thomas Jefferson to Miley Cyrus. There is no other country quite like that.

Americans aren’t better than others, but our American experience is unique — exceptional — and it has created the world’s most powerful economy and military, which, more often than not, has been used for good in the world.

Miley Cyrus? Really? My pride floweth over.

And former South Carolina senator Jim DeMint, now president of The Heritage Foundation, also defended “exceptionalism” by invoking the image of America as the Multi-Culti Empire that roams the globe doing good:

We are, in other words, not a nation based on ethnicity, but on beliefs, and not coincidentally, that is why we attract people of all ethnicities and they become proud Americans…. When we have used our power, however, we have done it for good.”

Both echoed what Madeleine Albright said as secretary of state:

It is the threat of the use of force [against Iraq] and our line-up there that is going to put force behind the diplomacy. But if we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future, and we see the danger here to all of us.

That self-image still inspires the Obama regime’s global aggression:

In their more honest moments, White House officials concede they got here the messiest way possible — with a mix of luck in the case of Syria, years of sanctions on Iran and then some unpredicted chess moves executed by three players Mr. Obama deeply distrusts: President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, and Iran’s erratic mullahs. But, the officials say, these are the long-delayed fruits of the administration’s selective use of coercion in a part of the world where that is understood.

“The common thread is that you don’t achieve diplomatic progress in the Middle East without significant pressure,” Benjamin J. Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser, said Thursday. “In Syria, it was the serious threat of a military strike; in Iran it was a sanctions regime built up over five years.”

If your identity is that of a polyglot hegemon endowed with greater wisdom than the rest of the world, how can you NOT support open borders? Or the invasion of Iraq? Or Iran? Or Syria?

First of all, the US was NOT founded as a unique blend of whatever ethnic group decided to elbow its way in; it was founded as an outpost of Western civilization.

More important, the notion that the American people have always been committed to a never-ending global war to impose democracy and equality is a pure lie, and a fairly recent one at that. Previous “Wars of Liberation,” including Lincoln’s invasion of the South, the Spanish-American War, Vietnam, and Iraq, later turned out to be based on massive propaganda and misinformation.

The core idea expressed in “American Exceptionalism” is that the role of America’s elite is to serve as the global mind bringing reason and order to a chaotic, degenerate world. That is Gnosticism, an anti-Christian concept that explicitly glorifies abstract knowledge while scorning the physical. I argued here that Northern thought degenerated from its Puritan roots into militant Gnosticism, while Southerners upheld and lived by a balance between the spiritual and the physical.

Author John C. Wright said this of the Gnostic foundations of today’s statists and their leftist enablers:

In sum, they are idolaters who substitute the worship of Caesar for the worship of Christ; they are Gnostics in the posture of eternal rebellion both against God in Heaven and civil society on Earth. They are chameleons who adopt any ideals or values or party lines needed for so long as needed to destroy them, including Pragmatism, including Worldliness. They are Politically Correct and factually incorrect.

They seek to destroy civilized institutions here on Earth and drag Utopia down from heaven to replace them, indifferent, or even glorying, in the bloodshed required.

To avoid confusion, let us call them Ideologues. They are utterly unworldly, rejecting the pragmatism of the Worldly Man as cold and loveless and unspiritual.

The Ideologues are as nearly a pure evil as mankind has ever produced or can imagine, but please note that their motives are the highest and noblest imaginable: they seek things of the spirit, peace on earth, food for the poor, dignity given to all men, and all such things which are the only things, the holy things, that can electrify dull mankind and stir him to take up the banner and trumpet and shining lance of high and holy crusade.

Ever wonder why leftists see “education” as the cure to all ills? Or why they fancy themselves superior to those they see as living in the darkness of tradition and irrationality? Their contempt for the physical explains their hatred of heritage and tradition–and of life itself. But as John C. Wright pointed out, there’s a terrible price to pay for the spreading of their concept of the good. When Madeleine Albright proclaimed the death of a half-million Iraqi children as “worth it,” she was expressing what all Gnostics believe.

By their fruits ye shall know them.

Word of the Day: Moby

The SPLC was recently caught planting an agent provocateur:

Damningly, the Southern Poverty Law Center reported that there were muttered racial slurs throughout the demonstration.

Now, however, it’s been revealed that the only racial slurs that were muttered came from the author of the $PLC piece—a mole named Keegan Hankes. According to another demonstrator at the rally, Mr. Hankes expressed his fury about “spooks” and “n*****s” and his pleasure that Chief Smith had “taken care of them.” He also consistently brought up race in conversations, trying to bait other members.

What do ethnic/religious slurs accomplish? Nothing positive. Nationalism is a movement of love, not hate. The only slur a nationalist need ever use is Moby (Urban Dictionary):

An insidious and specialized type of left-wing troll who visits blogs and impersonates a conservative for the purpose of either spreading false rumors intended to sow dissension among conservative voters, or who purposely posts inflammatory and offensive comments for the purpose of discrediting the blog in question.

The term is derived* from the name of the liberal musician Moby, who famously suggested in February of 2004 that left-wing activists engage in this type of subterfuge

Any who propose violence/vigilante action or use ethnic/religious slurs should be accused of being a Moby, or assumed under the influence of a Moby (e.g. a hate blogger working for the SPLC). If the SPLC needs a hate group to cite for funding drives, it should have to resort to entirely manufacturing its own.

*SSC blog claims Urban Dictionary is wrong, attributing Saul Alinsky as the true originator.

HT: Red wrote on the word Moby a few years ago (first I heard of it), and Rebellion Blog linked to VDARE article.

Preening her politically correct plumage

Grab your barf-bag before reading this puff piece on Jess George, the white jefa of Charlotte’s Latin American Coalition:

She’s not Latino, an immigrant, or even a minority. She’s not fluent in Spanish, either. …

Since taking over the Latin American Coalition four years ago, she has steadily increased its visibility with a series of rallies, marches and publicity stunts. … It’s an unusual approach that has drawn national attention. The country’s largest Hispanic civil rights organization, the National Council of La Raza, called the coalition an “inspiration” for other immigrant advocates.

I can remember when “civil rights” meant favoring voting rights for blacks who were US citizens. But we’ve evolved way past that. These days, “civil rights” means “the right of foreigners to invade and colonize another country.” I guess that’s progress.

But there are sometimes speed bumps on the road to progress. George’s ascent to the position of the jefa of the Latin American Coalition was resented by Latinos who couldn’t figure out why this gringa was telling them what to do:

“I’ve had other Latino leaders in Charlotte tell me: ‘Jess, it’s nice that you are doing this for the community. But when is a real leader going to show up?’?” says George.

“At first, it was really hard to hear. I’m the kind of person who likes to be told how I can do things better. But when you point to me and say, ‘You’re white,’ I can’t change that.”

Former coalition board chairwoman Olma Echeverri admits that there was backlash when George was named executive director. Prior to that, George spent five years as an associate director at the coalition.

“I supported her taking over, but I was approached by people asking why I didn’t find another candidate who was Latino,” said Echeverri, now chairwoman of the Hispanic-American Democrats of North Carolina.

Nevertheless, despite such difficulties, this New York transplant continues to stand up “for a class of people she feels is being bullied by the system.”

How noble. And how courageous. After all, other than the federal government, the media, academia, and big business, NO ONE is helping illegal aliens in this country.

An Example of Good Government Spending in Finland

Since 1949 every Finnish mother, rich and poor, is given a Maternity Pack which is partly credited with dramatically reducing Finland’s infant mortality rate to one of the world’s lowest. What it’s not given credit for is uniting Finns with this commonality, and distinction from other nations.

A box like this should in theory give Finns a sense of nationalism, and it tells a mother someone cares, even if the father has abandoned her. Perhaps my pointing this out will bring a leftist activist to modernise the pack into being more ethnically neutral, though I doubt my post will be noticed. However, it’s worth pointing out to American readers that a government expenditure of this type can be positive.

Would a maternity pack be feasible in America? No, we’re an entirely different type of state and populace (diverse).

King Brihadratha’s Lament

King Brihadratha in the Maitrayani Upanishad quoted in A.L. Basham’s The Wonder That was India:

[Great heroes and mighty kings] have had to give up their glory; we have seen the deaths of [demigods and demons]; the oceans have dried up; mountains have crumbled; the Pole Star is shaken; the Earth founders; the gods perish. I am like a frog in a dry well.

Basham quoted that when talking of how pessimistic Hinduism had become during a time of great change when tribes were being absorbed (the middle centuries of the first millennium BC).

We relive King Brihadratha’s trauma today.

Basham, A.L. The Wonder That was India. London: Picador, 2004. 248-249. Print.

A bad week for anti-white leftists

First, the leftist fantasy that white supremacists murdered Texas District Attorney Mike McLelland and his wife was upended when it turned out the actual killers were a disgraced justice of the peace and his wife who killed the McLellands out of revenge.

Then, when the FBI released pictures of light-skinned Boston Marathon bombing suspects, the anti-white left whooped for joy. David Sirota at Slate openly hoped the culprits were white, and Tim Wise bloviated that the real lesson of the tragedy was, like everything else in the Tim Wise Alternate Universe, all about “white privilege.”

Over at Little Green Footballs, the FBI pictures were the object of much anti-white ridicule. One commenter noted the hat worn by one of the suspects and wondered, “Could that be a Dale Earnhardt hat?” Oh, if only a Christian Southerner did it!

Now comes word that the Boston terrorists are (were?) Chechnyan Muslims.

Showing once again that leftism isn’t so much an ideology as it is a pathology.